The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company."According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any

The memo indicates that the customers of Super Screen-produced movies reached the lowest point last year, while the positive viewer inclined. The author concludes that customers are not aware of the high quality of Super Screen movies, so Super Screen movies should advertise more to gain customers. However, there are some questions rendering the argument a little unconvincing.

First of all, the writer mentions that last year was the worst sale year in any other years. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that could demonstrate the viewers who already watched Super Screen-produced movies in previous years do not know the quality. In other words, the viewers who watched the Super Screen-produced movies in previous years already comprehend the quality, but did not all come to see Super Screen-produced movies again in the last year. Therefore, the answer of why the viewers did not watch the Super Screen-produced movies in last years should be investigated. The writer should provide the real reasons that cause the loss of viewers who already comprehended the quality.

Secondly, the author contends that the positive viewers became more in the last year. Nonetheless, the author does not touch on the reason why the viewers rated the Super Screen-produced movies positively. It is possible that they rated it high for the awesome service in the theaters. Thus, the good rate might cause from other factors, but not because their superb quality. The author needs to offer the detailed survey of accurate causes that why viewers recognize Super Screen-produced movies great.

Finally, the argument cites the decrease of the customers and the increase of positive viewers. Notwithstanding, the author does not afford the exact percentage of the loss and the increment. For instance, if the percentage is not large, such as 0.1 percent or even less of the loss or the increment, the argument is not persuasive. Only if the number of the loss of consumers and the increment of positive views are large enough, they could be indicators. If both of them are small, then the investigation might be meaningless. Hence, the writer should support the exact numbers of the loss and the increment.

To sum up, with the lack of the above information, the recommendation is plausible and should not be accepted. The writer should provide more information to answer the questions above to bolster the argument.