First of all, the costs of processing do not go down solely because of time passing. (or "because of the passage of time.") Instead, advanced technology, improved manpower management and simplified processing procedure may account for the decreasing costs.("improved human resources management" is also possible.  Also maybe "simplifications in processing procedure".  "count" and "account"... "This will count towards your score."  "This will count as extra credit."  "We have to account for a margin of error in our calculations.") In other words, there is no proof of a direct-cause relationship between aging industry age and cost efficiency. ("direct causal" might be better.  "direct-cause" sounds strange but maybe it's a particular term that you are familiar with.  "aging" sounds like either the elderly or a particular process.  "The aging of this cheese accounts for its distinctive flavor."  "industry age" is probably appropriate to what you're saying.  Otherwise it feels like you would have to say "between how long a process has been around/has been in use and the cost efficiency of that process." "industry age" is certainly more concise.) Therefore, it’s not logical to assume that Olympic Foods will necessarily minimize costs while as it reaching reaches its 25th anniversary.(This is okay, but a comparison would be better I think.  I.e., "minimize costs" relative to what?  "Therefore it's not logical to assume that Olympic foods will minimize costs as a result of its experience in the food industry."  But then, that is somewhat logical... I'm not sure... to be honest, I don't know why someone would analyze one of these company quarterly statements.  They're just a bunch of lies and nonsense for the idiot gamblers on the stock markets.  Further, most of those idiot gamblers bet more on the tone of voice of the CEO or the color of his tie than what he actually says.)

In addition, the costs of color film processing went going down doesn’t mean that the costs of food processing will go down too/as well. (You could also say "a/the decrease in the cost of color film processing doesn't mean that the... ") The statement falsely assumes that what happened in color film processing will happen in food processing.

Last but not least, the statement fails to consider the possibility that Olympic Foods doesn’t won't decrease its processing costs even if/though the whole food processing industry does. ("if" is better here with "does" I think, and this is a future expectation so, "won't".  "though" is more difficult since this is a future expectation.  "even though the whole food processing industry will."  but this sounds a little strange.)

(With that first paragraph, I think the issue is that the report relates the company's longevity in the industry to technological developments in general, and the two are not necessarily related.  Which is sort of what you say later in your second two points "In addition" "lastly"... "minimize costs" is... it's vague.  I got to say again, I don't know why anyone would read one of these shareholder reports.  咬文嚼字,字的气或者字形?.   Are they good people or evil?  Are they competent or incompetent?  Who owns them?)