“To reverse the deterioration of the postal service, the government should raise the price of postage stamps. This solution will no doubt prove effective, since the price increase will generate larger revenues and will also reduce the volume of mail, thereby eliminating the strain on the existing system and contributing to improved morale.”


The argument claims that the price of postage stamps should be raised in order to increase the postal service's customer satisfaction. The assumption that underlies the thinking is that as a result, the revenues will increase. This argument is somewhat correct but incomplete. It could be strengthened considerably by taking into account some very important key factors.

Firstly, the key assumption of the argument is that this new pricing strategy will generate larger revenues. This might not be the case. Due to higher prices, the sales might decrease dramatically, leading to a decreased revenue generation. This could also lead customers to more expensive, private postal services. Therefore, additional information is needed on the market and customers to evaluate the impact of the price change.

The deterioration of the postal service should be analyzed closely. The reason behind it should be investigated. It could be a factor that can easily be corrected. Plus, it is the duty of a government to provide low cost and high quality services to its citizens. Low cost and high quality service is possible. The postal service should use its resources wisely and develop new strategies to achieve this goal.

Another crucial key factor is the brand image of the postal service. It would not be good for the brand image to constantly increase prices. The main goal of the postal service should be to increase the number of shipments, not to reduce it.

The argument is flawed, incomplete and unconvincing due to aspects mentioned above. The author could have made it more logically sound by including some important points such as information about the market, the customer base and past data about the organization. The argument then could be evaluated much better.