According to a recent report by 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 last year. Clearly, the content of these reviews is not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater quantity of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.
The memo provided here discusses about the Super Screen Movie Production Company which has based few data to assume that the advertising of their product is being unavailable to general people, therefore they need to allocate greater share of their budget for reaching the large mass of people; but, on meticulous analysis of the premises provided suggests otherwise. The conclusion of the managing director is fallacious and based on myriad of unwarranted assumptions, the couple of which are discussed below.
First, it is mentioned that fewer people attended super screen-produced movies because of lack of awareness on the movie quality. But is it really so? Won't it be the case that people prefer watching the movies at their home through other sources like Youtube, torrent and the other sites so that they come at much lower price. It might also be true that the audiences are decreasing due to the increasing availability of employment opportunities in the nearby area.
Second, the conclusion of the general manager is based on the assumption that the positive reviews are being flooded by the viewers of the movies; what happens when the selected reviewers do not fully represent the general perception of the viewers and the other company lured the viewers to say so for the sake of some incentives? This may lead to the false information which may totally ruin the business.
Additionally, it assumes that the content of the reviews are not properly reached to the target audiences. What if the content is being reached, but the audience are being uninterested because of the lack of the company to go to watch movies with? People are being more isolated nowadays with the pacing development especially in the field of Information Technology sectors, which may undermines the managers assumption.
Further, the director is being pretty much sure that the lack of advertisement has been a major impediment on the dearth of audience of super-screen movies on the basis of aforementioned assumptions and facts. It is also evinced that the company is going to invest a larger share of its money for the advertisement sector, to be in reach to the public. Without properly knowing the facts with the intensive study, the director is being lured by the reported documents by other sources, the condition might not always be the same, and it might incur a heavy loss if not carefully planned.
In sum, it can be concluded that the director is drawing his conclusion based on the unwarranted assumptions which shows that there is much needed effort of the director on scrupulously identifying the root cause of the paucity of audiences and contrive the plan that way. If these attempts are done, the conclusion might seem plausible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 455 350
No. of Characters: 2244 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.619 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.932 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.76 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.438 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.046 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.319 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.605 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.044 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 160, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...e quality. But is it really so? Wont it be the case that people prefer watching th...
^^
Line 7, column 401, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...ology sectors, which may undermines the managers assumption. Further, the director is ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, really, second, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2296.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 454.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05726872247 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61598047577 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80491192463 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497797356828 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 720.0 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => 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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 91.107422859 57.8364921388 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.5 119.503703932 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.375 23.324526521 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.70786347227 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172651280773 0.218282227539 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572377227072 0.0743258471296 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0880902428398 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0874160210545 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0666691857036 0.0628817314937 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.41 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => 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.