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.
The argument that Apogee company should close down its field offices and conduct all of its operations from a single location as this measure would improve profitability by cutting down the costs and helping the company by maintaining better supervision of all employees fails to mention many important points which are required to affirm the argument. There can be multiple reasons for lower profit such as tough market conditions and higher discounts because of new competitor in the market. So, simply stating that moving back to centralization would improve profitability is not a valid argument.
Argument states that profitability will be increased by cutting cost and having a better supervision of all the employees, but lower profitability might be because of tough economic conditions. As we all know that recession in 2008 affected profits of all the businesses. However, this centralization measure might be a temporary solution to increase the profitability, but in long term it will be detrimental to the overall growth of the company as company would not be able to expand to other locations without having field offices. Also, argument fails to mention whether this centralization will help to get the profit to same level as they were when Apogee Company had all its operation in one location. It might be the case that centralization will increase profit to some marginal amount compared to profits when company had all the operations in one location. For example, earlier profit might be 10 Million USD and now it is 2 Million USD and centralization can increase profit to only 3 Million USD. Hence, there are some other reasons for decline in the profit. Company needs to look at other factors before taking this decision.
Also, company profit might be decreased because now company has opened field offices at different location which are required for future growth of the company and in short term these offices may increase the overall expenditure of the company, hence impacting the profit. So, it is not prudent to close them. Company should look at long term effect of these office on its profit before closing them. These offices might have short term negative effect on profit, but will increase the profit of the company substantially after some years.
Argument states a correlation between supervision of employees and the profit without explaining how this will affect the profit. Usually, employees are supervised by their managers so even if all the employees are at one location that doesn't mean that they will be supervised differently. Employees will be still supervised by their respective managers. Hence, argument should provide how there will be better supervision and how it will impact the overall profit of the company.
Because the argument fails to take into consideration various factors as mentioned above it is not a sound and logical argument. Argument needs to take care of current economic conditions, long term growth prospective of the company, etc. to make the argument more sound and convincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 194, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
...e because of tough economic conditions. As we all know that recession in 2008 affe...
^^
Line 3, column 352, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this office' or 'these offices'?
Suggestion: this office; these offices
...pany should look at long term effect of these office on its profit before closing them. Thes...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 236, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... the employees are at one location that doesnt mean that they will be supervised diffe...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, may, so, still, as to, for example, in short, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.9520958084 193% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2562.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 495.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17575757576 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71684168287 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79768732746 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.416161616162 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 812.7 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.0320859846 57.8364921388 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.454545455 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.09090909091 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245885657933 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0817976666523 0.0743258471296 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108153868834 0.0701772020484 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142208261482 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112028127716 0.0628817314937 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.79 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.