The author states that allocating a greater share of the budget, in the coming year, to advertising would solve its conundrum of fewer people attending Super Screen (SS)movies. I do not concede with this conclusion due to its baseless assumptions and lack of evidence.
Firstly, the marketing team does not provide complete facts. They said fewer people attended the movies produced by the SS movie production company, they did not give the statistics from where the gather these numbers. There might be movies which were made last year which targetted a particular genre and hence fewer people attended them. There needs to proper research with relevant figures from the marketing team.
Then the second claim is that positive reviews increased from the last few years. This statement is also vague as we don't know the medium through which these reviews were taken. Maybe the fans liking the movies made duplicate reviews, maybe the marketing team of the film itself posted reviews so that more and more people watch the movie. We need to know where the reviews were taken and how their authenticity was marked.
Also, the author wrongly assumes that the public is unaware of the specific good reviews. The audience may know about the reviews and still not want to come because of the bad facilities, overpriced tickets or even disinterest in the theme of the movie. SS may be producing only slapstick comedies and the audience may want biographies or dramas! SS has to consider these factors to get larger numbers.
Also, it's not only the advertising which helps in gaining more audience but also surveys which will help in understanding the current scenarios.Also the SS can collaborate with theatres and provide goodies, discounts on tickets and food items and gain a share of the audience from these activities.
In conclusion, the author must provide relevant facts and statistics to strengthen his argument. Otherwise, I do not concur with his idea to bring in more crowds for SS productions.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 334 350
No. of Characters: 1633 1500
No. of Different Words: 186 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.275 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.889 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.445 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 110 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 83 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 54 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.647 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.554 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.303 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.609 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 165, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...m of fewer people attending Super Screen SSmovies. I do not concede with this con...
^^
Line 5, column 118, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ars. This statement is also vague as we dont know the medium through which these rev...
^^^^
Line 9, column 145, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Also
... in understanding the current scenarios.Also the SS can collaborate with theatres an...
^^^^
Line 9, column 145, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... in understanding the current scenarios.Also the SS can collaborate with theatres an...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, so, still, then, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1685.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 332.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07530120482 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.2685907696 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55599754649 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.560240963855 0.468620217663 120% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.4563693162 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.3125 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => 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: 0.202036554634 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0594667398417 0.0743258471296 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624597185043 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0883801776218 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772443902423 0.0628817314937 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.