The following appeared in a memo from the president of Bower Builders a company that constructs new homes A nationwide survey reveals that the two most desired home features are a large family room and a large well appointed kitchen A number of homes in o

Citing the nationwide survey and the success of the Domus Construction, the author concludes that Bower Builders should increase the size of the family rooms and kitchens in all houses they build and should make state-of-the-art kitchen its standard feature in order to boost sales and make greater profits. At the first glance, the argument seems convincing; however, on closer inspection, several alternative explanations could seriously undermine the validity of the argument. The author should provide answers to the following questions in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable.
First of all, the very first question that should be answered is related to the survey. Who conducted the survey? Who are its respondents? And what is the range of the survey? It is highly likely that the survey has been conducted by the employees of Domus Construction for its advertisement and the majority of the respondents are its consumers. If it is the case, then the survey do not include the opinion of other consumers that could probably have different tastes and opinion towards house—the survey could be biased. The author should provide authoritative data information of the survey and the range of its respondents in order to provide sufficient ground for the argument to stand.
Secondly, are there no other engaging features in the homes sold by Domus Construction? Did Domus Construction garner much profit from the sales of these homes? The author prematurely assumes that a large family room and a large, well-appointed kitchen are only the main reason for its higher sales. And the author naively assumes that the sales of these homes provided Domus a greater profit. However, these assumptions fall short given the lack of reliable evidences. It is likely that Domus Construction might have provided homes at those places where the climate is always suitable (neither too cold nor too hot), plenty of water, and other facilities needed to live a happy and comfortable life, whereas Bowler Builder may not. It is also possible that the homes built by Domus might have other attracting feature, such as sophisticated bathrooms with highly expensive showers, bathtubs, mirrors etc, attractive balcony, lavish light-bulbs and sufficient parking space for vehicles. And, it is for the same reason (use of expensive materials in the homes) that Domus might not have earned greater profit through the sales as the author thinks, though it might have sold them at higher prices. Answers to the abovementioned questions are imperative for the proper evaluation of the argument.
Thirdly, the author presumptuously assumes that customers of Bower Builders do not need a separate dining room for family meal, and they can expense the money needed for dining rooms in the construction of large family room and a large kitchen. However, this assumption might not work in real life. They do not need a separate dining room for family meal does not mean that they do not need dining room at all. Since humans are social beings, they often have a social gathering during special occasions such as rice feeding ceremony, birthday events, and several festivals. And in these cases a large separate dining room is always needed, and a customer would always prefer to have a large dining room in his/her home.
In sum, though the argument seems plausible, it lacks its persuasiveness due to its reliance upon several unwarranted assumptions. The author should provide the answers to the questions mentioned above in order to support the argument. In the absence of these answers, the argument remains highly dubious and cannot be fully evaluated.