On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airli

“On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airlines last year filed a complaint about our baggage-handling procedures. This means that although some 1 percent of our passengers were unhappy with those procedures, the overwhelming majority were quite satisfied with them; thus it would appear that a review of the procedures is not important to our goal of maintaining or increasing the number of Avia’s passengers.”

The argument given above quotes a statistic detailing the number of passengers on Avia Airlines who have logged a complaint about their baggage-handling procedures. The writer, writing on behalf of Avia Airlines, then wrongly interprets the result of the data and formulates the conclusion that the airline does not need to review its procedures because its customers are content with the current procedures. The assumptions employed by the writer are flawed and overlook a number of factors, which is why the argument built on top of these assumptions is not well reasoned.

First, the writer talks about how only 9 out of every 1000 passengers filed a complaint about the airline’s baggage handling procedures. The writer concludes that the remaining majority of customers are quite satisfied with their procedures. However, the reasoning for this conclusion is flawed because the writer overlooks certain important points. It isn’t necessary that all the people who have not complained against the procedures are satisfied with them. The complaint procedure might be too tedious for them, they might not have the time to file a complaint due to their appointments or they might just be unmotivated to file a complaint. The majority of people that the airline considers are satisfied with its performance, can easily fall into any one of these categories.

Second, the writer then concludes that it isn’t necessary for the airline to review its procedures to maintain or even increase its passengers. Now even if we assume that the vast majority is actually satisfied with the current procedures, it isn’t necessary that the company would increase the number of passengers by just continuing with these procedures. There could be other airlines that improve their operations and thus obtain a greater market share. Hence the airline backs its conclusion upon a flawed interpretation, which even if were right wouldn’t completely make the conclusion appear well reasoned.

The argument presented can be made more substantial and solid by taking into account the various factors that have been overlooked and then correctly interpreting data. Only then will the writer be able to form a sound argument based on the data and its interpretation.

Can someone please evaluate this for me, this is one of my first attempts at AWA.
Thanks a lot.