According to a recent report from out marking department, during the last yea, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year,
The memo provided falls short of providing enough information to make a reasonable recommendation. There are several questions that need to be asked in order to fully evaulate the recommendation. For one, we need to know more about the conditions taking place outside of Super Screens, two there needs to be known about the quantity of movies being produced, and lastly, we cannot assume that the average movie review can effect the numbers of attendees.
For us to fully evaulate this memo, it would be important to know the factors outside Super Screen that might effect movie viewings. The memo would do well to provide information about events that happened in the last year that could have effected movie attendance. For example, if there was an economic recession in the last year that would mean people are not paying seeing movies in general and not because they are unaware of Super Screen's quality. Likewise, perhaps Super Screen changed movie distributors in the last year and perhaps the new distributors simpley do not distribute to as many movie chains as Super Screen's previous distributor. In either example, the problem in not awareness, and adversiting would not assist in changing attendees.
Moveover, the memo does not say anything about the number of movies produced. While yes, the quality of the movies is important, if Super Screen only produced two movies that garnered slightly better reviews than the 50 it produced last year than we can assume that the problem the quantity not quality.
Lastly, we cannot assume average reviews by movie reviews coorelate to viewership. For example, if Super Screen produced low-brow child-friendly fun last year, opposed to eludite documentries of the ivory trade this year, then a wildly different (and substantally smaller) market is being cartered to. People can be aware of the quality Super Screen is producing, but they do not want to see it. If this is true, then the problem is not a lack of knowledge.
I conclusion, the memo needs to provide more informantion for a reasonable decision tp be made on the next corse of action.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 236, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... For one, we need to know more about the conditions taking place outside of Super...
^^
Line 3, column 112, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[6]
Message: Did you mean 'affect'?
Suggestion: affect
...factors outside Super Screen that might effect movie viewings. The memo would do well ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 363, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...last year that would mean people are not paying seeing movies in general and not ...
^^
Line 5, column 201, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...two movies that garnered slightly better reviews than the 50 it produced last yea...
^^
Line 7, column 100, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...coorelate to viewership. For example, if Super Screen produced low-brow child-fri...
^^
Line 7, column 151, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...een produced low-brow child-friendly fun last year, opposed to eludite documentri...
^^
Line 9, column 2, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...roblem is not a lack of knowledge. I conclusion, the memo needs to provide mo...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, lastly, likewise, so, then, well, while, for example, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1763.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 350.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03714285714 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69279310269 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485714285714 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 548.1 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => 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: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0743983185 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.533333333 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3333333333 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86666666667 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.218785080524 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0748686429446 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0743733414054 0.0701772020484 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123818566021 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0887235775595 0.0628817314937 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => 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: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.