“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In colour film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20

Essay topics:

“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In colour film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”

The argument presented states that an organization tends to mature with time in terms of its efficiency, as with experience it learns how to do things better. Further, an example is provided to validate the conclusion that the same is supposed to hold in the case of Olympic Foods. The argument as such lacks certain facts and appears to be logically deficient.
Firstly, the example appears to be irrelevant and lacking on some grounds to support the claim of the argument. It says that, colour film processing service has become more profitable with time. Here, the example presented and the argument are not parallel as the author is comparing an industry as a whole to a particular company in a different industry altogether. The author then goes on to claim that since, Olympic Foods is about to complete its 25 years in the industry thus, it will be able to minimize costs and maximize its profits pertaining to its expansive experience. While this might be true but, the argument does not provide any information about the past financials of the company. For example, Lehmann Brothers was one of the oldest and largest firm in its field when it collapsed. Therefore, author’s claim about the financial well-being of an organization solely on the experience it has is unfounded.
Secondly, the author is comparing two industries that vertical and horizontally different. While the colour-film processing industry is driven by the latest advancements in technology, the food industry is highly consumer centric. So, the fact that the former has become more efficient cannot be solely attributed to the experience the organization has but, to the development of better and better technology. For example, the Pulse candy although brought in India by a consumer industry conglomerate, was only successful because of its excellent reception among the audience and not because the company was efficient. Hence, the example seems to provided very limited support to the argument.
Pertaining to the above-mentioned fallacies the argument does not appear sound and lacks important information and facts related to Olympic Foods based on which one could comment about the profitability of the company.
The conclusion would have been relevant if we had information relevant to the past and current financial status of Olympic Foods. If they were already in huge losses it would be highly unlikely that they will be able to maximize profits. Apart from that, the argument would have been stronger if it presented a coherent example which could further solidify the author’s claim that experience eventually leads to efficiency which further leads to success and profitability.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-05-27 ab9aur 55 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 130, 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.
...rent financial status of Olympic Foods. If they were already in huge losses it wou...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, while, apart from, for example, in fact

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2259.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 431.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24129930394 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92342282619 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482598607889 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 717.3 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8465790245 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.894736842 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6842105263 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42105263158 5.70786347227 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.142935051976 0.218282227539 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442378581047 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0581061855935 0.0701772020484 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0724945651413 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0478421234428 0.0628817314937 76% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 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.

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: 19 15
No. of Words: 431 350
No. of Characters: 2202 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.556 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.109 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.807 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 140 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.684 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.868 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.312 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.06 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5