According to a recent report by 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 last year. Clearly, the content of these reviews is not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater quantity of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.
There are several flaws in the assertions made by the director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. That claim that increasing the budget to reach more prospective viewers is based on many ungrounded assumptions and hence is dubitable. Several questions can be asked to cast the doubt on the validity of the claim made some of which are discussed below.
Firstly, the director claims that the movie are better because they have better reviews. But are the review veritable? How creditable are the reviews given? These question pose a serious challange to the claim made by the director.Since there were fewer movie goers, the opinion belongs lesser number of people. Furthermore, there is no information abou the competition. Has any new production house opened in the area that is attracting more people? This question should be answered first. If there is, a suitable competitive strategy should be followed.
Also, there is no data regarding the changes. Has the demography changed in the area? Is the popularity of cinema same as in previous years? If cinema is a declining option for spending time, then the number of people are bound to decrease whether the director employs the marketing strategies or not. So, proper research need to be done to find out the actual cause for decline in number of cinema goers.
On deciding to increase expenses, the director has assumed that the reach is not enough. But no evidence is presented for such. What if the reach is already enough but people are hesitant to attend the movie? Instead of such, it is better to take people's opinion on what would make them want to attend the movie and focus on that. This would aid much better in attracting prospective viewers than pouring money in marketing expenses.
Finally, there is no indication if the changes have occured in the cinema management. Has the ticket price gone up? Then renting a cinema would be a more viable option for people. Also, has the operating time changed? If the time has changed, it may present people with added burden of matching schedule with the cinema. The number of people largely depends on number of movies coming out. If the number of movies coming out is less, then whole argument is undermined.
In conclusion, it is clear that increasing reach to people is not sufficient to guarantee the increase in number of cinema goers. A detailed research should be done on this topic and figure out what will be the best option and strategy to carry out. otherwise, it is dubious that number of people going to cinema will increase.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-24 | Cynic | 43 | view |
| 2019-12-14 | nimesh94 | 42 | view |
| 2019-12-14 | mcmaster | 33 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | pooja.kakde@gmail.com | 59 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | a251ravind | 63 | view |
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- 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. 50
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted... 72
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar. 62
- Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks. 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 30 15
No. of Words: 438 350
No. of Characters: 2073 1500
No. of Different Words: 211 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.575 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.733 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.432 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 14.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.486 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.567 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.25 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.25 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.078 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 142, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'reviews'' or 'review's'?
Suggestion: reviews'; review's
...eview veritable? How creditable are the reviews given? These question pose a serious ch...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 231, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Since
...lange to the claim made by the director.Since there were fewer movie goers, the opini...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 250, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Otherwise
... best option and strategy to carry out. otherwise, it is dubious that number of people go...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, if, may, regarding, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2131.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 437.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87643020595 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53940660315 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489702517162 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 677.7 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 19.7664670659 157% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 22.8473053892 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.5247054786 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 68.7419354839 119.503703932 58% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 14.0967741935 23.324526521 60% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.1935483871 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158271081621 0.218282227539 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0411338130537 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526713591373 0.0701772020484 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0789044972942 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0388859542892 0.0628817314937 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.6 14.3799401198 60% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 48.3550499002 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 12.197005988 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.43 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.1389221557 68% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.