The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities.
Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff for all our pest control services.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The thought suggested by the vice president of the food distribution company seem to be persuasive at first. However, since several pieces of evidence are missed to support his argument, the decision of returning to Buzzoff Company to control doesn’t seem to be such a good idea.
First of all, the vice president regarded it necessary give up the contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company for Buzoff because the food stored at Palm City, where Fly-Away Pest Control Company was responsible for, was destroyed severer than the counterpart which the Buzoff Company had responsibility to. Nevertheless, several details weren’t mentioned, and this may be unfair to the company just signed the contract nearly. The warehouse in Palm City can be ten times larger than the one in Wintervale, which means that the new company already did a good job. Furthermore, the conditions of the two storage area weren’t discussed either. There is probabilities that Palm City is a wet and scorching hot place proper for pests to live and Wintervale is cold and dry. Therefore, it may be simpler for the Buzoff Pest to control pest but more challenging for Fly-Away Pest Control Company. In this case, the decision of turning back to the old company may be irrational.
Secondly, in the memo, it can be understood that the food company had just have signed with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company for just a short time, and the vice president attempted to break the contract right away. Nonetheless, he probably would feel remorse for doing so since the Fly-Away Pest Control Company may do work better in the future. After all, the vice president had just witnessed the outcome of the first month. The reason their work wasn’t satisfying may be tributes to unfamiliarity. The Fly-Away Pest Control Company may probably had same work when they first signed the contract with the food company.
Lastly, the reason why it doesn’t seem to be a good idea to break the contract with Fly-Away for Buzoff Pest Control Company is that the money the food company have to spend, instead of cutting down as they expected, may rise. The reason is that they will have to pay for breaking the contract, and after the Buzoff Pest Control Company know that the food company have a strong dependency on them ,they may want to raise the price. If the food company really want to change their cooperate partner, why not choose another pet control company that they haven’t considered before.
The reasons listed above suggested why breaking the contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company for Buzoff Pest Control Company isn’t a wise decision. The vice president of the food company better ponder for it.
- No field of study can advance significantly unless it incorporates knowledge and experience from outside that field. 83
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities.Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast-food 69
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the Wextent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 66
- It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero. The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny eventually be diminished. 79
- It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero. 16
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 460 350
No. of Characters: 2172 1500
No. of Different Words: 197 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.631 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.722 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.447 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 152 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.645 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.408 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.574 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.144 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 657, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[3]
Message: Did you mean 'There are probabilities'?
Suggestion: There are probabilities
...age area weren't discussed either. There is probabilities that Palm City is a wet and scorching h...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 951, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is case, the decision of turning back to the old company may be irrational. ...
^^
Line 13, column 402, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...company have a strong dependency on them ,they may want to raise the price. If the...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, really, second, secondly, so, therefore, after all, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2282.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 453.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03752759382 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62345476413 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.441501103753 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 688.5 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.561536 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.105263158 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8421052632 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.47368421053 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.455593225758 0.218282227539 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173302971821 0.0743258471296 233% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121149296503 0.0701772020484 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.316051257806 0.128457276422 246% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0648286524151 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.