The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should, therefore, allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising
The memo argues that an increased percentage of positive reviews and a reduced number of viewers of the Super Screen-produced movies indicates that the company should allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising. Before we can reach a conclusion for this argument, there are three issues we need to address.
Firstly, we need to analyze if the movie from last year received fewer viewers despite a higher percentage of positive reviews because of its nature. It could because the movie itself only caters to a small group of viewers. It is common that some movies that cater to a small group of viewers have high reviews. For instance, horror movies, because a lot of people simply cannot watch horror movies, even a good horror movie does not have a large number of viewers. It is little related to the budget that the marketing department received. If the company wants to improve the number of viewers, it should focus on making a movie that can attract more viewers.
Secondly, there is little information provided about the timing of the movie being displayed in the movie theater. It is nothing new that when more than one good movie is being displayed in the movie theater at the same time, each will lose a little market share because of the competitiveness of the market. If last year's movie were displayed at the same time with some other big hits on the big screen, then the reduced number of viewers does not reflect a lack of funding of the market department.
Thirdly, we also need a more comprehensive analysis of the operation of the marketing department last year. If we assume the reduced viewers were caused by marketing. What exactly went wrong? Was a lack of marketing presence responsible or a poorly designed marketing strategy responsible? If the marketing department already had enough funding but simply did not have a good marketing strategy or simply carried out its strategy poorly, then better training for the marketing department is more urgent than allocating more money to the marketing department.
In summary, the memo presented a limited analysis of the issues that need to be addressed. We need more information regarding the three issues mentioned above in order to reach a well-informed decision.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | view |
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your posi 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 50
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any ot 59
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 50
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 385 350
No. of Characters: 1866 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.43 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.847 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.598 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 57 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.615 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.58 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.19 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 441, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... even a good horror movie does not have a large number of viewers. It is little related to the bu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 318, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
... competitiveness of the market. If last years movie were displayed at the same time w...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 109, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... of the marketing department last year. If we assume the reduced viewers were caus...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, well, for instance, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1913.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 385.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96883116883 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68311814033 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.475324675325 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 603.9 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.9965276836 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.277777778 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3888888889 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.215634919219 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624733160304 0.0743258471296 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0478114101065 0.0701772020484 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106393969088 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0500558625573 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.