The following appeared in an e-mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville."Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre product

The author's argument that instituting a "Shakespeare in the Park" program will increase the number of audience members is flawed. In the argument, the author shakily reasons that instituting such a program will surely increase the size of their audience because it has done so for another company. Additionally, it is stated that the other company experienced a 10% increase in profit due to the establishment of a similar program. This statement implies that such an increase would be significant for his company. Additionally, the author fails to explore the reason causing the decrease in profit and its relation to inflation and a changing economy over the previous 10 years. This line of reasoning can not be used to conclude that the establishment of such a program would increase the number of audience members or the revenue of his company.

First, the author assumes that since such a program increased the number of audience members for one company that it will surely do the same for his. In order to validate such claims, the author would need to present information on the adjacent population's interest in such programs. It is probable that the companies are not located in the same area and that people in their area are not interested in such a program. Until interest is established, it can not be determined whether or not such a program would be beneficial to the author's company. Furthermore, the author bases his claim on the assumption that if it worked for The Avon Repertory Company, it must work for his company as well. There is no information to substantiate such a claim. Similarly, with such a program already successfully in place it is likely that the addition of a similar program may not generate as much interest.

Additionally, it is stated that there has been a 20% decline in the audience size at this theatre. The author fails to mention if the other theatre has experienced similar declines. Perhaps less people are interested in such productions and the company would benefit more from a different variety of productions. Furthermore, the author cites the 10% increase in profit experienced by the other company since the implementation of the program. The program can not be directly credited with the increase in profits with out first examining other changes within the company, as well as the economy or demographic as a whole. Similarly, the increase in profit is presented in as 10% which may not be statistically significant when compared directly to the profit of the authors company. The Avon Repertory Company may be much smaller, causing a similar increase in profit to be insignificant to the Classical Shakespeare Theatre Production.

Finally, the author states that a decrease in the number of audience members is directly correlated with a decrease in profits over the last ten years. With out information about the company's expense versus revenue it is impossible to support this claim. Increasing inflation over ten years will undoubtedly increase costs of supplies, labor and rent. The decrease in profits, may better be assigned to failures within the company to adjust admissions to the current economy. Information regarding trends in ticket pricing and money spent would further strengthen the author's argument.

In conclusion, the argument could be strengthened if further information were provided in regard to the interest in such a program, trends in the company's profit and expenses ad well as more substantial information regarding the patron's interest in such a program. As it stands, however, the argument is flawed and with out further information the author's argument can not be validated for the reasons indicated.