"Despite its downtown location, the Rialto Movie Theater, a local institution for five decades, must make big changes or close its doors forever. It should follow the example of the new Apex Theater in the mall outside of town. When the Apex opened last year, it featured a video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system. Furthermore, in a recent survey, over 85 percent of respondents reported that the high price of newly released movies prevents them from going to the movies more than five times per year. Thus, if the Rialto intends to hold on to its share of a decreasing pool of moviegoers, it must offer the same features as Apex."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The manager of the Rialto Movie Theater asserts that Rialto Movie Theater should have the same features as Apex to control decreasing pool of moviegoers. Apex had video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system. Further, over eighty five percent of respondents are reluctant to see newly released movies more than five times per years because of high price. It seems very logical at first glance, but there are some unsubstantiated assumptions and evidences that does not take account the conclusion.
First and foremost, argument did not explicate the fact that what are the advantageous effects of physical location in Apex comparing to Rialto. Because the downtown location is the beneficial location for audiences to go more than outside of town, there should be valuable effects that people are more likely to go Apex. For example, there are free bus lane to go Apex Theatre; free transportation will be beneficial point that people become willing to go Apex.
Secondly, author did not mention that Rialto Movie Theater did not have video arcade, plush carpeting and seat and state-of-the-art sound system. Argument did not explain why this is very important. New item can be best solution to this situation, but in the way of exposition that Apex does not show about ‘new’. If argument shows that Apex has better and new cutting edges in theatre, then it will surely help the conclusion that Rialto should follow the Apex.
Thirdly, argument will be strengthened considerably by additional evidences that what kind of question was asked in survey. Opinions can be regarded from different jobs which can be varied from laborer, layers, professor, researcher, artists and so on. It means all people do not have same salary. Further, different ages have different value of vision. Youngster wants to watch action movie while elderly wants to watch history-based movies. Since there are different vision of watching, they would consider the price of ticket is expensive.
In closing, argument refers that Rialto Movie Theatre should follow Apex because of unproven evidences and assumptions, but if author add more evidence that is appropriate for the conclusion and fix assumption that follows the conclusion, then argument will be relevant as it sound.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 355, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'lanes'?
Suggestion: lanes
...o Apex. For example, there are free bus lane to go Apex Theatre; free transportation...
^^^^
Line 5, column 213, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'be the best'.
Suggestion: be the best
...hy this is very important. New item can be best solution to this situation, but in the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 277, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'sounds'?
Suggestion: sounds
...n, then argument will be relevant as it sound.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, for example, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1942.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 368.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27717391304 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79305528857 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535326086957 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0073370184 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.888888889 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4444444444 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.83333333333 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216276074828 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627993506542 0.0743258471296 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0679194165922 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125409003896 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0633366076389 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => 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.