We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch,
having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years,
has a large customer base because it is known for its wide selection of books
on all subjects. Clearly, opening the café would attract more customers.
Space could be made for the café by discontinuing the children's book
section, which will probably become less popular given that the most recent
national census indicated a significant decline in the percentage of the
population under age ten. Opening a café will allow Monarch to attract more
customers and better compete with Regal Books, which recently opened its
own café.
The argument claims that “Monarch Books” should open a café in its stores just to attract more customers. Started in this way argument manipulates and conveys a distorted and ambiguous view of the situation. It also fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is not cogent and has several flaws.
Firstly, in the argument, the author avers that Monarch Books should open one café to attain the desired level of profit by attracting more and more customers. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. There are numerous examples in the field of business where business organizations attract more customers just by the quality of their products and customers are ready to buy products even with higher prices what contradicts the argument. For instance, when Apple Company started selling their I-Phone product it had literally higher price than the products of other companies, but, Apple made its own market and now has become the king of the kingdom. Apple Company never needed to use any other ways to attract customers rather they concentrated on the quality of their products. Undoubtedly it can be illustrated that the argument could have been much acceptable if it stated to improve the quality of the products and customer satisfaction.
Furthermore, the argument claims that opening one café will help Monarch Books to attract more customers and better compete with Regal books. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between Monarch Books and Regal books. The author never mentioned other measures of the situation when Regal Books opened the café. In fact, the argument does not even draw a parallel between the primary condition, location and situations of Monarch Books and Regal Books. If any Correlation would have been shown in the argument, it would supposedly work well, then, the author would have sounded a tad bit more convincing. In addition, if the author would have shown evidence to support that opening café helped other stores with the same situation with Monarch Books, to attract more customers, the argument could have been strengthened furthermore.
Finally, the author claimed to abolish children’s section just to have the space to open the café. From the statement, it is again not clear how Monarch Books can hold its reputation even after discontinuing children’s section. Here, the author claims students section is not any more famous to the population under the age of ten. It can be possible that Monarch Books fails to attain its quality and collection of books that’s why they faced this declination of the popularity of children’s section. Without a convincing explanation of these, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. As a result, this conclusion has no legs to stand on.
In summary, the argument may seem to be flawless in a cursory glance, but, in reality, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. In order to avail the merits of the situation, one must include all the information as it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, this argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-09-06 | sampadacharya3 | 70 | view |
- “Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty and Fitch Realty- Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams revenue last year was twice 83
- The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not work 83
- The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangered. Because illegal immigrants pose such threats, every effor 75
- We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch,having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years,has a large customer base because it is known for its wide selection of bookson all subjects. Clearly, opening the c 70
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 535, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had been'?
Suggestion: had been
...oks and Regal Books. If any Correlation would have been shown in the argument, it would suppose...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 695, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had shown'?
Suggestion: had shown
... convincing. In addition, if the author would have shown evidence to support that opening café h...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'hence', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'for instance', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'in summary', 'as a result']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.259375 0.25644967241 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.1515625 0.15541462614 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.075 0.0836205057962 90% => OK
Adverbs: 0.053125 0.0520304965353 102% => OK
Pronouns: 0.028125 0.0272364105082 103% => OK
Prepositions: 0.1078125 0.125424944231 86% => OK
Participles: 0.03125 0.0416121511921 75% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.85536482944 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.03125 0.026700313972 117% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.1140625 0.113004496875 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0234375 0.0255425247493 92% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0140625 0.0127820249294 110% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3473.0 2731.13054187 127% => OK
No of words: 565.0 446.07635468 127% => OK
Chars per words: 6.14690265487 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87542086881 4.57801047555 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.36814159292 0.378187486979 97% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.293805309735 0.287650121315 102% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.201769911504 0.208842608468 97% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.134513274336 0.135150697306 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85536482944 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Unique words: 254.0 207.018472906 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449557522124 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 53.3318107507 52.1807786196 102% => OK
How many sentences: 26.0 20.039408867 130% => OK
Sentence length: 21.7307692308 23.2022227129 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.3856548745 57.7814097925 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.576923077 141.986410481 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7307692308 23.2022227129 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.692307692308 0.724660767414 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 51.1113002042 51.9672348444 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.71140939597 1.8405768891 93% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.355586810227 0.441005458295 81% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.123974939476 0.135418324435 92% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0831266387827 0.0829849096947 100% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.535994182325 0.58762219726 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.131766701014 0.147661913831 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14433962836 0.193483328276 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0618645645305 0.0970749176394 64% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.472967543285 0.42659136922 111% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0548397452244 0.0774707102158 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259972379108 0.312017818177 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0174073898111 0.0698173142475 25% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 6.46551724138 155% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 22.0 14.657635468 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.