The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the
southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have filed a formal complaint, indicating
that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have
reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine
instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term
'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, to avoid the expense of purchasing butter, the Happy
Pancake House should extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants throughout the rest of the
country."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure
to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the
argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted
This memo underlines on the fact that superseding the margarine in lieu of butter to alleviate the cost can be deemed as an effective strategy. To justify this hypothesis, three postulations have been proposed. 1) a number of clients expressing malcontent are trifle 2)consumers cannot distinguish the taste of butter from margarine and 3) people do not represent any dissatisfaction when the margarine is presented to them. Close scrutiny each of these facts, divulges that none of them seem plausible.
A threshold problem with the argument involves the vague number of users. In fact, in spite of only 2 percent of consumers demonstrate reluctant to utilize margarine instead of butter, the total number of persons which are investigated in this experiment is not cleared. Thus, the thesis consider that because the majority of persons are partial to implement margarine does not seem reasonable. After determining the whole number of participants, it can be concluded that this thesis is accurate or not. Furthermore, the range of persons with sundry tastes is not specified in the text, accordingly, this may subsume only the limited range of ages or special taste. To demystify the argument, it is critically essential to widen the range of individuals whom the researchers can scrutinized.
Even assuming that persons do not have the competency of recognizing the flavor of butter from margarine cannot lead to conclusion that the margarine can play as one of substitute for butter to amplify the enumeration. To delineate, the writer underestimates the fact that a wide range of participants can fathom the difference between them but they may not evince their reactions and conceal their attitudes. Based on this explanation, to reach more reliable ramification about supplanting the butter by margarine, the more valid and discernible evaluation test should be contrived. To clarify, missing the customers due to their unsavory flavor may leave the most intense and destructive repercussions in the amount of currency that the corporation can obtain.
Nor does the mere fact that consumers who do not disclose any negative or dissent reaction after trying the margarine can opt for or advocate this replacement. Since, most of the time the consumers do not show their disagreement in order not hate others' feelings. Thus, it does not sound logical to comprehend the notion that the prevalence using of margarine will not demolish the business in the following years. Or, this approach may extenuate the revenue of company to its lowest point owing to the loss of predilection of buyers to eat some foods encompassing the margarine as unpalatable taste. Consequently, not only will the company lose some allegiances, but also it may be predisposed to a fatal recession in future time.
In sum, the argument is logically blemished and therefore untenable as it stands. To bolster the theory, the author must further expand the scope of experiment not only one specific types of persons but for a wide range of persons with various ages. As well as, regarding the importance of concealing the real attitudes of consumers in expressing their opinions about the new taste is not stealthy. Ultimately, that persons do not divulge their dissatisfaction cannot affirm the belief that replacing the butter with margarine can be a kind of cost-saving method.
(541 words)
- maintaining old friends is more important than finding the new one 90
- It is better to spend the money of rich persons for health cares, or provide food or start the small business? 3
- Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls forstudents to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspectthat others have cheated. Groveton's honor code r 83
- Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 16
- Prevalence of dinosaurs because of mass extinction 86
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 423, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: Scrutiny
...hen the margarine is presented to them. Close scrutiny each of these facts, divulges that none...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 161, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” 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.
...n opt for or advocate this replacement. Since, most of the time the consumers do not ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, in fact, kind of, as well as, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2839.0 2260.96107784 126% => OK
No of words: 543.0 441.139720559 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22836095764 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82725184711 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0046253574 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 280.0 204.123752495 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.515653775322 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 905.4 705.55239521 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.22255489022 261% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3718809346 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.434782609 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6086956522 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04347826087 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
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: 0.0862958568653 0.218282227539 40% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0241844068439 0.0743258471296 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0242698968114 0.0701772020484 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0513461813331 0.128457276422 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00946040690878 0.0628817314937 15% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 157.0 98.500998004 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.