The given content from the memo states that Super Screen should allocate a greater share out of its revenue to publicity in the coming financial year. The main evidence to this fact would be the lack of awareness among people of such high ratings by the viewers. Adding to this, very few people go to movies despite of higher quality content in movies. As far I am concerned, I think this conclusion is partially flawed owing to three reasons.
Firstly, since the profits of the movie are evidently low, doesn't make the quality of the movie solely responsible for bad attendance of people at movie screens. The company's argument is based upon the assumption that people love to watch movies at theaters instead of watching through Blu-ray DVDs or by subscribing to any mobile streaming platform, which are much cheaper. Maybe this assumption might not hold water for the given argument as people would definitely prefer watching any movie, for that matter over sources that are much convenient and full of exciting offers.
Secondly, movie productions believe that the prices of the tickets at the movie screens are at par with the budget of the average household. The assumption might not be true in screens which are very far away from residential neighborhoods. Because, this would not only lead to buying of tickets or wasting money to travel such long distance through personal or public transport systems. In such cases, frugal families would always love to watch the movies when they are streamed for free on their personal TV sets. This assumption could hold true to movie screens that are in vicinity to neighborhoods and nearby work places.
Last but not the least, there is a bad misunderstanding by the movie companies that good advertisements are always proportional to heightened profits by movie places. This could not be true among the masses who are not totally convinced by catchy advertisements or hoardings along the streets. Increased outreach of good reviews among the viewers would definitely help to some extent. But, authentic reviews by national critics would underscore the popularity and the revenues earned through movie streams. For an example, review by a national critic panel would not only reach along a large section of the population, but would be more reliable and trustworthy among the common movie fanatics.
Based upon the explanation to the improper assumptions of the movie companies over the demographics of a houseful movie show, the given argument does not have substantial value as to stating the core reasons behind the failures on gross profits earned by movie production companies.
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------------
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: 18 15
No. of Words: 434 350
No. of Characters: 2163 1500
No. of Different Words: 227 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.564 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.984 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.623 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 156 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.838 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.389 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.311 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.426 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.058 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 60, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...profits of the movie are evidently low, doesnt make the quality of the movie solely re...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 319, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hrough Blu-ray DVDs or by subscribing to any mobile streaming platform, which are...
^^
Line 5, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r hoardings along the streets. Increased outreach of good reviews among the viewe...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, may, second, secondly, so, then, as to, i think
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 : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2206.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 433.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09468822171 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67442672052 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526558891455 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 666.9 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4351114787 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.555555556 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0555555556 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.77777777778 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.155385379315 0.218282227539 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0511898213683 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0489932672989 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.088903203886 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0327002391445 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.