The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.
“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.”
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author of the memo recommends that the company should allocate more money for advertising in order to make the public more aware of their presence on the market. He bases his argument on the assumtions that their movie received high rating even though fewer people attended the Super Screen-produced movies. However thre main question must be asnwered to understand the streanghtness of the argumment.
First if all, are there other possibilities of wathcing Super Screen-produced movies rather than attending a cinema? It might be the case that the majority of their viewers are seeing the movies online, perhaps on priate web-sites. For instance, russians web-sites are known for the plethora of movies they make available free of charge. As a result, the company cannot track the number of veiws they receive from these, and the information is eroneous. If the above mentioned has merit, then the argument as it is now does not hold water.
Second of all, are all movies highly rated? If not, then allocation of money for advertising of all movies might do more harm than good. For example, people might like one of their movies, however, if other movies that have a lower desirability will be advertise, the company might suffer loses from the fact that now the share of negative reviews will increase. Consequently, the critics will be made more aware of the company's movies and, as aresult, they will have to deal with a higher number of negative comments. If the afore-mentioned is true, then the recommendation is not well founded.
Finally, did the marketing department study the reviews of the other movies of the company? To illustrate, maybe the overall content of the "Super Screen" has decreased in value, and this is the reason why fewer people attend their movies. In this case one movie might have had received good reviews, but the other ten might have been disliked. As a result, if the company implements the recommendation to found the advertising more, they might suffer a bigger loss as the public will be made more aware of the movies that have a lower quality.
In conclusion, the argumment as it stands now is ill founded and needs more precise research. To answer the three questions, the company needs to find out: where do the viewers prefer to watch Super Screen's movies; what are the rations of other of their movies, and whether the marketing department took in consideration other movies that did not receive such desirable reviews.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-06 | Sumaiya Mila | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-06 | Shams Tarek | 46 | view |
| 2020-01-02 | jamaya8 | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-26 | Yongrok_Jeong | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | Opak Pulu | 16 | view |
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.“According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in a 55
- 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.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree 16
- 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. 66
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 416 350
No. of Characters: 2004 1500
No. of Different Words: 196 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.516 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.817 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.593 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.519 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 313, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ended the Super Screen-produced movies. However thre main question must be asnwered to ...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 156, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uestions, the company needs to find out: where do the viewers prefer to watch Sup...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2084.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 416.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00961538462 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71349833699 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490384615385 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 644.4 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.567807961 57.8364921388 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.684210526 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8947368421 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84210526316 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22402626862 0.218282227539 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0712416306616 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657829553437 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136409091512 0.128457276422 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344494746569 0.0628817314937 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.