The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities.
"Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest Control Company, which we have used for many years in Palm City, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff for all our pest control services."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
This is my answer:
In this memo form writing, the vice president of a food distribution company compared between the costs of two pest control companies Fly-Away and Buzzoff. He concluded that the Buzzoff pest control company is cheaper than the Fly-Away company. So he can save the money of his company by dealing with Buzzoff Company. In the first view the conclusion of the vice president seems to be logical, but in fact it depends on weak assumptions which make it not correct.
First of all, comparison the destroyed in the food which happened by the two different companies at the last month is not correct statistically. Only one month is not enough to decide which company is better than the other. There may be some environmental conditions which affected on the distribution and spreading of the pests. So, the vice president of this company cannot take the right decision to complete his contract with a specific company depending on the results of this survey. This flaw weakness the conclusion that returning to Buzzoff Company will save the money of the vice president's company.
In addition to the previous point, the writer used every company in different city. He used the Fly-Away company to control the pests at his warehouses in Palm city and the Buzzoff company to control the pests at his warehouses in Wintervale city. Comparison the performance of these two different companies depending on this information will not be accurate as the weather and environmental conditions will differ between the two cities and this will affect on the activity of the pests. This point makes the conclusion that the Buzzoff company is better may not be write.
Finally, the vice president mentioned that the amount of destroyed food was about 20000 in the Fly-Away company and about 10000 in the Buzzoff company. Upon this survey he decided to return to the Fly-Away company in order to save the money of his company. This seems to be not logical. The vice resident did not take in his mind the whole amount of the food. It is possible that the amount of the food controlled by the Fly-Away company large than the amount of the food saved by the buzzoff company. This will change the results and so using Fly-Away company may be better for save the money of the company.
In conclusion, the decision to return to Buzzoff Company in order to save the company money is very weak as it depends on doubtful assumptions. The vice resident of the company should take care of the previous points while taking his decision in order to get a right one.
Please send me a feedback on my essay.
"Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest Control Company, which we have used for many years in Palm City, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff for all our pest control services."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
This is my answer:
In this memo form writing, the vice president of a food distribution company compared between the costs of two pest control companies Fly-Away and Buzzoff. He concluded that the Buzzoff pest control company is cheaper than the Fly-Away company. So he can save the money of his company by dealing with Buzzoff Company. In the first view the conclusion of the vice president seems to be logical, but in fact it depends on weak assumptions which make it not correct.
First of all, comparison the destroyed in the food which happened by the two different companies at the last month is not correct statistically. Only one month is not enough to decide which company is better than the other. There may be some environmental conditions which affected on the distribution and spreading of the pests. So, the vice president of this company cannot take the right decision to complete his contract with a specific company depending on the results of this survey. This flaw weakness the conclusion that returning to Buzzoff Company will save the money of the vice president's company.
In addition to the previous point, the writer used every company in different city. He used the Fly-Away company to control the pests at his warehouses in Palm city and the Buzzoff company to control the pests at his warehouses in Wintervale city. Comparison the performance of these two different companies depending on this information will not be accurate as the weather and environmental conditions will differ between the two cities and this will affect on the activity of the pests. This point makes the conclusion that the Buzzoff company is better may not be write.
Finally, the vice president mentioned that the amount of destroyed food was about 20000 in the Fly-Away company and about 10000 in the Buzzoff company. Upon this survey he decided to return to the Fly-Away company in order to save the money of his company. This seems to be not logical. The vice resident did not take in his mind the whole amount of the food. It is possible that the amount of the food controlled by the Fly-Away company large than the amount of the food saved by the buzzoff company. This will change the results and so using Fly-Away company may be better for save the money of the company.
In conclusion, the decision to return to Buzzoff Company in order to save the company money is very weak as it depends on doubtful assumptions. The vice resident of the company should take care of the previous points while taking his decision in order to get a right one.
Please send me a feedback on my essay.
