The chart below shows global sales of the top five mobile phone brands between 2009 and 2013.
The bar chart provides information about the number of worldwide sales for the top five best-selling handphone brands from 2009 to 2013.
Overall, the sales number for Samsung, Apple and ZTE had increased throughout the period, while the sales figure for Nokia and LG had decreased.
In 2009, Samsung sold 250 million phones, while Nokia sold close to 450 million phones, the highest for the year. In contrast, by 2013, Nokia’s phone sales dipped markedly to reach slightly above 250 million units and Samsung’s sales figures doubled to reach its highest point at 450 million phone units.
It can be observed that the mobile phone sales for Apple and LG had reverse trends, although both phones sold less than 150 million units in each of these three years. Apple’s sales rose slightly, while LG’s sales went down gradually. Finally, Zte remained the least popular phones despite observing a slight rise in sales number from2009 to 2013.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-21 | PhucHuynh | 100 | view |
| 2023-03-02 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
| 2023-02-17 | tieuquynh | 84 | view |
| 2023-01-12 | AYUSH BOTHRA | 73 | view |
| 2022-11-09 | BÙI QUỐC VƯƠNG | 78 | view |
- In many parts of the world children and teenagers are committing more crimes Why is this happening How should they be punished 67
- A lot of places in the world rely on tourism as a main source of income Unfortunately tourism can also be a source of problems if it is not managed correctly Describe the advantages and disadvantages of tourism in the modern world Do you think that benefi 84
- The picture below shows the recycling process of wasted glass bottles Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- It is more important for the government to spend money on promoting the healthy lifestyle to prevent the illness rather than on the treatment for people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree 61
- The diagram shows the design of a modern landfill for household waste Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 100
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, so, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 33.7804878049 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 799.0 965.302439024 83% => OK
No of words: 156.0 196.424390244 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12179487179 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.53411884305 3.73543355544 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.27962814308 2.65546596893 86% => OK
Unique words: 98.0 106.607317073 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.628205128205 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 216.9 283.868780488 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.442200354 43.030603864 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.142857143 112.824112599 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 5.23603664747 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250577880937 0.215688989381 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123871395979 0.103423049105 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0805154190469 0.0843802449381 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162043255876 0.15604864568 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0903812420851 0.0819641961636 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 11.4140731707 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.06136585366 109% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.