The graph shows data about the annual earnings of three bakeries in London, 2000-2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph indicates how much 3 bakeries in London earned over a decade from 2000 to 2010.
Overall, while the yearly incomes of Robbie’s Bakery plunged, there’s a substantial rise in Bemie’s Bun and Lovely Loaves’ earnings. Moreover, Lovely Loaves experienced the fastest growth in comparision with the others.
In 2000,the wages of Robbie’s Bakery was the highest: 80000 per year. Coming in next ranks are Lovely Loaves and Bemie’s Bun- with just about 55000 and 20000 respectively.
However, in the late 2000s, Lovely Loaves was the bakery that earned most with around 60000, despite the stability of this category from 2000 to 2005. The biggest change was seen in the numbers of Robbie’s Bakery, which fell drastically to less than 60000 in 2005 and 40000 in 2010. In contrast, from 2005 to 2010, the incomes of Lovely Loaves increased considerably and peaked at nearly 85000 in 2010. Additionally, Bemie’s Buns also stabilized at 40000 in 4 years (from 2002 to 2006) before experiencing a surge of 20000 to reach 60000 in the final year.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-04-20 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2019-03-30 | Richard37 | 65 | view |
| 2019-04-01 | dsasas | 78 | view |
| 2019-04-21 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
| 2019-07-23 | Giang Tran | 71 | view |
- The graph shows data about the annual earnings of three bakeries in London 2000 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The percentage of workers in a company graduated with science and art degree 87
- The graph shows data about the annual earnings of three bakeries in London, 2000-2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- The line graph below shows changes in the amount and type of fast food consumed by Australian teenagers from 1975 to 2000. 84
- The line graph below shows changes in the amount and type of fast food consumed by Australian teenagers from 1975 to 2000. 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, moreover, so, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 918.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21590909091 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91368156964 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602272727273 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 249.3 283.868780488 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.0890501651 43.030603864 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.0 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5555555556 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.22222222222 5.23603664747 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.108563619809 0.215688989381 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0575131146823 0.103423049105 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655924846542 0.0843802449381 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0947999336636 0.15604864568 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0784147946742 0.0819641961636 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.2329268293 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 11.4140731707 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.