"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 actually increased during the past year.Clearly,the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers.Thus,the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available.Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
In a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company, it says that Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the pubic through advertising. It is a good way for the movie company to expand the market to the potential audiences, but for Super Screen Movie Production Company, is it an effective strategy to improve its performance? Let us make a careful analysis about it as follows.
From a recent report of its marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. Above all, is the quality of the report from marketing department? Was it made in a scientific, objective way? Is the writer of the report professional or amateur? If he is a trainee, maybe the report is less reliable. And does the report cite from other organization or paraphrase the information on the network or did the market staffs make a deep investigation? The question is obvious——the report is worth for the Super Screen’s reference. Moreover, what’s the meaning of the words ‘fewer people’? 90%, 50% or 10%? Suppose that in the last year before, there were 5000 people who attended Super Screen-produced movies while in the last year, there were 4900. Did the difference of 100 produce a big influence on its earnings? No specific figures to explain the declining audiences to attend the company’s movies.
Yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. How many did the rising percentage of the positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific movies lat year? 1%, 2% or 10%? If there is only a small percentage, it may have fewer effects in the movie review market. If one or two specific movies had obtained good reviews, the majority was less positive, so these positive reviews could not represent the quality of all the movies produced by Super Screen. Perhaps, the movies of Super Screen are less popular in the market.
From the positive reviews, it’s possible that the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of its prospective viewers. Really? Who wrote these reviews? Famous or unknown reviewers? If they are unknown, fewer people will read these reviews even if they wrote in a real and objective way. And if famous reviewers wrote in an exaggerating and grandiloquent way in order to obtain commercial interest, it would be fewer and fewer people who believe their reviews so that they do not pay attention to such reviews and relevant films. In addition, are the contents of the reviews enough to attract people? Make sure that these reviews have a big influence on the movie market and on the audiences.
In the memo, the advertising director always emphasizes the high quality of Super Screen’ movies, owing to positive reviews from movie reviewers. As a matter of fact, compared with those produced by its competitors, these films are much less attractive to people, including flatuent tableau from the advanced film-making technology, superficial contents, fictitious plots, and so on. did Super Screen make an investigation about the audiences’ true viewpoints, not the reviewers ? After all, audiences are the true consumers, whose views are important to appraise the quality of the movies produced by Super Screen. However, in the memo, the fact that fewer people watch SS’s movies owes to the public’s lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Obviously, it is dogmatic. In modern society, there are a lot of avenues for people to find good movies, such as network, newspaper, radio, magazine, and so on. And good movies are easy to be disseminated among people through QQ, Wechat, and other social websites.
Therefore, the advertising director suggests taht Super Screen should allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising. Indeed, advertising is a good way to arrive to its movies’ potential audiences, but for Super Screen, does it truly know the crux of the problem that fewer people attend its movies? Make clear the reasons that the declining numbers of audiences and then formulate a careful strategy for marketing in order to reverse the depressing situation.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2017-03-04 | flowerft2007 | 50 | view |
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. 58
- claim: many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system.Reason: laws cannot change what is in people’s hearts or minds. 83
- The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority. 83
- Unfortunately, in contemporary society, creating an appealing image has become more important than the reality or truth behind that image. 83
- Claim: the best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its role models.Reason: heroes and role models reveal a society’s highest ideals. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 185, Rule ID: PUBIC_X[1]
Message: Did you mean 'public'?
Suggestion: public
...of its budget next year to reaching the pubic through advertising. It is a good way f...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, may, moreover, really, so, then, therefore, while, after all, in addition, such as, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 91.0 55.5748502994 164% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3631.0 2260.96107784 161% => OK
No of words: 705.0 441.139720559 160% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15035460993 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.15284737739 4.56307096286 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87961454692 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 306.0 204.123752495 150% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.434042553191 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1122.3 705.55239521 159% => 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
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 9.0 1.67365269461 538% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.22255489022 261% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 39.0 19.7664670659 197% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 60.1210263059 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.1025641026 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0769230769 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.35897435897 5.70786347227 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 24.0 8.20758483034 292% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 14.0 4.67664670659 299% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.5833590078 0.218282227539 267% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1442696177 0.0743258471296 194% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.136018566694 0.0701772020484 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.325889854815 0.128457276422 254% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131962413172 0.0628817314937 210% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.29 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 151.0 98.500998004 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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: 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.