“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5 inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits”
The argument that over time costs of processing go down because organizations learn to do things better is somewhat flawed and omits serious concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The comparison that follows the statement, between the food and colour film processing industries brings rise to a set of questionable assumptions . As there may be many factors altering the cost of production between industries, this alone does not constitute to a logical argument in favour of a rise in profits, and it certainly does not provide support or proof for the main argument.
First, the argument assumes that experience automatically equates to a reduction in cost. In a weak attempt to support its claim, the argument compares the food processing industry to that of the colour print industry, assuming that they would follow similar paths. But if the cause of the colour prints’ cost reduction was due to factors other than experience, such as the lower cost of machinery, change in personnel or reduction in cost of raw materials such as transport costs then this would not guarantee in any way a reduction in the cost of food processing today. To make the argument more logically sound, evidence of Olympic Food’s marginal cost of production (year to date) should be shown proving that the cost of production is indeed following a trend like that assumed.
Second, the prices used to compare the colour print processing are not comparable as they offer a different service. 50 cents for a 5 day service as opposed to 20 cents for a 1 day service is not a equivalent service as buying goods or services in bulk usually tend to be cheaper.
Third, the argument never addresses the interlink between the health of the economy, the health of the company and how it translates to profit. The argument makes the assumption that a reduction in cost equates to an increase in profits. This can be a dangerous argument to make, thus guaranteeing profits to a set of stake holders without taking into consideration factors such as inflation, cost of raw materials, debt, projected sales, economic/political uncertainty, employee performance etc. Evidence of the company’s accounts showing the company’s financial health must be analysed before making claims of a projected increase in profits. The competition must also be considered to ensure the price mark will not drop drastically and have a negative effect in profits.
Finally, the argument does not provide any details of what can be done better due to the experience and instead uses a rather vague explanation of “things will be done better” thus giving no substance to their claims.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included more items discussed above instead of solely using the flawed example of colour prints, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-27 | navderm | 82 | view |
| 2019-09-07 | glaedr7274 | 63 | view |
| 2019-03-26 | HayHAHA | 68 | view |
| 2018-12-11 | gomoros | 66 | view |
| 2018-12-04 | Naga Goutam | 53 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 481 350
No. of Characters: 2371 1500
No. of Different Words: 240 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.683 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.929 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.732 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 183 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 96 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.062 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.278 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.348 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.466 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 350, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ise to a set of questionable assumptions . As there may be many factors altering t...
^^
Line 3, column 989, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... to 20 cents for a 1 day service is not a equivalent service as buying goods or s...
^
Line 3, column 1110, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...er. Third, the argument never addresses the interlink between the health of the economy, the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, may, second, so, then, third, thus, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2452.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 480.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10833333333 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96765440258 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514583333333 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 763.2 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.6760708562 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.235294118 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2352941176 23.324526521 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35294117647 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249431128701 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0758535479418 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0683567735666 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148562043201 0.128457276422 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0742392386575 0.0628817314937 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.