Argument that two things cannot be compared, when, in fact they can be compared

A software company says: For $5000 per year you get unlimited hot line support. This is even less than the amount that Microsoft charges for the same service, and our response times are better.
The purchasing agents says: You cannot compare yourself to Microsoft, so your prices have even to be lower.

I assume that this is only a killer phrase, but is there a special logical fallacy for that?

I know of no such fallacy that this would describe. It seems more of just a false statement (i.e., the things really can be compared).

For some silly reason I am reminded of this presidential debate:

"What kind of qualifications does Dan Quayle have to be president," "What kind of qualifications do I have," and "What would I do in this kind of a situation?" And what would I do in this situation? ... I have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice president of this country. I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration if that unfortunate event would ever occur.

Judy Woodruff: Senator Bentsen?

Bentsen: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged shouts and applause.)