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 proposed memo from the advertising director states that the problem of fewer people attending the super screen movie production films is because of lack of awarness among people about good quality movies, and the advertizing spend should be increased inorder to spread awareness. The author says so, because of the increase in the percentage of positive reviews among the people watched the film this year, compared to the previous year. And hence, the content is not far-reaching even if it has good quality. However, the conclusion needs more evidence to bolster it's claim and make it more ubiquitous.
Firstly, We donot know the actual reason behind less number of people attending the films compared to last year. For instance, the movie that was released in the last year may be bad which inturn made viewers hesitate to come into theatres for the company's next ventures. Also, the production company may have increased the prices of tickets that made the tickets unaffrodable to some people, and resulted in the decrease in numbers. If either of the above claims is true, then the reason of lack of awarness about the good quality films reflecting in reduced numbers of peope not going to the theater doesn't hold water.
Secondly, The author states that the contents of the films are not reaching enough of the prospective viewers. There is a chance that the categorization used here is actually flawed and the company doesn't have a proper understanding about the prospective viewers. They may be fond of drama's and the company keeps producing action films. So, proper research on the prospective viewer's preferences might actually make fortunes for the company. And, there's also a possibility that the prospective viewers set the company is catering to is a small set. Then changing the target audience set to other genres might increase the revenues for the company instead of concentrating on advertizing. If any of the above stated hypothesis holds truth, then the assertion made by the author is not persuasive.
Thirdly, Current film's advertizing percentage in the overall budget is unknown as compared to previous film's advertizing percentage. There is a chance that the current year's advertizing percentage may be grater than previous year's percentage in the overall budget, but this increased budget didn't reflect in the viewership numbers. Also, the current marketing style of the production company might be outdated and not properly reaching people, it may be using hoardings to promote films, while many other films use social media or television to reach wider audience. In this case, altering the marketing style is needed instead of increasing the allocation. If any the above stated reasons is true, then increasing the advertising revenues might not be prudent for the company to attract customers.
To conclude, the assertion in its current form is prone to many fallacies, if any of those comes true, the company might actually loose more customes instead of the increase in the number. The author needs to do more analysis on the actual reason why the people are showing disinterest and do more research on people movie preferences. And, the author might also have to look if the current marketing practices are actually working positively for the company or not. Upon doing thorough analysis of the above stated possibilities, the author can come up with much more solid and persuasive suggestion to improve the companies profits.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | view |
- Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic News editors decide what to broadcast on television and what to print in newspapers What factors do you think influence these decisions Do we beco 61
- NA 11
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 70
- The table below shows the consumer durables telephone refrigerator etc owned in Britain from 1972 to 1983 Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown below 73
- A bar graph showing research students across five subjects in 2005
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 14 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 568 350
No. of Characters: 2853 1500
No. of Different Words: 249 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.882 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.023 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.631 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 219 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 165 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 108 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.061 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.509 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.103 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 603, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...mbers of peope not going to the theater doesnt hold water. Secondly, The author st...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 199, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...here is actually flawed and the company doesnt have a proper understanding about the p...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 448, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
...lly make fortunes for the company. And, theres also a possibility that the prospective...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 226, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
... percentage may be grater than previous years percentage in the overall budget, but t...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 292, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...erall budget, but this increased budget didnt reflect in the viewership numbers. Also...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2910.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 565.0 441.139720559 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15044247788 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87542086881 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67620569183 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 204.123752495 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451327433628 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 909.9 705.55239521 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.2800775331 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.25 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5416666667 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.45833333333 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158800242619 0.218282227539 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0416713446501 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587329296117 0.0701772020484 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.093279515526 0.128457276422 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0612873140442 0.0628817314937 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 98.500998004 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.