In the memo, the author concludes that Bargian Brand should work on new low-priced food products. This conclusion relies on several premises, such as succeeding their cereal over a year of and being a profitable product. Although the author's assertion could prove true, he should answer three questions in order to bolster his persuasiveness.
First, is the cost of producing new products the same as breakfast cereal? The technology and equipment for cereal may be less expensive than other products. In this case, the profit of cereal is coming from these cheaper machines, but for initiating a new line of products, the owner has to invest more money, which could reduce the profit. Moreover, maybe cereal production does not need skillful and experienced staff; by contrast, most other products require professional workers who need a higher salary. Likewise, the profit could be lower than the cereal process as they have to dedicate more money to the employment section. If either case holds water, the author's suggestion would considerably hamper.
Secondly, is the author sure that BB breakfast cereal will sustain its sales? It might be possible that, due to their newness, people were keen to buy and taste them. After a year, it could become like other products, and people will look for new brands to escape their routine and find new experiences. Furthermore, maybe with the emergence of new lower-priced cereal, people would abandon BB cereal as the price is a high priority for them. In addition, even if there is no new lower-price cereal and people are loyal to the product, an unpredicted side-effect will appear. In this situation, not only could they lose all customers, but it also put a massive burden on the owner's shoulders if he has to pay the medical expenses, leading to bankruptcy and the company's closure. If the above examples have merits, the author's conclusion will fall apart.
Finally, are other factors leading to lower prices exclusively for this product? It could be possible that the company's owner has many hectares of maize nearby. This might get them an advantage as they do not need mediators who cost them. In addition, maybe the lands could be near the factory; therefore, the transportation cost would be reduced. On the other hand, the new products require a barn, for example, for a diary, which the owner does not possess. They should contact many farmers to reach an agreement to supply their demands, which is competitive with other companies and may not lead to higher profit as they compromise. In either scenario, the author's suggestion is not overly compelling.
In conclusion, although the author's suggestion for expanding low-priced products could be sound, he should consider answering the above three questions to make his argument credible.
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper Your recent article on corporate downsizing in Elthyria maintains that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship o 16
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals One year ago we introduced our first product Bargain Brand breakfast cereal Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top selling cereal companies A 83
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals One year ago we introduced our first product Bargain Brand breakfast cereal Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top selling cereal companies A 79
- Some people argue that successful leaders in government industry or other fields must be highly competitive Other people claim that in order to be successful a leader must be willing and able to cooperate with others 79
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr Karp an anthropologist Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rat 62
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 235, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...eing a profitable product. Although the authors assertion could prove true, he should a...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ection. If either case holds water, the authors suggestion would considerably hamper. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 552, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[14]
Message: Did you mean 'side effect' (=adverse effect, unintended consequence)? Open compounds are not hyphenated.
Suggestion: side effect
...re loyal to the product, an unpredicted side-effect will appear. In this situation, not onl...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 819, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... If the above examples have merits, the authors conclusion will fall apart. Finally,...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 661, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...hey compromise. In either scenario, the authors suggestion is not overly compelling. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 29, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...elling. In conclusion, although the authors suggestion for expanding low-priced pro...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, if, likewise, look, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, as to, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2352.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 460.0 442.535393258 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11304347826 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67889602858 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519565217391 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 700.2 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.3133559341 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1666666667 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 5.21951772744 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.174878559709 0.243740707755 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.057035727797 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540586222218 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104979682587 0.150359130593 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0469951525676 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.