Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago I listed my home with Fitch, and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams Realty.
The argument claims that Adams Realty real estate firm is better and eminent than Fitch Reality. Hence if any one want to sell or buy his/her home quickly at a good price should use Adams Realty. Stated this way the argument fails to mention certain key factors and manipulates facts on which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on the assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Thus, the argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that the firm with large number of employees does great business. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in anyway. For example "what's app" group have less than 40 employees and it is the leading company in it's field and worth of 2 billion. However, number of companies with large number of employees have vanishes like air. Another example is SATYAM Computers an Indian based company which employed more than 1 million employees ended up with a dept of 3million. The author fails to clarify weather the company with large employee base has good chance to be at the top in their respective fields. The argument could have been clearer if it explicitly stated the importance of having a large employee base.
Secondly, the argument claims that Adam's revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch and adding to this Adam sell home faster than Fitch. This is again weak and unsupported claim as the argument dose not demonstrate the correlation between revenue of last year and frequency of sale before ten years. In fact, the argument dose not draw parallel between revenue of last year and frequency of sale before ten years. If any such correlation had been shown then the author would have sounded bit more convincing. In addition if the argument would have provided any evidence of it then it could have been strengthen even further.
Finally, the argument concludes that if any one want to sell his/her home quickly with a good price they should use Adams Reatly. From this statement it is not at all clear with out relevant evidence. In fact we cannot judge a firm capability based of last year sales or an incident that happened ten years ago, It totally depends on the fluctuations in the market one cannot predict the market. However, we cannot deem a firm by a single testimony author could have strengthened the argument if could have provided more testimonies. Without convincing answers for there questions one is left with an impression that the claim is more of wishful rather than substantive evidence.
In sum, The argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing. It could be strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to access the merits of certain situation it is essential to have knowledge on the contributing factors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 98, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... better and eminent than Fitch Reality. Hence if any one want to sell or buy his/her ...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 107, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'anyone'?
Suggestion: anyone
...nd eminent than Fitch Reality. Hence if any one want to sell or buy his/her home quickl...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 155, Rule ID: IN_ANYWAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'in any way'?
Suggestion: in any way
...ment is a stretch and not substantiated in anyway. For example 'whats app' grou...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 184, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...stantiated in anyway. For example 'whats app' group have less than 40 emplo...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 425, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...and frequency of sale before ten years. If any such correlation had been shown the...
^^
Line 5, column 523, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,
...ld have sounded bit more convincing. In addition if the argument would have provided any...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 548, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had provided'?
Suggestion: had provided
...convincing. In addition if the argument would have provided any evidence of it then it could have b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 611, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'strengthened'.
Suggestion: strengthened
... evidence of it then it could have been strengthen even further. Finally, the argument...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 41, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'anyone'?
Suggestion: anyone
...Finally, the argument concludes that if any one want to sell his/her home quickly with ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 174, Rule ID: WITH_OUT[1]
Message: This word is usually written together. Did you mean 'without'?
Suggestion: without
...m this statement it is not at all clear with out relevant evidence. In fact we cannot ju...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
anyway, but, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, in addition, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2336.0 2260.96107784 103% => OK
No of words: 474.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92827004219 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58636710595 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478902953586 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 715.5 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.2773556642 57.8364921388 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 93.44 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.96 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.152666505657 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.044705044429 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0886344269061 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0873519509149 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0686829273464 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.