The survey reports savings “on average.” An average recognizes the possibility of outliers. So some people might not have saved money by switching; this doesn’t change the fact that new policyholders on average did save $250 per year.

The argument doesn’t compare how much new policyholders pay with how much longer, non-new policyholders pay.

The conclusion isn’t that switching to Popelka will help people save the most compared to switching to other companies. The conclusion is only that switching to Popelka will help people save money. Whether switches to other companies save more has no impact on the argument.

The argument’s reasoning isn’t based on the estimates of policyholders before they made the switch. Maybe everyone underestimated how much they’d save and found that they ended up saving more than expected; this wouldn’t undermine the argument.

This possibility shows that the savings achieved by the new Popelka policyholders might not be achievable by most people who are with other companies. The survey’s results are based on a sample that can save more, on average, than other people would save by switching.