When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees.
In the Argument, the author has introduced the apogee company to the readers addressing its profitability when operated from one location. The author also suggests that the company should close down all its field offices and conduct all its operation from a single location. Through which the author derives a conclusion of centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees.
Firstly, the author doesn’t provide any information regarding the nature of work, firm or industry to which “The Apogee” belongs to derive a conclusion regarding the profitability of the company.
Secondly, The author vaguely states that the Apogee was profitable when operated from one location but doesn’t mention any particular location from which Apogee operated and made profits in the previous years.
Further, the argument doesn’t provide any information or any relevant figures to describe the profitability of the company or the loss incurred by the company while operating from different locations.
Moreover, the author suggests an illogical solution to the presented problem by stating to shut down its fields offices. Where there is a chance or requirement for the field offices to run the existing projects smoothly for avoiding further losses. To increase the profitability of the company one should target the potential customers to increase profits.
The presented argument is not sound or persuasive as it failed to present the minimum details to decide the profitability of the firm. If the above mentioned items are included the Argument can be strengthened.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 255 350
No. of Characters: 1355 1500
No. of Different Words: 134 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.996 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.314 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.881 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 117 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.182 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.22 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.419 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.745 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 21, column 136, 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.
...o decide the profitability of the firm. If the above mentioned items are included ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.6327345309 25% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 28.8173652695 24% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1435.0 2260.96107784 63% => OK
No of words: 252.0 441.139720559 57% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.69444444444 5.12650576532 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03156942891 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539682539683 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 705.55239521 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.7228309972 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.454545455 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9090909091 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.72727272727 5.70786347227 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.424625442827 0.218282227539 195% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164564710669 0.0743258471296 221% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.173643755021 0.0701772020484 247% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190515705053 0.128457276422 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.18803392763 0.0628817314937 299% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 48.3550499002 67% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.02 12.5979740519 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.9071856287 143% => 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.