“Techcorporation is our top pick for investment this term. We urge all of our clients to invest in this new company. For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed satellite technology has been approved by the FTA to compete with the current satellite provider. That company is Techcorporation. A consumer survey last year indicated that over eighty percent of respondents were dissatisfied with the current satellite television provider and would want to switch to another provider if the industry were not a monopoly. Thus, the new venture of Techcorporation into satellite television will prove to be highly profitable for those who invest now.”

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.


The given newsletter offering advice to investors is incompetent to provide a logical base for making such investment. It has various unmentioned details, that are necessary to be aware of before reaching to a conclusion. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws, which are stated below.

First of all, the author has not mentioned the kind of satellite technology this new company has developed. Is it anywhere nearly related to satellite television? The author has readily assumed the specific service this company provides without clearly stating the kind of satellite technology it deals in.

Second, the argument makes a reference to a survey conducted last year, which concluded that eighty percent of respondents were dissatisfied and would want to switch to another provider. This is again a very weak and outdated claim, since this survey was conducted over last year. A lot can change during this span, the survey would be completely useless if the current satellite provider has much better services now. Also, the author fails to mention the authenticity of survey, and even the scale at which it was held. It can be a survey done in a locality, or a supermarket, or a district. Without stating the amount of people surveyed and the total area surveyed, this claim is unsupported.

Finally, the author concludes that a new venture into Tech corporations that deal with satellite television will be highly profitable for those who invest now. From this statement again, it is not clear how long will it take for the investment to give a profit, or even mention the rate of investment we can expect to get back. Without supporting evidence and examples from other ventures in the same field, making this claim is baseless and weak.

In a nutshell, the above mentioned newsletter is flawed and full of unsupported claims that lack evidence. It can be strengthened if the author answers the above mentioned questions and provides valid reasoning with proper evidence. In order to make such investment, it is necessary to be provided with a strong argument and have knowledge of all contributing factors.