"The experiences I'm having with business owners in every city makes me understand some things: .... 2. Twitter is underhyped. I'm now convinced that Twitter

"The experiences I'm having with business owners in every city makes me understand some things: .... 2. Twitter is underhyped. I'm now convinced that Twitter has locked up a whole raft of businesses and that Twitter is actually worth five to 10 billion dollars. .... Anyway, this all leads me to understand that Twitter is way underhyped and is worth more in the marketplace than anyone has estimated yet." So the author "understands" that Twitter is underhyped because, citing item number 2, "Twitter is underhyped." What kind of silly argumentation is this?