The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice for a client."Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that

The argument above is well-presented and appears to be relatively sound at first glance: since the author assumes that the demand for heating oil increase, it seems cogent to invest in Consolidated Industries. However, as more light is shed on issues and more detailed facts are concerned, the unsubstantiated assumptions lead me to question the validity of the argument.

First of all, the author assumes that the prediction of the climate forecasters can be taken at face value. The weather forecasters anticipate that the weather of the northeastern United States will continue to be in inclement. However, the author should take into account that it is a mere prediction and it does not rule out the possibility of increased temperature in the future. For instance, due to the global warming, the average temperature of the northeastern region may continuously increase and people will not use the heating oil as much as they did previously. If this would be the case, the author’s assertion on the weather prediction can be weakened. Therefore, more valid evidence on the future weather pattern should be necessary.

Another assumption the author makes is that new homes built in the region will use oil as their primary heating resource. However, the author should note that these houses might not install oil-heating system. In other words, with the advent of cutting-edge technology, the owners of the new houses decide to utilize alternative energy sources such as sun and wind energy. In such a case, those houses will not require using heating oil and consequently, the demand of oil will stay constant. Therefore, without detailed information on the new houses, the author’s argument will not be considered as persuasive.

Lastly, the author assumes the soundness of the recommendation that the investment in the Consolidated Industries will reap a myriad of benefits to consumers. However, the author should consider that the profits of Consolidated Industries depend not only on the demand of heating oil but also on the achievement of other types of businesses that the industries operate. Put it differently, the Industries might not be profitable since other portions of businesses might fail success despite of the increased demand of heating oil. If this would be the case, it is unwise to follow the suggestion of the author.

In conclusion, the argument above is not persuasive on many grounds. To bolster the argument, the author should provide detailed information on the weather prediction in the near future, corroborate that the new houses will use oil, and verify the soundness of the recommendation.