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 about specific Super Screen movies have increased in this year.Clearly,the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough to our prospective viewers.Thus the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with the lack of awareness that good movies are available.Super Screen Movies should thus allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching public through advertising.
In the memo, the author believes that increasing the budget in advertising will evaluate the reviews of the movies, based on this year's inadequate audience and increased positive reviews concerning the movies. While the author offers a seemingly plausible solution, there are still some questions unspecified, whose answers may either weaker or strengthen the advice.
To begin with, we need to know whether the survey by marketing department is credible. Without enough information to support the credibility of the survey, we can not believe the conclusions drawn from the survey. For instance, if the survey fails to cover a variety of people, we have to reconsider whether the audiences are fewer and whether the relative percentage of positive reviews increased last year.
Even though we accede the accuracy of the survey, there is still a question that whether the specific Super Screen movies can represent the other movies from the company. If the specific movies mentioned are of good qualities because cooperation with other companies, then the other movies by Super Screen may nor necessarily be of the same quality. Even though, those specific movies are made by the company own, there is no guarantee for other movies from the company either. Therefore, we can not decide if the advice is plausible base on this reason.
Last but not the least, even though we accede the company really made quality movies, there is still suspect whether advertising will evaluate the reviews next year. The author ascribes the failure to the ignorance of the public, but apparently the reasons for this lack of awareness is not considered. If the public concentrate more on the contents of the movies and movies by Super Screen usually have average contents, then the company should consider altering this stereotype through movie festivals to substantiates the quality improvement. In this scenario, we can not decide whether the method to increase the budget on advertising will help improve the reviews of the movies.
All in all, the argument lacks information to answer the questions above, including the credibility of the survey and the a comprehensive condition of the company's movies. Moreover, we need more details to decide whether the advice of increasing the budget on advertising is reasonable and feasible.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-30 | akaeyjay | 33 | view |
| 2019-07-07 | Anmol Nailesh Shah | 29 | view |
| 2019-03-23 | gkb | 29 | view |
| 2018-09-09 | SHARMIN AKTAR | 50 | view |
| 2018-08-01 | syedfaizan | 49 | view |
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed 83
- Widespread use of the Internet 76
- Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters (such as food, clothes and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes. Other people believe that it is impor 80
- TPO-48 - Integrated Writing Task In recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These population declines and extinctions have serious consequences for the ecosystems 80
- when there is a new technological device available, some people will buy it immediately, while others will wait until many others have adopted it. Which view do you agree more. 70
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 373 350
No. of Characters: 1909 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.395 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.118 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.659 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.867 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.043 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.397 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.636 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.212 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 126, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ate the reviews of the movies, based on this years inadequate audience and increased...
^^^^
Line 9, column 119, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'a' is left.
Suggestion: the; a
...uding the credibility of the survey and the a comprehensive condition of the companys...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, if, may, moreover, really, so, still, then, therefore, while, for instance, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1959.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 373.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25201072386 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72299758341 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.466487935657 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5657139022 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.6 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8666666667 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.06666666667 5.70786347227 124% => 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 : 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: 0.236470965023 0.218282227539 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808531187852 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0817454990507 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123248006614 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0802455636513 0.0628817314937 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.3799401198 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => 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.