Super Screen-produced movies
In the argument, the director makes a recommendation that the company should increase their spendings in advertising to reach more audiences, given the number of viewers declined in the past year. However, the suggestion is not convincing enough before several following questions can be answered and specified.
First of all, the director claims that their products are of good quality by saying that the percentage of positive reviews has increased. This claim actually falls into the trap of vague data, that is, it's dubious before the question regarding exactly how many percentages of reviews are positive can be answered. The director may be over optimistic after seeing a slight increase in positive reviews. For example, if percentage of positive reviews increase from 1% last year to 2% this year, we may only draw the conclusion that the movies are actually of poor quality.
Secondly, more evidence should be provided to address the question why the company sees a decline in the number of audiences this year. The writer points out directly that the decline results from a lack of public awareness. However, this doesn't have to be the case, since bad performance may be caused by various reasons. For example, last year may have seen a great recession of the economy, and as a discretionary consumption, the expenses on watching movies are cut down sharply by many families. Also, say that audiences these days generally prefer comedies to action movies, but in the last year, the mojority of the products are actually action movies, which is only appreciated by a small number of people. Consequently, the director cannot hastily draw the conclusion that the decline is solely caused by lack of awareness.
Thirdly, the writer fails to do cost and benefit analysis when making the recommendation. It's true that more expenses on advertising may lead to an increase in sales and revenues. But these benefits must be comparaed against the extra spendings on advertising. For example, if the expected increase in profit is calculated to be 200 million after more reaching more people, but at the same time, the cost for putting the advertisments on televisions is estimated to be around 300 million, then this is certainly not the strategy Super Screen wants to conduct. To make his suggestion more persuasive, the director has to answer this critical question.
In conclusion, the recommendation is dubious and not very persuasive in that it referred to vague data, and fails to analyze the real reason behind the poor performance. Also, when talking about increasing the buget to make more people be aware of the brand, the director doesn't calculated the potential cost and expected benfited that this strategy will bring. As a result, before these questions can be properly addressed, the company should hastily take this suggestion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Mahima1902 | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 83
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time. 79
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 66
- Super Screen-produced movies 72
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time.In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and e 79
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 467 350
No. of Characters: 2326 1500
No. of Different Words: 220 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.649 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.981 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.693 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.661 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.85 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.296 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.518 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.054 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 240, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...lack of public awareness. However, this doesnt have to be the case, since bad performa...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 691, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...on movies, which is only appreciated by a small number of people. Consequently, the director cann...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 273, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ple be aware of the brand, the director doesnt calculated the potential cost and expec...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, as to, for example, in conclusion, talking about, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2401.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 465.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16344086022 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78405017344 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49247311828 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 745.2 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.210415684 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.05 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 5.70786347227 166% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0433071543469 0.218282227539 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0104755809992 0.0743258471296 14% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0255450113468 0.0701772020484 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0211449715621 0.128457276422 16% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0207303131242 0.0628817314937 33% => 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: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.