"Five years ago, at a time when we had difficulties in obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric, we discontinued production of our alpaca overcoat. Now that we have a new fabric supplier, we should resume production. This coat should sell very well: since we have not offered an alpaca overcoat for five years and since our major competitor no longer makes an alpaca overcoat, there will be pent-up customer demand. Also, since the price of most types of clothing has increased in each of the past five years, customers should be willing to pay significantly higher prices for alpaca overcoats than they did five years ago, and our company profits will increase."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the argument purportedly highlights that production of alpaca overcoat should commence again after five years. However, the premise upon which he puts his claim are fallacious. For the support of which more well-established evidence should be given.
To commence with, the author contends that they should start production of alpaca overcoat because they found new costumers for high quality wool. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since there is no sufficient evidence to support if high quality wool is still a popular material for production of alpaca overcoat among consumers. One point that should be considered is that the taste of people in buying clothes rapidly change day in day out so, for this reason there is no guarantee that people still are willing to wear wool clothes after five years. It is also important to say that there is no valid evidence to show that this wool material is still a high quality one.
The author also asserts that because they do not produce alpaca overcoat for many years, it will be sold significantly and also their major competitor does not offer this product for years so, the demand for these costs are high. Although it might seems tenable at face, it has some defects, due to the paucity of evidence that would consolidate the premise the otherwise. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that the absence of these products enhance the likelihood of no demands for alpaca overcoats during past years. In this case, production of coats will not only be profitable but also they may face a terrible market in near future. Moreover, their competitor might attract people with different high quality clothes after five years, which could change the taste of people solely.
Finally, as set forth by the author the costumers will pay a substantial amount of money for alpaca overcoats due to the fact that the price of clothes have increased vigorously during past years and it will be profitable for the company. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to an inadequate evidence to support if the increase in people's payments for other products means that they will pay equivalently for alpaca overcoat. One point that can't go unnoticed is that new fashion style clothing are improving day in day out and people are willing to put on clothes according to new fashion style. In this case, perhaps people avoid to pay a good amount of money for alpaca overcoats. This situation might run a company into serious problem.
Having scrutinized all premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there is some evidence, having been ignored by the author while the presence of which could add to the logic of each premise.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 397, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'products'' or 'product's'?
Suggestion: products'; product's
... increase in peoples payments for other products means that they will pay equivalently f...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 480, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...tly for alpaca overcoat. One point that cant go unnoticed is that new fashion style ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2304.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 468.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92307692308 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50715609599 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459401709402 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 721.8 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.6454681653 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.0 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143857737132 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.055971327251 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0372217403858 0.0701772020484 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0872833898994 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405576120972 0.0628817314937 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 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.