In the statement above, the author claims that diversifying the commercial enterprise of the band 'Zapped' will help them grow financially. The author's statement is based on his comparison with another band 'Zonked' who play the same type of music as 'Zapped' and have a diverse commercial enterprise including a line of clothing, series of posters, concert tours and a contract with an advertising agency. Though his claim may well have merit but the author presents a poorly reasoned argument with questionable arguments, and based solely on the reasoning the author offers, we cannot accept the argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's argument lies in his open assumption that as 'Zonked' has a greater name than 'Zapped', the latter is financially stronger than the latter. This assumption is unsubstantiated. The case might be that even though 'Zonked' is more famous , it might not be financially stronger than 'Zapped'.
The secondary issue with the author's argument lies his unproven evidence that only greater name recognition can help in 'Zapped' in growing financially. This argument does not have any supporting evidence. Several other factors like cutting down on costs, improving the quality of their music, may help 'Zapped' in growing financially. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and not providing any legitimate evidence to back the assumptions.
While the author does have several key issues with the assumptions made, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author can strengthen his argument by providing supporting evidence such as a detailed spending analysis to help cut the unnecessary spends of the band, a detailed analysis of how diversifying the commercial enterprise for 'Zapped' will help them become financially stronger. Though there are several issues with the author's argument, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly analyse his assumptions, and provide evidences in support of his argument. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.