The following appeared in a memo from the president of Bower Builders, a company that constructs new homes."A nationwide survey reveals that the two most-desired home features are a large family room and a large, well-appointed kitchen. A number of homes

The president of Bower Builders states that the size of the family room and kitchen should be increased in all homes to boost sales. The author substantiates his claim by stating the result of a nationwide survey supporting that large family rooms and kitchens are desired by homeowners. Also, the author further states that the homes of Bower Builder’s competitors contain the desired features and hence have very auspicious sales and profits. The author’s argument does not provide sufficient evidence to corroborate the underlying assumptions and thus makes for a weak argument.

Firstly, the author assumes that the rapid sales and increased profit made by Domus Construction (D.C) are attributed to the implementation of larger family room and kitchen. This claim is not compelling, as the author does not provide evidence to aver that indeed the increased sales is as a result of the change. There could be other reasons that could explain the elevated sales for D.C, perhaps because of their greater popularity amongst construction firms, or the better quality and design of their homes. The author’s argument is undermined if the assumption fails.

Secondly, the author assumes that because homeowners prefer larger family rooms and kitchens implies that they would be willing to pay for it. The author provides no justification to enlighten readers as to whether making larger family rooms and kitchens have accumulated increase in cost and if potential customers would be willing to trade preference for cost. If Bower Builder’s end up spending more on the houses they construct implemented with the desired features, they may not make the profit they desire.

Finally, even if we agree that the features provided by D.C homes are compliant to the result of the survey that helped boost sales, it cannot be assumed that the adoption of the same features by Bower Builders would also have gratifying results. Perhaps the commingling of several features is what lead to auspicious sales. It could be that clients of D.C are richer, hence appreciate and demand larger family room and kitchens, or the extra services offered by D.C in ensuring customer satisfaction or the location of their houses etc. Are few of the possible reasons why the implementation of the idea is beneficial for D.C and may not be so for Bower Builders. The author should delineate evidence that would guarantee profit for Bower Builders if they adopt the change.

In sum, the argument presented by the author while interesting does not provide the required evidence to justify the underlying assumptions. The argument can be strengthened if the author provided evidence to readers that the increased sales by D.C are attributed to their implementation of larger family room and kitchen, the cost related implications and whether the adoption of the idea by Bower Builders would have the same outcome as D.C.