A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood. Moreover, the majority of f

The author concludes that the new Captain Seafood restaurant will be successful. A first glance, it seems to be persuasive. However, careful scrutiny of this argument reveals that it suffers from several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

First, the author assumes that the thirty percent increase in seafood consumption during the past five years represents the popularity of seafood among Bay City people. However, the rate is one thing, the absolute number is another. The increasing rate might be affected by the very previous number. In other words, if the very previous statistic was low number, the increasing rate would be relatively high, even when the real change is not significant. So, without accounting for the previous number of seafood consumption or other possible factors might contribute to the rate, the increasing rate cannot be appropriate criteria in estimating the popularity of seafood in Bay city.

Also, the argument relies on the assumption that the nationwide study is applicable to Bay City. Yet, the Bay City might be a unique part of the country. Besides, the Bay City’s two-income families might be different compared to the respondents of the survey. Without providing clear-cut evidence that the nationwide survey is representative of Bay City, this assumption is vulnerable to criticism.

Finally, even if the author can substantiate all of the foregoing assumption, the author’s assertion that the new Captain Seafood restaurant should be very popular and gainful is still unwarranted, in three aspects. First, the author did not indicate its location whether it is in Bay City or not. If the new Captain Seafood restaurant is located where is distant from Bay City, the people in Bay City might not go this restaurant. Second, even if the new restaurant is in Bay City, this fact would not assure its popularity because the seafood of other restaurants that are not specialized in seafood might be more palatable than those of the new restaurant. Third, even assuming the popularity of the new restaurant is true, the restaurant might not be necessarily profitable due to its other expenses such as high prime costs, operating expenses, payroll costs, and marketing costs. Thus, without providing evidence that the revenue of the new restaurant will exceed the expenses, the author cannot draw a firm conclusion.

In sum, the author’s argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unconvincing as it stands. To justify this argument, the author should provide sufficient evidence and information that will eliminate all the above doubtful questions. Then, the argument can be completely well reasoned.