The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend.
“Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams’ revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch’s $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago I listed my home with Fitch, and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams Realty.”
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In the letter, a homeowner is trying to convince his friend that of the two leading Realty Firms in the town Adam’s Realty is better in every aspect. He supports his claim using evidences which compare the two firms on various business aspects. In the process he assumes that both firms have employees with very similar capabilities. He is not clear about the sphere of influence in the types of Real Estates these firms have. He also assumes that industry is insulated from the time effects and the results in the past can comfortably depict today’s scenario.
First, the author assumes that employees of the both firms are equally efficient and hence the output of about 40 employees must supersede the 25 employees many of whom are part time. Although the assumption may sound plausible on the surface, one needs to take care of the experience and business contacts of these agents. It may happen that of 25 employees of Fitch Realty are vastly experienced and need to work part time only, whereas Adam’s employ fresh graduates only who lack both. If this assumption is proven false then the argument loses one of the important evidences of the comparison of number of employees.
Second he assumes that revenue of the two firms can be one of the important ways of comparing the business. In the process he is not clear about the portfolio of the two firms. Adam’s may be involved in Commercial space, which are far more expensive than residential properties. He also uses the average deal size of the two companies for comparison. While doing so, he conveniently neglects the profitability in the two deals. It may happen that Fitch is famous for selling houses which are in city outskirts at very high profitability while Adam’s are dealing with premium properties which are easily saleable and may not be that profitable.
Third, Author sights his personal example, where he highlights the timeline of the two deals through the two firms, but doesn’t even attempts to look at the basic flaw in the timeline assumption. How can the recent market condition be compared with that of ten years in past? It is very much possible that in recession period he might have sold his property with Fitch’s Realty which would have done a good job considering the tough times, whereas Adam’s may have had a cakewalk in the booming Real Estate Market. Author also conceals the conditions of the two houses he dealt with. Size, age, condition of the houses matter a lot in the deal and that’s why his assumptions has flaws of wrong time line and vagueness.
In conclusion, the author must provide information which would help the reader realistic comparison of the two firms. He must put efficiency of the employees as well as niche advantages both firms are offering in residential houses. It will be great to have a look at the profitability each firm is having. While giving personal example, extra details on the two properties as well on the timeline would prove vital for the comparison of the two firms.
The analysis of the argument satisfies almost every instruction. It yet lacks a bit in clarity of the flaw. The author could also improve relation between the flaw and implications of the flaw.