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.”
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company affirms that the only way to increase the attendence to the movies they produce is to allocate a greater share of its budget to reaching the public through advertising. The memo justifies this argument saying that fewer people attended their movies during the past year. Furthermore, the argument states that even though their movies are having a greater percentage of positive reviews, the content of these reviews is nor reaching enough viewers. The arguments given by the advertising director are somehow logic, but they are not supported by any data.
Firstly, the memo states that the recent report from the marketing department about last year's number of viewers is lower than any other year. One question that must be asked is when the company decided to start doing these reports about viewership, because in case they started doing them just a few years ago, the low number of viewers may not mean such as bad results. In relation to this, we do not know either whether the results from previous years were higher by a wide difference or just by some hundreds of viewers. Furthermore, the number of attendees to the movies can be also low because the number of movies has been also low. The memo does not offer us clear data about the number of attendees or movies.
It is also unclear the data regarding the reviews. The advertising director states that the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers increased during last year. But there is no data at all regarding the negative reviews. It is possible then that the number of negative reviews also increased during last year. When someone wants to check on movie reviews, they do not only check the good reviews, but also check the number and content of the negative ones.
Moreover, the budget allocation towards advertising can also be a failure, as the memo does not give any reasonable data or explanation about the expected success of this strategy. Maybe the problem of Super Screen Movie is nor their marketing/advertising campaign, but it can be a decrease on the quality of the movies. Or even the cost of attending the cinema. It is not explained in the memo the fact that normally every year the cost of services increase, and the movie theater can be one of them.
In conclusion, the advertising should have answered these questions before giving a solution that requires allocating money from other, maybe more important, departments or projects.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-06 | Sumaiya Mila | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-06 | Shams Tarek | 46 | view |
| 2020-01-02 | jamaya8 | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-26 | Yongrok_Jeong | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | Opak Pulu | 16 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 503, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d the movie theater can be one of them. In conclusion, the advertising should ha...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'in conclusion', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.262008733624 0.25644967241 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.139737991266 0.15541462614 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0764192139738 0.0836205057962 91% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0633187772926 0.0520304965353 122% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0349344978166 0.0272364105082 128% => OK
Prepositions: 0.126637554585 0.125424944231 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0371179039301 0.0416121511921 89% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.62225072646 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0174672489083 0.026700313972 65% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.14192139738 0.113004496875 126% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0152838427948 0.0255425247493 60% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00873362445415 0.0127820249294 68% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2510.0 2731.13054187 92% => OK
No of words: 422.0 446.07635468 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.94786729858 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.350710900474 0.378187486979 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263033175355 0.287650121315 91% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.187203791469 0.208842608468 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0995260663507 0.135150697306 74% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62225072646 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 207.018472906 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.471563981043 0.469332199767 100% => OK
Word variations: 51.5760392168 52.1807786196 99% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 20.039408867 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.2105263158 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9816835664 57.7814097925 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.105263158 141.986410481 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2105263158 23.2022227129 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.684210526316 0.724660767414 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 48.5138438513 51.9672348444 93% => OK
Elegance: 1.78899082569 1.8405768891 97% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.536830882893 0.441005458295 122% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.138096792469 0.135418324435 102% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0588720023821 0.0829849096947 71% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.650658328541 0.58762219726 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.11923251923 0.147661913831 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.233667098283 0.193483328276 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0956022114048 0.0970749176394 98% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.37572151577 0.42659136922 88% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.135140331573 0.0774707102158 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.330768070336 0.312017818177 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111378202155 0.0698173142475 160% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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.