The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of marketing at Dura-Sock, Inc."A recent study of our customers suggests that our company is wasting the money it spends on its patented Endure manufacturing process, which ensures that our socks ar

The marketing vice president of this company states that in order for Dura-Socks to raise profits, they must cease paying money and using the Endure manufacturing process. The premises on which this argument is based on is not completely cogent from a logical standpoint, as it fails to address three critical assumptions.

First, the speaker of this argument states that despite its long-lasting durability for two years, customers continue to purchase socks every three months. This does not take into account other reasons for which the customer purchases the socks. In economics, tastes and preferences are huge determinates of demand in the market system. The customers could be spending money on new socks simply for the sake of variety and still use their old socks that they had purchased during the previous visit. For example, a consumer would have bought two pairs of red socks during one visit. The next time, he may have realized he needs a pair of blue socks for a special occasion within the next three months. That does not mean that he would disregard the red socks permanently. The consumer would use them at a later time and just accumulate more socks over time. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that durability should be neglected just because the consumers acquire new products more frequently. Durability could still be an important factor for consumers if they continue to use their old socks, instead, just adding more pairs to their collection. This argument could be strengthened with the inclusion of the assumption that customers are buying new socks every three months along with discarding the socks they had previously purchased.

Second, the argument asserts that customers were surveyed in the largest market, which included solely the northeastern cities of the country. Although this is the largest market, this pool of consumers does not represent nationwide consumers and their interests. Geographical factors could greatly be a reason for why consumers in the northeast prefer style and variability. For instance, in the midwestern United States, there could be a greater population that performs hard labor and treks many miles as part of their daily responsibilities. Therefore, if one were to survey the consumers in other parts of the nation, they may reveal their prevarication for and dependence on the durability of the socks to last them for a long time through arduous walks, rather than its plethora of colors that are available. The argument could be fortified if it assumed that other markets across the nation also seemed to have similar results in the poll as did those in the northeastern part of the country.

Finally, to focus on just the results of the consumer survey itself, people indicated that they most valued the appearance and diversity of hues available in the market. However, this does not show that they did not care for the durability at all. If there were only able to pick a couple options, many consumers may have chosen to vote for the stylish appearance, although they still do recognize the importance of the durability. Hence, the author of this argument could strengthen its foundation by specifying that consumers only care for the outward appearance and multitude of colors that the socks come in, and are ambivalent or uncognizant of the durability that's inherent in the products.

It is evident that the omission of such important assumptions to the central premise poses an incredibly great weakness to this argument presented by the company. By being incapable of considering the reasons for why consumers would purchase socks every three months, the geographical limits of the survey, and the survey results themselves, the argument proves to be rationally unsound.