"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."
While the inference drawn from the fact that the percentage of positive reviews have not declined but attendance have been less than the previous year means the reviews haven't been reaching the prospective viewers may seem plausible, it is not necessarily the case and thus increasing the amount spent on advertising may be a loss to the company financially as the argument is rife with assumptions and holes, because there may be numerous reasons of the decline in attendance or ineffectiveness of the advertising.
First of, the advertising director is assuming that the prospective viewers are going to be accessed via advertising channels used by the Production company. It is a possibility that the prospective viewers are not in the subscribed to whichever means he chooses to advertise through. That is he may advertise via mail or newspaper dailies or magazines and the viewers consume most of their information from TV and social media.
There is also the assumption that the positive reviews they have been getting from the few patron this year is a honest one. The movie reviewers may be inclined to give a positive review to boost the morale of the production company and its staff as they have noticed the scarcity of people in the movies as compared to other years.
Also the argument is completely based on the awareness of the movies and nothing else. It doesn't take into account the economic climate of the times as in cases where there have been some sort of market crash or the other, such as the stock market crash of 2008, activities such as going to see a movie (which is not a necessity) is now see as a luxury to most people due to the now limited resources to make ends meet.
If these questions put forward cannot be answered without speculation, then the argument is invalid and the investment of more money in the advertising of the production company would be a futile allocation of resources.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | 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 any ot 50
- The best way for society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation and not competition 64
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 10 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1571 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.718 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.74 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 102 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 60 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 33.3 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 23.148 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.384 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.384 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.154 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 170, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...han the previous year means the reviews havent been reaching the prospective viewers m...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 88, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun patron seems to be countable; consider using: 'few patrons'.
Suggestion: few patrons
...reviews they have been getting from the few patron this year is a honest one. The movie re...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 112, 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
...etting from the few patron this year is a honest one. The movie reviewers may be ...
^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...he movies as compared to other years. Also the argument is completely based on the...
^^^^
Line 4, column 91, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ness of the movies and nothing else. It doesnt take into account the economic climate ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, then, thus, while, sort of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1594.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 331.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81570996979 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76393274377 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510574018127 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 513.9 705.55239521 73% => 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
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 19.7664670659 46% => 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: 36.0 22.8473053892 158% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 126.764874209 57.8364921388 219% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 177.111111111 119.503703932 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.7777777778 23.324526521 158% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 5.70786347227 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.17432140025 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0712830307394 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0253639705087 0.0701772020484 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0893103093 0.128457276422 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0287016052746 0.0628817314937 46% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.7 14.3799401198 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.94 48.3550499002 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.3 12.197005988 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.27 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 29.0 12.3882235529 234% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 16.4 11.1389221557 147% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.