The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend.
"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty and Fitch Realty-Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch, and it took more than four months to sell; last year when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams Realty."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
To advise which real estate firm is better for selling a home, the writer has considered some factors, including the number of agents that each agency has, the revenue of agencies and the ability of agencies to sell a home in a short time. In this letter, the writer provides several advantages of Adams Realty over Fitch Realty. However, the argument of the writer based on these three factors is full of assumptions and ambiguities which weakened his argument. His advice is not convincing enough.
According to the first factor namely, the number of agents employed by each firm, the writer has tried to prove that Adams has better and more sufficient manpower resources to sell homes. However, having more agents or working full-time is not an indication of a better home-selling performance. For example, in the letter writer has said that “Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25”. There is no evidence that all agents of Adams have the same performance in selling home. It is possible that some agents of Adams do not have good performance compared to Fitch’s agents. Additionally, the writer has not provided any statistics about the number of sales of each firm, and it is not clear whether or not each agent has been able to cover the maximum of sales monthly. So, the number of sub-agency groups is not a good criterion for the assessment of home-selling performance. The argument mentioned had been more valid if the working report of each agency would have been presented.
The second factor is related to the revenue of agencies. The writer has said that “Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. This data is not enough for the revenue comparison of the two firms. This data is only related to one year. For better comparison, the writer should consider a long-standing sales pattern. For example, he should consider the 10-year sales of each agency. Therefore, the higher revenue of one year is not a good indication for assessment. In other words, the sales figure given had been more acceptable if the writer would have considered the revenue of the two agencies over a longer period.
In the final factor of assessment, the writer has claimed that “Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch, and it took more than four months to sell; last year when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month.” We know that the sale of a home depends on many factors, such as the price, the location, the facilities, access to public transportation, the façade, interior decoration of the home and the floor of the home. So, there is one question regarding the writer’s argument. did the two houses sold have the same features? We have to consider that the economic and political conditions have changed after 10 years, and these factors have an important impact on the sales of different things like homes. So, Comparing the sale of the house in the past 10 years with the sale in the present time is completely wrong. Also, the workers in the agencies during the 10 years have gained more experience and they may have more abilities to sell homes. The argument had been more persuasive if the writer would have compared the agencies in recent years and considered the performance of workers in each one.
To summarize, according to the reasons mentioned above, I believe that the arguments of the writer for the selection of Adams as a better firm are not enough and cogent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 711, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...sales of each firm, and it is not clear whether or not each agent has been able to cover the m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 58, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... is related to the revenue of agencies. The writer has said that “Adams revenue las...
^^^
Line 4, column 83, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '”' seems to be missing
...e of agencies. The writer has said that “Adams revenue last year was twice as hig...
^
Line 4, column 632, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had considered'?
Suggestion: had considered
... had been more acceptable if the writer would have considered the revenue of the two agencies over a ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 101, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...at “Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home w...
^^
Line 5, column 554, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Did
...estion regarding the writer’s argument. did the two houses sold have the same featu...
^^^
Line 5, column 1076, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had compared'?
Suggestion: had compared
... had been more persuasive if the writer would have compared the agencies in recent years and consid...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, so, therefore, well, for example, in contrast, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 58.6224719101 130% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2968.0 2235.4752809 133% => OK
No of words: 620.0 442.535393258 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78709677419 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98996985923 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53573010378 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 215.323595506 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.414516129032 0.4932671777 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 933.3 704.065955056 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 20.0 4.99550561798 400% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 87.6811826786 60.3974514979 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.28571428571 5.21951772744 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158470504724 0.243740707755 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0519499489875 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802430763795 0.0758088955206 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104444082604 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0610498207546 0.0667264976115 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.1639044944 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.