The following appeared in a memo to the board of the Grandview Symphony.
"The city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony since the symphony's inception ten years ago. Last year the symphony hired an internationally known conductor, who has been able to attract high-profile guest musicians to perform with the symphony. Since then, private contributions to the symphony have doubled and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series has reached new highs. Now that the Grandview Symphony is an established success, it can raise ticket prices. Increased revenue from larger audiences and higher ticket prices will enable the symphony to succeed without funding from the city government."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The memo sent to the board of Grandview Symphony seems possible but is fallacious. The authors of the memo have to discuss all the important aspects before establishing the neccesity of funds from the city government or not. The assumptions stated in the memo lack evidence and need more concrete work on it.
Firstly, the author mentions that the Grandview Symphony was incepted 10 years back, and last year it was able to attract high profile guest musciancs to peroform with the symphony because of an internationally known conductor but does not mention how the other years were, and how succesful was the Grandview Symphony, before last year. It might be possible that only last year it gathered a lot ears and eyes, because of increasing popularity of symphony in the entire world or due to cheaper tickets.
Secondly, the author states that since last year private contributions to symphony have doubled and attendance at concerts in the park series have increased tremendously. The authors underlying assumption is that because of the last year success, the symphony has become an established success. This assumption is flawed as a 10 year tenure of a venture cannot be corwned on the basis of performance one single year. You can not use the past result to deduce future success. It might be true that last year it gathered a lot of success, but in the coming year, maybe if there isn't a high profile guest musician to perform therefore it might gather lesser crowd.
Finally, to increase the ticket price to parry from government funding might be a bad decision for the Symphony, as the author does not mention anything about the plan of this year and who is planning to perform, an unnecesary hike in the ticket might cause a lot of people to spurn from the Symphony. The possibilty of increasing the ticket price and still gathering the same amount of attendees is bleak. The funds from the government can be used for better planning, a bigger space for the audience or better musicians, the revenue further could be used for the symphonys next year budget.
To conclude, the excerpt of the memo needs a far-detailed study before arriving at any conclusion as to whether take funding from the government or not. Several different angles and factors have to be taken into consideration, a blueprint of this years Grandview symphony, to percentage hike in price, to the artists performing has to be considered.