The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors:
"Tech corporation is our pick for investment this term. We urge all of our clients to invest in this new company, For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed satellite technology has been approved by the FTA to compete with the current satellite provider. That company is Tech corporation. A consumer survey last year indicated that over eighty percent of respondents were dissatisfied with the current satellite television provider and would want to switch to another provider if the industry were not a monopoly. Thus, the new venture of Tech corporation into satellite television will prove to be highly profitable for those who invest now."
The author of the argument concludes that the investors should invest in Techcorporation. The author gives the reasons that it is the first company which has been approved by the FTA , in 10 years. Also according to a survey, eighty percent of the consumers were dissatisfied with the current satellite television provider. He further goes to state that this new venture of Techcorporation would be profitable for those who invest now. The argument at first looks convincing, but when we study deeply we encounter a number of loopholes.
The first loophole is that the author has just stated that Techcorporation is their top pick. But he has not listed the companies among which Techcorporation is their number one pick. Also the reasons as to why the other companies fail. He should provide a detailed report of the comparison between Techcorporation and othe companies.
The second loophole is that he has told that first time in 10 years a company who developed satellite technology has been approved by FTA to compete with current satellite provider. This means that the current satellite provider has been in this competitive market for 10 years or more and if it has managed to survive 10 years, it would be good. Just because the FTA has approved doesnt mean investing in it would be profitable. The author has not given any evidence as to What tests has the techcorporation passed? Who conducted the tests?
The third loophole is that the author mentions a consumer survey was conducted and has stated that eighty percent of the respondents were dissatisfied. But the author has provided given details on How many people were part of the survey? What age group did the respondents belong to? What were the questions asked to them? Answers to all these questions is necessary for concluding the probity of the results. If the survey is conducted among 10 people, it will not represent the whole population.
Another loophole of the argument is that the author states that the new venture of Techcorporation into satellite television will prove to be profitable. On what basis has he reached this conclusion? Since Techcorporation are new in this field, Will they be able to compete with thw current satellite television provider, who are in this field from past 10 years? Will the customers be able to trust and switch to another provider?
The argument would be strengthened if the above questions have been answered and the author provides a more in depth report on the analysis of the new company Techcorporation. Also detailed results of the survey which was conducted which will further enhance his argument. As it stands, however the argument is flawed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-08-28 | dimplepatel16 | 50 | view |
- Claim: An action is morally correct if the amount of good that results from the action is greater than the amount of bad that results from the action.Reason: When assessing the morality of an action, the results of the action are more important than the i 70
- The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors:"Tech corporation is our pick for investment this term. We urge all of our clients to invest in this new company, For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed satellite t 50
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 66
- The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News: "The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a w 50
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of a 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 o 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 183, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...mpany which has been approved by the FTA , in 10 years. Also according to a survey...
^^
Line 1, column 199, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...been approved by the FTA , in 10 years. Also according to a survey, eighty percent o...
^^^^
Line 3, column 185, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...chcorporation is their number one pick. Also the reasons as to why the other compani...
^^^^
Line 5, column 382, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...good. Just because the FTA has approved doesnt mean investing in it would be profitabl...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 177, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...sis of the new company Techcorporation. Also detailed results of the survey which wa...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'third', 'as to']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.224532224532 0.25644967241 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.197505197505 0.15541462614 127% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0790020790021 0.0836205057962 94% => OK
Adverbs: 0.029106029106 0.0520304965353 56% => OK
Pronouns: 0.037422037422 0.0272364105082 137% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.120582120582 0.125424944231 96% => OK
Participles: 0.0582120582121 0.0416121511921 140% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.90728945532 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.027027027027 0.026700313972 101% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.126819126819 0.113004496875 112% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.02079002079 0.0255425247493 81% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.029106029106 0.0127820249294 228% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2677.0 2731.13054187 98% => OK
No of words: 447.0 446.07635468 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.98881431767 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.348993288591 0.378187486979 92% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.266219239374 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.183445190157 0.208842608468 88% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.131991051454 0.135150697306 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90728945532 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 207.018472906 93% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429530201342 0.469332199767 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.0544978441 52.1807786196 90% => OK
How many sentences: 27.0 20.039408867 135% => OK
Sentence length: 16.5555555556 23.2022227129 71% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9548842979 57.7814097925 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.1481481481 141.986410481 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5555555556 23.2022227129 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.407407407407 0.724660767414 56% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 43.1774794929 51.9672348444 83% => OK
Elegance: 1.52755905512 1.8405768891 83% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396633029438 0.441005458295 90% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.131688172831 0.135418324435 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0887844689207 0.0829849096947 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.546565105336 0.58762219726 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.133511891316 0.147661913831 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148372245043 0.193483328276 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0693509492394 0.0970749176394 71% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.357788774098 0.42659136922 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0642477415075 0.0774707102158 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.265755329475 0.312017818177 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0714633686052 0.0698173142475 102% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.33743842365 144% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.82512315271 187% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 10.0 6.46551724138 155% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.