The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company:“When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field

The argument claims that if the Apogee Company close its field offices and transfer all processes of production in one place, it will be more profitable as it was in previous time because the firm can cut costs and better supervise it employees. This conclusion, based solely on one piece of evidence, is doubtful as it does not provide any clear information. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First of all, the argument readily assumes that, doing the same things as in prior time, the Apogee Company will have the identical result. It is a mistake because everything always changes and the firm can not take the lead position if it does not provide any suggestions for their customers. For instance, the BlackBerry is a good example of this logical mistake which led the company to falling.

Second, the argument makes an assumption that if a company has all process of production in one place, it will be more successful and profitable than one which has no concentration of manufacture at a single location. Unfortunately, there are a lot of evidences that companies having a lot of stage of production in different places have more profit than local players and the Apple Inc. is the best example of such company.

Thirdly, there is no any statistic information or calculations which can be useful in order to make this argument more logical and convincing. Why is the company sure that the working in one place it will cut down costs? How the Apogee Company is going to maintain better supervision of all employees? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. To strengthen the conclusion the author would have to provide more evidence. Supporting examples would further substantiate the author's view. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.