Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70

PROMPT

The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper.

"Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers—some say because its product lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness, and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine-roar on the sound track."

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

MY RESPONSE (30 MINUTES)

The newspaper article notes the failure of a foreign company (we will refer to its product as Motorcycle Y, or simply Y) to steal the customer base of Motorcycle X (hereafter X), and disputes a claim that this is due to X's noise, which is perceived as a positive trait lacking in the foreign copy. The writer attempts to disprove this claim by referencing successful - and quieter - foreign products, as well as the ads marketing X while drawing no attention to the engine-roar.

The way consumers choose a car is hardly the way in which consumers choose a motorcycle. The automobile market is far more general, as a high percentage of working adults will own a car, whereas the motorcycle market is niche. A buyer of a motorcycle is more likely someone who is using their purchase as an expression of their identity rather than a convenient mode of travel. Loudness of the motorcycle might well be a positive factor for this kind of individual. A survey into the buying rationale of motorcycle fans would provide helpful information in further evaluating this point, as well as finding comparisons within the foreign motorcycle market instead of trying to find an analogy in a very different market.

The second argument is with respect to the advertising strategy of the company selling X. The writer wrongly assumes that, one, the television ads focus on an audience that can only choose between X and Y. In reality, there are many other brands and models of motorcycle, and it seems likely that focusing on durability and sleek lines will attract broader attention in the motorcycle market. Customers interested in several American motorcycle brands, for example, might appreciate the look and longevity of X.

In addition, we can say that the loudness of X is something that commercials won't necessarily need to communicate to the target audience. People who have seen the motorcycle in public, on the road, at a diner or bar, are probably already familiar with the noise. The ad logically focuses on durability, which a typical observer cannot appreciate at first glance, and the sleek lines, which is a strong point to feature in video marketing. A loud engine might even detract from the ad, as music and voice-overs cannot be used simultaneously.

Ultimately, the writer fails to argue convincingly against the belief that the loudness of X is a key selling point that Y is lacking. If the writer were to present relevant information about the foreign motorcycle market, or survey data that summarize reasons American consumers prefer X over Y, the writer could better address the question at hand. This not being the case, the argument as it currently stands is uncompelling.