The writer argued that some southwestern customers who were given margarine instead of butter did not complain because they could not distinguish between these two or they use the term "butter" for both of these ingredient. The writer also stated that 2 percent of customers have complained is equivalent to 98 out of 100 customers were happy with the change. And because many consented to use margarine instead of butter and could not distinguish between them, the restaurant should extend this change to southeastern and northeastern branches as well. These explanations lack compelling evidence, therefore, the arguments and conclusion are unjustifiable.
First of all, there can be many alternative reasons why the customers who received margarine did not complain. They might have realised it was not the butter they have asked for, but they did not want to make things complicated or they were not very fussy with food, so they remained silent. However, deliberately serving margarine many times and ignoring the customers' request may risk increasing their unsatisfaction and losing customers. The customers may also think these restaurants were unprofessional as they could not distinguish between butter and margarine. Furthermore, they may also enjoyed the taste of margarine and they felt complaining was not necessary.
In addition, interpreting 2 percent as 2 out of 100 people is not necessarily true. The restaurants may only have 50 customers, but 1 of them complained and it is also 2 percent. On the contrary, there might be 200 customers, so 2 percent of 200 would be 4 people. The larger the customer base, the more complaints there are. Thinking 98 out of 100 customers were satisfied may underestimate the situation and also risk losing many customers if the restaurants keep using margarine.
Moreover, the writer assumed that margarine is a more cost-efficient alternative to butter, which might not hold true at all branches. The costs of ingredients might vary across regions, and butter might be much cheaper than margarine in the southeast and northeast. In that case, the latter would no longer be a cost-saving change in these regions and the Happy Pancake House should continue to use butter.
Lastly, even when margarine can replace butter in the southwestern restaurants, it does not necessarily mean that it will also succeed in the southeast and northeast branches as well. People from different regions may have different tastes and preferences, therefore, Happy Pancake House should not use the result from one location to infer about that of the other locations, unless it is certain that residents from these areas have very similar taste. It should also do some trials in the latter regions.
Overall, there can be many explanations for the information the writer gave and we need more sound evidences before making any solid conclusion, such as the exact number of customers tried margarine, the costs of replacing butter by margarine in each region, or surveying those customers who were served margarine to know their thoughts about it.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 495 350
No. of Characters: 2530 1500
No. of Different Words: 222 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.717 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.111 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.824 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 103 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.571 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.035 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.81 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.572 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.092 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this ingredient' or 'these ingredients'?
Suggestion: this ingredient; these ingredients
...the term 'butter' for both of these ingredient. The writer also stated that 2 percent ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, therefore, well, in addition, such as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.9520958084 193% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => 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: 2609.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 495.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27070707071 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71684168287 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96093946822 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.480808080808 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 790.2 705.55239521 112% => 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
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.064694112 57.8364921388 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.238095238 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5714285714 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.61904761905 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.312964832111 0.218282227539 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0961456469406 0.0743258471296 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0755000073185 0.0701772020484 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161371809648 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0492715935125 0.0628817314937 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
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: 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.