At what cost does a company deserve to be taken off of life-support? While actor Gregory Peck would say that a surviving, long-lived company is worth saving, fellow actor Danny Divito sees it differently. "Who cares?" he asks. The company is an investment, and no investment in need of life support is worth saving. Peck and Divito see the company; differently they also relate to their audience on different levels. In their speeches in Other People's Money, Peck and Divito use ethos, pathos, and logos with varying amounts of success in their stockholder addresses. By analyzing how ethos, pathos, and logos affected the audience for first Peck, then Divito, it is possible to determine whom to vote and why.
             Beginning with wonderful composure backed by a familiar audience, Gregory Peck begins creating creditability for his case by mentioning his experience and personal relationship with the voters. The audience believes what he has to say because of his history and because some of them have worked side by side with him. They are supposed to know that he is competent and has good character through the experiences they have shared with him. Peck also reminds the audience that this is "the 39th (meeting) of which I address you as your Chief Executive." This one statement brings up history, Peck's high position, and his connection to the audience. By emphasizing his similarity to the audience and bringing up his position in the company, Peck does an excellent job of building his credibility (Adler and Elmhorst 428).
             Peck's attempt at logos comes next and is provided through examples in the past where the company had its better days. He mentions that once, the company was strong. Twice, Peck says that this is the company's 73rd annual meeting, an apparent attempt to transfer some of the company's positive results from the past to the present. According to his logic, since that was true, then in the future, the company will become prosp...