- UID
- 590025
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-12-14
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
The conclusion drawn here is that Olympic Food can improve its efficiency on food processing because of its long experience in the industry, hence minimize the costs and maximize the profits. To substantiate the statement, an example of film processing is provided, stating that the film processing have a improved efficiency and decreased cost over time, assuming the analogy between food processing and film processing, the argument attempts to convince the reader that the long experience will bring the same effect to Olympic Food which operates in food processing business.
the potential fallacies which lie behind the argument/reasoning are obvious. below we will identify two main flaws in this argument:
Firstly the analogy between film processing and food processing is quite unconvincing. since mainly the cost of film processing depends on the cost of chemical compounds and the processing techniques, while that of food processing depends on the cost of raw materials. the price elasticities of those commodities on the market could be quite different, hence it is not reasonable to expect those two industries to yield similar results for the sake for long time experiences.
Secondly the total cost of a company usually has a quite complexed composition. the costs includes not only operational cost, which are referring to the food processing cost in Olympic Food's case, but also many other costs such as administrative cost and logistic cost. minimizing one part of it is going to decrease the whole costs, but not sufficient to minimize the total costs.
To summarize, the conclusion drawn is inadequate, because the author failed in providing sufficient evidences and making a convincing reasoning. To support the conclusion, the author needs to identify for the food processing techniques used in Olympic food and to provide more details for the company's financial status. |
|