Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who still ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish margarine from butter, or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, to avoid the expense of purchasing butter, the Happy Pancake House should extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well.
In Happy Pancake House restaurants, the butter has been replaced by margarine and the minimal amount of people have complained against it and contrary to this even when the people who have complained are served margarine instead of butter they have happily accepted it. Therefore, the author of this argument draws an optimistic conclusion that to cut the cost of purchasing butter, the Happy House should apply this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well. However, the argument is problematic in several aspects.
The chief reason for my disagreement lies in the fact that here the obvious doubt arises is on the credibility of the customers who were asked for the survey. It is highly possible that the customers who were asked are the employees working for the restaurants. Moreover, here it is given that about 2 percent of customers have complained about this change but the author fails to provide the statistics data of the total number of people. Does it take into account the customers of whole southwestern? If not then just based on a survey of 100 random customers they can not assert that same will be the condition for southeast as well as northeast regions.
Secondly, it is stated that many servers have reported that customers do not complain when they are served margarine instead, but how many servers to be very precise? If this number is very less then that data would not be sufficient and based on such data we cannot assert that customers who have asked for the butter accept the margarine instead. Moreover, it is highly possible that the customers of southwestern United States cannot distinguish between two items but that does not mean that same would be the case in other regions, customers in other regions might have the ability to spot the difference.
Finally, without any proof, we are being asked to believe that customers cannot distinguish between two items or they may use the term butter to refer either of the items. The author fails to provide the evidence to support his claim. It is highly possible that it is very easy to distinguish these two items from their taste, smell or from their color. Therefore, providing customers margarine instead of butter would be betrayal and customers would not accept it.
In my final analysis, I conclude that the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The mere assumptions are not enough to justify the argument and the author must provide some credible data of analysis to strengthen his argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-09 | wo00_hi | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-21 | Yann | 43 | view |
| 2019-10-29 | bmartinurcelay | 63 | view |
| 2019-10-29 | FaylEAVE0920 | 55 | view |
| 2019-10-28 | sushil koirala | 50 | view |
- A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled foo 41
- Distance learning and online classroom classes replace classroom learning 70
- "One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are n 58
- The northern land bridge 68
- Integrated essay 3
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
read a sample:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/following-memorandum-business-ma…
----------------------
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: 17 15
No. of Words: 425 350
No. of Characters: 2058 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.54 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.842 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.532 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.732 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.569 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.094 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 196, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[2]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...ry precise? If this number is very less then that data would not be sufficient and b...
^^^^
Line 5, column 229, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of analysis to strengthen his argument.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2103.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 425.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94823529412 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60449863674 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461176470588 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 654.3 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.3049411257 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.705882353 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.70588235294 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.208315891924 0.218282227539 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606810137495 0.0743258471296 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0641365558199 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105995474574 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0761450679323 0.0628817314937 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.