Merely based on dubious and unfounded assumptions,the author recommendations that the company should shift from deconcentrated operation to concentrated operation.In order to support the conclusion,the author cites the fact that since the company located in one location,there is a decline in revenue.In addition, the author emphasizes the merits of concentrated in one location.This argument seems to be plausible at first glance.However,as discussed below,closer scrutiny of the argument reveals that it accomplishes little toward supporting the recommendation.

To begin with,the author fails to establish a casual relationship between increasing in revenue and concentration in one location.It is entirely possible that the growth in income is attributed to the effective advertisement,successful management,decline in rent.It is also possible that he company capitalized advanced scientific technology,making the employee more efficient ,cutting costs and thus increasing the income.The mere fact that just because one event(increasing in revenue ) follows another(concentration in one location) is insufficient to substantiate the conclude that the first event caused the second.Without compelling evidence to support the casual connection between two events,the author's recommendation is not worthy consideration.

Even if the fact that increasing in revenue has been caused by the located in one location does not suggests that concentration does not have negative impacts on company.No evidence is stated in the argument to substantiate that.For one thing,It is obvious that located in one location,the company has cut part of costs,but it is not granted that other costs have not increased dramatically.Just as likely,the employer have to seek a place that big enough to accommodate all of employee,may be the rent higher than the whole rent before concentrated,consequently,even if the income increases,the expenditure surpasses the revenue making the company in the danger of deficit.For another, citizens,who prefers to closer companies considering convenience,may choose other company near by ,therefore,our company loss a large number of clients.Moreover,The author fails to provide evidence to demonstrate that the loss in former location can be supplemented by the latter concentrated location.Unless the author can point out and rule out the disadvantage that was brought by located in one location,the recommendation is premature and problematic.

In sum,as it stands the argument is unconvincing.To strengthen the argument,the author should rule out other relevant factors that would influence the company's profitability.To better evaluate the recommendation,we need more information about the demerits of concentration.