essay - GMAT: Argument 9

Question:
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.

Answer:
The author of the opinion column argues that sales figures of department store will increase in proportion to the increase of population of middle-aged people, who are denoted to spend 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and services. Moreover, the author contends that department store should replace its products for young people with products for middle-aged people based on the fact that middle-aged people will increase within the next decade. The argument has two clear flaws.

First of all, the argument presupposes that young people will have the same preference as middle-aged people currently have, but this premise is unreasonable. Trends are varying as time goes by. That is, preference of middle-aged people varies from time to time, leading to the fact that middle-aged people in ten years would show different purchasing characteristics from ones of current middle-aged people. For instance, in my country, Japan, almost all middle-aged people had strong preference several decades ago forward purchase at department stores, but middle-aged people at present don't show such kind of preference anymore. Since the argument that sales figures of department store will increase stands on this false premise, the argument is invalid.

Second, although the author suggests that department stores change the products to target middle-aged people, this merchandise strategy is wrong not only by the wrong premise that I mentioned above but also by the fact that this strategy would force young people away from department stores. If young people could see department stores targeting older people not themselves, they would change their attitudes toward department stores. This result should be avoided for department stores.

In summary, this argument stands on wrong premise and supports unreliable conclusion. In order to make this argument convincing, the author needs to introduce more reliable reasoning.