Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, to avoid the expense of purchasing butter and to increase profitability, the Happy Pancake House should extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well.
The Margarine has taken place of butter in Happy Pancake House in a region of US because of its less expense compared to latter one. The Author concludes that to increase the profit, Butter should be replaced by Margarine throughout all the restaurants of Happy Pancake House. He believes the fact of the price difference and the assumption of less number of complaints raised by the change. Though, the underlying issue have merit; because of a lack of relevant evidence, unaddressed assumptions and vague terminology, the author's argument is unsubstantiated and deeply flawed.
The first undermine fact is that, the number of complaints received from the customers are less. It requires more lucid way to indicate the interest of the customers in the Margarine than butter. It can be a possibility that customers are not having any platform to register their feedbacks about the new change. The 2 percent customers may have escalated it to higher management of restaurant due to bad taste or odour in food. The time frame is also a bar, that needs to taken into account when getting the suggestion regarding the change. It can be assumed that the 2 percent figure is of first day of change. There could be less number of people came to the restaurant compared to rush days. The number of customers or the information regarding the feedback platform could have strengthened the the author's argument.
The second weak point is with the region choice. This new experiment has been tested in southwestern US. There is no clue about the number of restaurants in this region and the customer's population for the House. The statistics of both of these facts are missing which breaks another assumption made by author here. The Pancake house is about to launch the successful change in southeast and northeast region, but it can be assumed that these regions has more popularity of the house than the former one. To recall the first argument here, if it comes true and the change is not really huge success in the Southwestern US, it will affect the homeground of the Happy Pancake house that will definitely be harmful for the business.
The final point is the cost of both the items, Butter & Margarine. The cost difference is not limpid here that provides the profitability in the business. One can assume that the butter is costlier in a particular region but it is cheaper in other regions. The cost of transportation is also has an effusive role here. There is ambiguity in the statement given in the argument that weakens the author's point here.
The conclusion of the argument is not correct because of the lack of evidence provided. To bolster the argument, author should have provided stats of the customer numbers, the cost difference, the information of type of customers as well as the feedbacks received from them. To keep the prestige of the House, the change needs more of information and surveys that can help to prevent the hamper of the quality and taste of the restaurants.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 525, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... assumptions and vague terminology, the authors argument is unsubstantiated and deeply ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 235, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... It can be a possibility that customers are not having any platform to register ...
^^
Line 3, column 797, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...edback platform could have strengthened the the authors argument. The second weak po...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 797, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...edback platform could have strengthened the the authors argument. The second weak po...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 805, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...latform could have strengthened the the authors argument. The second weak point is w...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 178, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'customers'' or 'customer's'?
Suggestion: customers'; customer's
...r of restaurants in this region and the customers population for the House. The statistic...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'really', 'regarding', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.268602540835 0.25644967241 105% => OK
Verbs: 0.152450090744 0.15541462614 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0671506352087 0.0836205057962 80% => OK
Adverbs: 0.032667876588 0.0520304965353 63% => OK
Pronouns: 0.021778584392 0.0272364105082 80% => OK
Prepositions: 0.134301270417 0.125424944231 107% => OK
Participles: 0.0508166969147 0.0416121511921 122% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.72053718376 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0254083484574 0.026700313972 95% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.152450090744 0.113004496875 135% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.021778584392 0.0255425247493 85% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.010889292196 0.0127820249294 85% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2997.0 2731.13054187 110% => OK
No of words: 510.0 446.07635468 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.87647058824 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75217629947 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.347058823529 0.378187486979 92% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.260784313725 0.287650121315 91% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.18431372549 0.208842608468 88% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.129411764706 0.135150697306 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72053718376 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 207.018472906 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.445098039216 0.469332199767 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 51.0708023567 52.1807786196 98% => OK
How many sentences: 26.0 20.039408867 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.6153846154 23.2022227129 85% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0419548497 57.7814097925 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.269230769 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6153846154 23.2022227129 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.461538461538 0.724660767414 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 45.6938159879 51.9672348444 88% => OK
Elegance: 2.19298245614 1.8405768891 119% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.424162915721 0.441005458295 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.138507297744 0.135418324435 102% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0708595910489 0.0829849096947 85% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.634414850831 0.58762219726 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.151818171856 0.147661913831 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.200981038403 0.193483328276 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0681141804198 0.0970749176394 70% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.595093140191 0.42659136922 139% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0513344138896 0.0774707102158 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.324849757677 0.312017818177 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059203873711 0.0698173142475 85% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.