"The Excelsior Company plans to introduce its own brand of coffee. Since coffee is an expensive food item, and since there are already many established brands of coffee, the best way to gain customers for the Excelsior brand is to do what Superior, the leading coffee company, did when it introduced the newest brand in its line of coffees: conduct a temporary sales promotion that offers free samples, price reductions, and discount coupons for the new brand."
The argument claims that the best way for the Excelsior Company to gain customers is to adhere to the same strategy that the leading coffee company, Superior, implemented. Therefore, it can successfully use this strategy In order to make its new brand of coffee popular. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that Excelsior is going to be successful by implementing a successful strategy. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. There are countless examples of companies that tried to utilize successful business plans to only fail miserably. Clearly, there are many factors that affect a certain result and by copying just one of those, you cannot achieve the desired outcome. For instance, there are factors related to human capital that cannot be copied. As a result, the argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated other factors that are going to be taken into account.
Second, the argument does not make clear the conditions of the market and the strategy that will give the company a comparative advantage. We are unaware whether the company is going to make an expensive coffee product and target more high income customers or produce a rather cheap one and target the low class. If the argument had provided evidence regarding this matter then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the aforementioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author mentioned all the relevant factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-03 | alexandrosz | 63 | view |
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: 17 15
No. of Words: 305 350
No. of Characters: 1539 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.179 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.046 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.766 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 118 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 93 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 58 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.941 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.024 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.075 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 314, 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.
...her cheap one and target the low class. If the argument had provided evidence rega...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, if, regarding, second, so, then, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 305.0 441.139720559 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22950819672 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87160336494 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55737704918 0.468620217663 119% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.9410139742 57.8364921388 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 93.8235294118 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9411764706 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.76470588235 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13868475965 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0415890012021 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0567585177957 0.0701772020484 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0786502985462 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0612369450718 0.0628817314937 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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.