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 w

The author of the argument recommends using Adams Realty over Fitch Realty to have a quick sale of one’s home. To substantiate his or her recommendations, he or she has cited several facts comparing Adams and Fitch Realty: that, Adams Realty has more agents than Fitch Realty, and Adams Realty has earned more revenue than Fitch Realty last year, and that, Adams Realty made home sales that averaged higher than Fitch Realty. He or she also shared his or her experience with these two leading firms, that, he or she listed a home for sale with Fitch Realty ten years ago that took more than four months whereas, his last-year listed home for sale with Adams Realty took only one month to be sold. However, I find this argument logically flawed and unconvincing in several respects.

To begin with, the author of the argument falsely concluded Adams Realty to be better than Fitch Realty simply on the basis of the fact that Adams Realty has more real estate agents than Fitch Realty. However, it is not necessarily true that a higher number of agents have higher effectiveness than that of a lower number of agents. Even though Fitch Realty has less number of agents, and many of them even work only part-time, it is entirely possible that these agents are more expert and efficient in their work than those of Adams’, and thereby more effective. So, without knowing the expertise of those agents and the efficiency of their work the author of the argument cannot consider one firm to be better than another depending on the number of agents.

To substantiate his or her argument, the author also noted that his listed home with Fitch Realty, listed ten years ago, took more time to be sold than his recent listed home for sale with Adams Realty, and attributed this discrepancy to be a disadvantage of the Fitch Realty.
However, it is possible that his home listed with Fitch Realty was less demandable and attractive to be sold earlier than it did. It is also possible that his home listed for sale with Adams Realty was comparatively cheap, which made his home more demandable and led his home to be sold out earlier than usual. Since the author of the argument fails to account for these alternative explanations for the discrepancy between the firms, I remain unconvinced that I should appoint Adams Realty over Fitch as the seller of my home.

In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons. It could be significantly strengthened if the author conspicuously mentioned all the relevant facts and evidence to substantiate his or her assumptions – perhaps statistically – that Agents of Adams Realty are more efficient than those of Fitch Realty, and both of his or her homes listed with Adams and Fitch Realty were comparatively similar, and last year’s market demand was tantamount to that of ten years ago.