We already know that the units cost the same, and that both meet the landlord's needs; this doesn't add anything to the existing premises. The salesperson recommended one AC over the other, so we need a principle that says the consumer should buy one and not the other. This fails to do that, so doesn't bridge the gap.

This principle starts in the wrong place: the FreezAll costs the same as the Sno-Queen, so a principle that requires the customer to choose a cheaper option apply to this stimulus. This also creates a restriction on choosing the less-powerful unit, whereas the correct bridge would judge in favor of the less-powerful unit.

The salesperson never directly establishes which AC has the best value; she only compares their power levels. If that's the only difference, then the Sno-Queen might actually have better value—more power for the same price. So we don't know if this principle even triggers, and it definitely doesn't bridge to the recommendation of the less-powerful FreezAll.

We don't know anything about which product offers the most commission to the salesperson, so this can't be the correct principle: it doesn't trigger. The only distinction we're aware of is the units' power, so the correct bridge has to involve power levels, and not another distinction like commission.

We know that the FreezAll is less powerful than the Sno-Queen while still meeting the landlord's needs, so this principle triggers. And it bridges to the conclusion that the landlord should buy the FreezAll, which is exactly what the salesperson advised. This is the principle that best matches the salesperson's advice.