The publisher of the mercury asserts his company should reduce its price below that of the bugle, at least until circulation increased to former levels. Upon closer inspection a number of questionable assumptions become obvious and thus weaken its ability to adequately convince potential readers. To begin with, the publisher assumes that newspaper’s price caused their circulation to decline by 10,000 readers. However, maybe something else was the cause of the decline in circulation. Probably the bugle provides various promotions to their readers, for example, 3 months free circulation when their readers pay for 1 year circulation. If this is the reason the mercury lose their readers, then there might be no reason the mercury should reduce its price below that of the bugle. Furthermore, even though newspaper’s price was the cause of the decline in circulation, it’s unclear if the mercury will succeed to get more people to read the mercury.

Hi there John! 

I just saw your message. This article reminded me of an essay that I used to read before in our local library. I think there is an argument here: Price of newspapers or choice of people. Who gets the whole market? Anyway, we will discuss this issue next class. 

bugle  - Bugle

mercury - Mercury

Best regards, 

Vanessa