In his memo, the new vice president of Sartorian councels the clothing company to resume production of alpaca overcoats, which were discontinued five years prior. He rationalizes his advice by pointing to a new wool supplier, the paucity of alpaca overcoats on the market over the previous five years, and the increase in retail prices for clothing over that same time period. While it is plausible that the vice president's suggestion might ultimately prove wise, he should adduce three pieces of additional evidence in order to bolster the validity of his argument and convince Sartorian to adopt his proposal.
Firstly, the vice president should provide evidence that Sartorian's new fabric supplier has the capacity to reliably provide enough high quality wool to meet manufacturing demands. If for instance, the new supplier can only produce enough wool to meet the manufacturing requirements for, say, twenty alpaca overcoats per year, then perhaps it would not be wise for Sartorian to invest in the marketing and distribution of such a miniscule market. Similarly, if the wool from the new supplier is of grossly inferior quality to Sartorian's former supplier's wool, then, no matter the quantity wool, it could result in a product that may not live up to the expectations of customers. Without details regarding the quality and quantity of wool available from the new fabric supplier, the vice president's assertion that Sartorian ought to resume alpaca overcoat production remains weak.
Additionally, the vice president ought to prove that customer demand for alpaca overcoats remains high. Perhaps clothing trends have greatly fluctuated since Sartorian last sold alpaca overcoats. If customers now perceive them as unfashionable, then it would be unwise for Sartorian to reintroduce them to market. This could explain why the company's major competitor ceased manufacturing alpaca overcoats.
Furthermore, the vice president needs to present evidence that customers will, in fact, be willing to spend more money on alpaca overcoats than they were five years prior. Just because "most" clothing prices have increased, does not necessarily equate to customer willingness to pay more for alpaca overcoats specifically.
To conclude, while it is possible that the vice president is wise to suggest that Sartorian produce alpaca overcoats once again, his argument, as it stands now, remains weak. He could increase the cogency of his plan by providing the additional evidence outlined above.
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position
- The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview It is time for the city of Grandview to stop funding the Grandview Symphony Orchestra It is true that the symphony struggled financially for many years but last year priva 78
- The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian a company that manufactures men s clothing Five years ago at a time when we had difficulties in obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric we discontinued production of 68
- A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood Moreover the majority of fami 78
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 389 350
No. of Characters: 2066 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.441 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.311 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.787 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.933 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.976 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.533 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.393 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.636 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.184 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 545, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'suppliers'' or 'supplier's'?
Suggestion: suppliers'; supplier's
...y inferior quality to Sartorians former suppliers wool, then, no matter the quantity wool...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, regarding, similarly, so, then, while, for instance, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2128.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 389.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47043701799 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87141121158 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503856041131 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 666.0 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.8664641552 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.866666667 119.503703932 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9333333333 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.86666666667 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251897848485 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0976613039278 0.0743258471296 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802989171983 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13175674237 0.128457276422 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0788502835371 0.0628817314937 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 12.3882235529 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.