The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals."One year ago we introduced our first product, Bargain Brand breakfast cereal. Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top-selling cereal companies.

The writer recommends expanding Bargain Brand Cereals' business and begins marketing other budget priced food products as fast as possible. This conclusion is buttressed by evidence which ought to be carefully scrutinized in order to give a comprehensive estimation of the soundness of the argument.

The first evidence which is given to us is that arguer tends to believe that low prices of Bargain Brand breakfast cereal attract many buyers; however, is it the only possible explanation of this result? Perhaps, other unstated factors impact on company's success. For example, rival companies may use some chemical flavor improvements or/and preservatives when Bargain's cereal may have natural taste and no preservatives was used during production process. Moreover, the company may use a thoughtful advertising campaign which makes the product desirable by customers. In other words, other neglected factors may directly or implicitly lead to the Bargain's success.

The second stated evidence is that despite the rivals' attempts to compete with Bargain Brand Cereals, the company has not raised its prices and despite of it, the company still makes profits. Spite of the fact that the company copes with its rivals today, the situation may change dramatically tomorrow. New introduced by competitors products may lure the company’s customers and thus it will have to increase price in order to continue to make proceeds. Moreover, other factors, which are not connected with rivals may force the company to raise the price, for example, the supplier of raw material may increase its cost and thus price on the Bargain’s cereal ought to be raised. Consequently, the fact that the Bargain has not had to increase its price yet, does not mean that this necessity will not appear in the future.

Finally, the writer proposes expanding of the kinds of low-priced food products. However, it is possible that company which has succeeded in selling cereals may not repeat it with new product. Perhaps Bargain Brand Cereals have created its product in right time and place. The market may not have such products and thus Bargain's cereal have not direct competitor for customers' attention and money but perhaps other food products have already had low-priced items. As a result, an attempt to repeat this success with new product may not bring similar result. What is more, time is important. It is suggested that repetition of previous experience may give the same result but, perhaps, the market has changed and yesterday's opportunity has been taken by other company.

In conclusion, the writer of the argument avers that expanding of Bargain's business on other budget food products as quickly as possible is a decent idea; however, the writer does not manage to prove that implementation of proposed policy will have expected result. Thus argument seems to be weak and infirm.