Recently butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States This change however has had little impact on our customers In fact only about 2 percent of customers have complained indicating tha

In this argument, the author asserts that the replacement of butter by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants had little impact on their customers, since only two percent of the patrons have complained. Also he claims that based on the server's report many of the customers who asked for butter do not complain when they are given margarine, and he concludes that these people either do not recognize butter from margarine or they just use the term butter without actually meaning it. This argument is based on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all, one threshold premise which the argument relies on is that only about 2 percent of the customers have complained about the change in the ingredients, and therefore 98 percent of the people are actually happy with the change. This assumption is not credible, first because the author provide us with no more information about the method of surveying. We are not aware whether the customers knew that they were getting margarine instead of butter or not. If they were not aware of the change that had happened, how they were supposed to react about it. Maybe only two percent of these people have understood the change.

Secondly, the author does not provide us information about how many people have asked for a butter contained product, and is the survey restricted to them or all the customers of the restaurant. A restaurant may have many products and dishes, and only some of them may contain butter as an ingredient, the author should have mentioned that whether these 2 percent was in all the customers of the restaurant or only those who have asked for butter contained products. In addition, it seems that the restaurants have implemented this change only in southwestern of the country, therefore, the result of it cannot be attributable to other parts of the country too. Maybe people of this region are more adapted to the taste of margarine and this is why they do not complain about it.

Finally, another threshold assumption, which the author bases his declaration on is based on the server's report. This assumption is not persuasive, since, servers may change the truth in order not to be penalized for not being able to handle the customers. Furthermore, not complaining does not mean that patrons were satisfied and they were happy with the change. It is plausible that they have been upset with the service this restaurant offers and they have not come to the restaurant again, but they did not complain.

In conclusion, the author's evidence lends little credible support to his allegation. To bolster the argument, the author should provide us with more information about how they have reached to the number of 2 percent unsatisfied customers and also give the readers more information to prove that the rest of the customers were happy about the change. He can also reinforce his argument by stating more information about the server's report to indicate that they observations were credible.