"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."
The claim from the author to the Super Screen Movie Production Company to keep a greater share so as to tout to public seem inherently flawed. There are several assumptions made by the author position of statement that are to be addressed to approve the letter as acceptable. Since, this letter lacks proper evidences and proofs, the conclusions made could not be accepted.
Firstly, the author is stating that the past year was having fewer viewers of the super screen movie than any other. Here, before claiming the statement, the kind of movie released is not reveled. Moreover, the author is also stating that the reviews given by the movie watchers was positive. Form these statements, it can be concluded that, could it be a case where the movie was banal and hence no much viewers was seen in the past year, though it might have conceived a good message to the society. Since, the type of movie released is not stated, the conclusion about the viewers count could not be accounted for the author's claim.
Secondly, the author is claiming that the contents of the reviews are not reaching the prospective viewers. This statement lacks many evidences. To point out some, it is not stated what is the numerical figure of the number of the prospective viewers that the author wants to claim, the taste of movie watchers like what kind of movies are most likely making sound in the public. The sense of taste in public is quiet important to impress good quantity of viewers. Hence without this information, it would be difficult to accept the conclusion made.
Thirdly, the author is stating that, in the coming year, greater share of budget should be devoted in toting the awareness about the good Super screen movies. From the beginning of the claim, the author is not stating that what is the medium that is used to advertise the Super screen movies. Without this information, it becomes hard to conclude that only through their advertisements the public are getting aware of such super screen movies and hence, approve the greater share in the budget to advertisements.
Thus, in total, the author's claim lacks so may proofs and evidences, that makes the letter futile. Still greater and deeper study as to made on how to make the public aware of such good super screen movies so that it can increase the total movie watchers.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
sample:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 403 350
No. of Characters: 1886 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.48 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.68 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.321 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 130 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 81 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.719 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.564 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.057 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 96, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...duction Company to keep a greater share so as to tout to public seem inherently flawed. ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 387, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d it be a case where the movie was banal and hence no much viewers was seen in th...
^^
Line 3, column 399, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...se where the movie was banal and hence no much viewers was seen in the past year,...
^^
Line 3, column 402, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...where the movie was banal and hence no much viewers was seen in the past year, thou...
^^^^
Line 5, column 466, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...nt to impress good quantity of viewers. Hence without this information, it would be d...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reater share of budget should be devoted in toting the awareness about the good S...
^^
Line 9, column 100, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Still,
...vidences, that makes the letter futile. Still greater and deeper study as to made on ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, third, thirdly, thus, as to, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1942.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 403.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81885856079 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48049772903 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42164808284 2.78398813304 87% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.446650124069 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 589.5 705.55239521 84% => 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: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.7458263199 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.888888889 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3888888889 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.27777777778 5.70786347227 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => 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: 0.264853351127 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0920663541729 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0906343326267 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154097428344 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0660223408838 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.