Last year PrepUp had record enrollment in their test prep courses, but yearly profits fell by nearly 30 percent. To the contrary, TopPreparation had comparable enrollment to the year be fore, with profits rising by approximately 20 percent. This discrepan
Last year PrepUp had record enrollment in their test prep courses, but yearly profits fell by nearly 30 percent. To the contrary, TopPreparation had comparable enrollment to the year be fore, with profits rising by approximately 20 percent. This discrepan 15m7M
In this argument, the author claims that PrepUP will propose online test prep course in the following year with the hope of profit. To bolster his standing, the author cites some pieces of evidence. Although the argument seems logical at a first glance, it has been flawed with some unwarranted assumptions that need to be justified.
Firstly, the argument based on the reference that the yearly profit of PrepUp(PU) has been curtailed by nearly 30 percent last year while the profit of TopPreparation (TP) has been augmented by approximately 20 percent in the previous year. However, the author did not mention any number of enrolled persons; Thus, how could the arguer compare between those percents with the ignorance of the number of individuals who enrolled PU, as well as TP, is same or not. It seems that there remains an urge of knowing the answers; In the absence of these, the argument still remains skeptical.
Secondly, the author explains about the teaching method of both PU and TP; It tells that PU costs much higher than TP due to the following reasons: Offline live classes, costly house rent, teaching pieces of equipment such as white-board, laptops, projector, giant screen and so on. On the other hand, the overhead cost of TP seems lower because it executes online classes. But, the argument flawed with the proof that the salary of the teachers, who gave online lectures may be greater than the teachers of PU.
Thirdly, it tells that the online enrollment of TP has been increased by 50 percent whether the total enrollment was constant; However, this information hardly adequate for considering the argument as a fact until it discloses its initial value. For example, it can happen that initially, the total enrollment was 500; The persons, who took live classes, numbers 400 on the contrary, online attendants are 100. So, the rise of 50 percent online enrollment could not assure that the majority are running towards TP.
To recapitulate, the number of unsupported assumptions, in the previous sections, questions about the validity of the argument. Unless these are properly addressed with citing some veritable proof, the argument will still be fallacious.
In this
argument
, the
author
claims that
PrepUP
will propose
online
test
prep course in the following year with the hope of profit. To bolster his standing, the
author
cites
some
pieces of evidence. Although the
argument
seems logical at a
first
glance, it has
been flawed
with
some
unwarranted assumptions that need to
be justified
.
Firstly
, the
argument
based on the reference that the yearly profit of
PrepUp
(PU) has
been curtailed
by
nearly
30
percent
last year while the profit of
TopPreparation
(TP) has
been augmented
by approximately 20
percent
in the previous year.
However
, the
author
did not mention any
number
of enrolled persons;
Thus
, how could the arguer compare between those
percents
with the ignorance of the
number
of individuals who enrolled PU,
as well
as TP, is same or not. It seems that there remains an urge of knowing the answers; In the absence of these, the
argument
still
remains skeptical.
Secondly
, the
author
explains
about the teaching method of both PU and TP; It
tells
that PU costs much higher than TP due to the following reasons: Offline
live
classes, costly
house
rent, teaching pieces of equipment such as white-board, laptops, projector, giant screen and
so
on.
On the other hand
, the overhead cost of TP seems lower
because
it executes
online
classes.
But
, the
argument
flawed with the proof that the salary of the teachers, who gave
online
lectures may be greater than the teachers of PU.
Thirdly
, it
tells
that the
online
enrollment
of TP has
been increased
by 50
percent
whether the total
enrollment
was constant;
However
, this information hardly adequate for considering the
argument
as a fact until it discloses its initial value.
For example
, it can happen that
initially
, the total
enrollment
was 500; The persons, who took
live
classes,
numbers
400
on the contrary
,
online
attendants are 100.
So
, the rise of 50
percent
online
enrollment
could not assure that the majority are running towards TP.
To recapitulate, the
number
of unsupported assumptions, in the previous sections, questions about the validity of the
argument
. Unless these are
properly
addressed with citing
some
veritable proof, the
argument
will
still
be fallacious.