AWA no. 2

PROMPT:

The following appeared in the opinion column of a financial magazine:

“On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and

services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will

increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly

during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those

products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer.”

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

Essay:

The argument claims that the department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly in the coming decade and that the stores should begin to replace some of the products meant for younger customers with products for middle aged customers. The conclusion is backed by the premises that middle-aged consumers spend a bigger portion of their expenditure at department stores and that such consumers are expected to dramatically increase in number over the next decade. Stated this way, the argument manipulates facts and presents a distorted view of the situation. It fails to mention several important aspects necessary to sufficiently evaluate the argument.

First, the argument assumes that 25% of younger consumers spending is less than 39% of middle-aged consumers spending. This statement is a stretch as there is no reason to believe the said assumption. For example, Younger consumers may be sufficiently large in number than the middle-aged consumer or the total spending of an average young consumer is far more than the total spending of the middle-aged consumer. The argument could have been more convincing if it mentioned something about the percentage contribution of the young consumers and middle-aged consumers in the overall market.

Second, the argument claims that dramatic increase in number of middle-aged population implies that the said cohort will be growing at a faster pace than the other cohorts. It maybe a case that the overall population is increasing at a similar pace and relative proportion of middle-aged consumers will remain constant instead of growing disproportionately. For this reason, It again is an example of poor reasoning. For example, the geography is facing mass migration of population and families, lead by middle aged people, are shifting together with their young ones. In order to make the claim more believable, the author could have mentioned about relative proportion of the middle-aged population expected at the beginning and the end of the said decade.

Finally, the argument fails to answer many relevant questions such as why is it necessary to replace the young consumer focused products with products focused at middle aged consumers rather than just adding more SKUs and whether or not ignoring young consumers. who shall later grow into the middle-aged population, today will mean that they will switch loyalty at a later stage in their life? Maybe, the consumers shift loyalty only at a young age and do not change it later on. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with an impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking than a substantive evidence

In conclusion, the argument is flawed and therefore un-convincing. It could have been further strengthened if it were to mention few census stats such as relative contribution of young consumers and middle-aged consumers both in terms of population and overall expenditure while highlighting the relative change expected in the metrics over the coming decade. In order to analyze the merits of a situation, it is important that the all the relevant facts necessary for the evaluation are presented clearly. Without this, the argument is unsubstantiated and open to debate.