In the memo to the board of directors of Bragain Bran Cereals, the author concludes that because of their success in the company's first product, Bargain Brand breakfast cereal, the company should start other production lines to expand its business by introducing different sorts of low-priced foods. The author reaches this conclusion because the company introduced their first product at a far lower price than its competitors, and its rivals failed to compete. Nonetheless, while the conclusion drawn by the writer might hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument.
First of all, the writer did not provide any data regarding the number of consumers that start buying from them rather than other companies. It is possible that those customers constitute a minor proportion of all the customers, and they started buying from this company because they are from the poor or middle class of society. On the other hand, most cereal consumers are from the rich and upper-class of society and stay loyal to those high-price cereals offered by the company's rivals. Therefore, the company only covers a minor proportion of the customers, which is regarded barely as a success. If this scenario has merit, the author's assertion that they outcompete their rivals due to lower prices is significantly hampered.
Secondly, the author presumes that all the companies in all the fields react the same in the face of predicaments or competition with rivals. The plans that other cereal companies have devised to compete with Bargain Bran might be useless. However, other companies in other areas, for instance, companies working in the field of producing frozen meat, might exert other strategies to outcompete their rivals, whose only advantage is producing similar products at lower prices more effectively. The argument does not hold water if the above is true.
Finally, people might react differently toward a considerable difference in the price of disparate types of foods. People might not pay much attention to the quality of the cereal, so they prefer to buy the cheapest one. But, in reacting to the noticeable price gap in other foods, for example, meat or chicken, they would rather buy the one with the highest price since they feel somehow ensure that the quality of this food is the best possible. They may be skeptical about the price difference in other types of food than cereal. If it is true that people's reaction toward the price difference for different kinds of food is not alike, the credibility of the writer's claim decreases substantially.
To recapitulate, it is possible that if Bragain Bran company produce low-price foods other than cereal, it may be able to dominate the food market as it has done with the cereal market during the last year. Nevertheless, as it stands now, the argument rests on several groundless assumptions that render its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Therefore, the author must provide three additional pieces of evidence that are mentioned above.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 504 350
No. of Characters: 2553 1500
No. of Different Words: 237 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.738 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.065 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.664 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.2 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.384 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.9 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.311 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.548 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 635, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...uccess. If this scenario has merit, the authors assertion that they outcompete their ri...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2616.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 504.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19047619048 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7398085277 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 204.123752495 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494047619048 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 800.1 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.3208226511 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.8 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35 5.70786347227 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => 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: 0.22278230703 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0676693868592 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0778251686078 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128703815426 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527383652743 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.