In the preceding argument, the director from the Super Screen Movie Production Company claims that the decrease in the number of people watching their movies is because of they are not aware of the existence of good movies from the company, thus more investment should be added to advertising in the next year. This may sounds appealing at first glance. However, upon careful scrutiny, it is rife with flaws and premises.
To begin with, the advertising director asserts that fewer people attended the company's movie in the last year was not because of the movies' content are not good, for there were more positive reviews on some specific movies. However, positive reveiws on several of the company's movies are not enough. It is possible that some of the excellent movies were quite popular among people, but more products performed not good, so the number of viewers as a whole dropped.
Additionally, the director doesn't compare the quality of their movies with the ones from other companies. It may be true that the Super Screen's movies are of better quality compared to its previous works, but if other rivals produced even better movies, then people will be attracted to those movies. So, a more thorough analysis on the quality and content of the company's movies is needed.
Last but not least, building upon the implications that movies produced by the Super Screen are not reaching the audiences, the director suggests increasing budget in advertising in the next year. However, increasing invesment in advertising means less money can be used to produce movies. Although more people will be attracted to watch their movies in the next year, but the quality of movies would decrease because of lack of investment, so it is unlikely that the number of viewers will be significantly higher.
Due to aforementioned evidences, although advertising may promote the popularity of movies from the Super Screen, a deeper and more detailed investigation should be carried out to make sure why there were fewer viewers the last year. Only then can the compamy come up with a efficient solution to its problem.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 162, Rule ID: BECAUSE_OF_I[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'because they' instead.
Suggestion: because they
...mber of people watching their movies is because of they are not aware of the existence of good ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 322, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ies are not enough. It is possible that some of the excellent movies were quite popular amo...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 28, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... dropped. Additionally, the director doesnt compare the quality of their movies wit...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 219, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o make sure why there were fewer viewers the last year. Only then can the compamy...
^^
Line 9, column 275, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... Only then can the compamy come up with a efficient solution to its problem.
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, so, then, thus, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1770.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 351.0 441.139720559 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04273504274 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32839392791 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57922731367 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.475783475783 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 705.55239521 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.7915099539 57.8364921388 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.428571429 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0714285714 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21428571429 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.262148638074 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0903663458493 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0910339429011 0.0701772020484 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165102492872 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0520049980797 0.0628817314937 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.