Have exam very soon, so please evaluate my essay. Comments are very welcomed.

“Company A has a large share of the international market in video-game hardware and software. Company B, the pioneer in these products, was once a $12 billion-a-year giant but collapsed when children became bored with its line of products. Thus Company A can also be expected to fail, especially given the fact that its games are now in so many American homes that the demand for them is nearly exhausted.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.


The argument states that, the similar pattern of Company B loosing its market for video games will be observed in Company A's case. The author gives as a main reason that, current game products of Company B is in almost all American houses and demand for them will decline as it happened to Company A. Stated this way, the argument fails to consider several facts on the basis it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument which predicts Company A to fail relies on assumptions where there is no clear evidence. Hence the argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.


First, the argument readily assumes that, the Company A is following the same way as once Company B did. Argument fails to show explicitly the correlation between two companies. There is no evidence that, company B will fail even if it had attracted so many demands from American homes. The argument could be much clearer if it explicitly stated the relationship and the correlation of both companies itself and demand trends.


Secondly, the conclusion of the argument did not give any cause and effect chain. Why children were bored of Company B games? And what is the difference of two company’s video-games? The answer to those questions would specifically identify the relationship of products. Assume the old game of "Snake". This was very popular during its initial lifetime and obviously, creators of that game made profit. However, after some time people lost interest in that game because the newer, more interesting game came to the world-“blocks”. Who knows, maybe the demand for snake game would not fall if new "blocks" game was not born. Thus, argument cannot truly predict Company A’s product to loose market unless it does not state the future trends in game world.


This is again very weak argument, because it does not give us clear evidence why Company A product should eventually be out of demand. The fact of Company A producing similar but more modern games does not guarantee that it will have same result of previous creators of the game.


Finally, the argument is flawed due to above mentioned facts and therefore is unconvincing. In order to assess merits of this conclusion, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors to demand. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated.