The regional brand manager sent the following memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser.
“We need to institute a huge publicity campaign for the launch of Sun-Beem’s improved formula. Without an enormous media blitz, including television, radio, internet, and magazine ads, potential new customers will not be aware of our product. And previous customers will not be aware that Sun-Beem’s new, non-carcinogenic formula is on the shelves. The best way to combat the negative publicity Sun-Beem’s old formula received is to fight fire with fire, by using the media’s insatiable interest in any new news about Sun-Beem to sell the new formula. This will erase the negative connotations in the minds of former customers, and will ensure that Sun-Beem is once again the best-selling facial cleanser on the market.”
In the memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser, the regional manager concludes that an increase in their commercial advertisement of the company's new formula would consummately increase their sales on the market. However, the author supports his conclusion with two assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically reduces the persuasiveness of the argument.
First of all, author presumes, without evidence, that the enormous increase in their advertisements in various media for their new formula would increase Sun-Beem's sales. However, this may not be true. perhaps, the customers are fed up with Sun-Beem's products because there may be an abundant of other facial cleansers available in the market for even lower prices compared to Sum-Beem cleansers. It is also possible that because of the increasing hatred for Sun-Beem products made customers to look for other alternatives. If either of these scenarios has merit, then conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, the author claims that medias insatiable interest in any new news about Sun-Beem would erase public's negative connotations on the brand value of Sun-Beem, but this may not be true. perhaps, media might present news about Sun-Beem's new non-carcinogenic formula in a negative way and in turn the sales may become worse. Further, public watching the advertisement on the media may think that the Sun-Beem has gone bankrupt and trying various alternatives for increasing their business. If the above is true, then the argument doesn't hold water.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now relies on unfounded assumptions that render its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Thus, if the author is able to provide additional evidence regarding Sun-Beem's success in introducing new plans for increasing brand value and public's thought of Sun-Beem's new ideas, then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation.
- People who have the talent to develop their own ideas may not be able to contribute much to the society if they are unable to present their skills in a suitable manner. On the other hand, people who have the inborn talent to recognize and coordinate the s 16
- According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies a 23
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment. 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 33
- The regional brand manager sent the following memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser.“We need to institute a huge publicity campaign for the launch of Sun-Beem’s improved formula. Without an enormous media blitz, including tel 63
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 309 350
No. of Characters: 1646 1500
No. of Different Words: 161 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.193 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.327 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.933 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.091 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.759 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.909 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.401 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.609 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.062 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 203, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Perhaps
...s sales. However, this may not be true. perhaps, the customers are fed up with Sun-Beem...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 192, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Perhaps
... of Sun-Beem, but this may not be true. perhaps, media might present news about Sun-Bee...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... Sun-Beems new non-carcinogenic formula in a negative way and in turn the sales may become worse....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 534, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...If the above is true, then the argument doesnt hold water. In conclusion, the argum...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, thus, in conclusion, first of all
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: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1702.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 308.0 441.139720559 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52597402597 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02637113497 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542207792208 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.6865027987 57.8364921388 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.923076923 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6923076923 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.76923076923 5.70786347227 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.33472103053 0.218282227539 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118379762667 0.0743258471296 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104918264081 0.0701772020484 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221136354833 0.128457276422 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0438527765602 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.3799401198 115% => 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: 15.09 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.