The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals.
"One year ago we introduced our first product, Bargain Brand breakfast cereal. Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top-selling cereal companies. Although the companies producing the top brands have since tried to compete with us by lowering their prices and although several plan to introduce their own budget brands, not once have we needed to raise our prices to continue making a profit. Given our success in selling cereal, we recommend that Bargain Brand now expand its business and begin marketing other low-priced food products as quickly as possible."
The memo sent to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals says that Bargain Brand Cereals with their first product breakfast cereal with very low price attracted many customers from the top-selling cereal companies and in return these top-selling brands to compete with the Bargain Brand reduced the prices of cereals. They also launched several budget brands. But with this all also Bargain Brand did not need to increase the price of their cereals to continue make profit. The author argues that based on this the Bargain Brand should now expand its business and begin marketing other low-priced food products. Here, the author assumes many things and does not provide clear and cogent evidences to prove his point.
According to the author, one year ago the first product of Bargain Brand Cereals's breakfast cereal was successful and they were able to compete with the top-selling brands.
Hence, based on this premise it will not be right to say that they should expand business and market other low-priced food products. As the economic situation may be different one year ago and now it is different so the author's argument does not hold water. It may also possible that cereal market is large and every company selling cereals is making profit, while same can not be said for food products market. The cereals quality of Bargain Brand may be best in the market with a very low price. There are no evidences or data to support the argument of the author.
There may be possibility that the people are very health conscious so they only prefer to buy food products from a well established company. There is also chance that the companies already selling food products are very big compared to their earlier competitors. These big companies have a large amount of financial resources so they can provide more discounts. Hence, there is not a guarantee that Bargain Brand will be profitable in selling food products. There may be lots of companies selling food products at a very low price hence, market is already saturated there is no more space for new company to enter in the market. The author could have consider these all assumptions and made more stronger argument.
To sum up, the author assumed many assumptions and there is lack of evidences to support the argument. By considering above assumptions author could have made his argument more stronger.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 400 350
No. of Characters: 1944 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.472 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.86 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.355 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 62 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.053 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.478 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 220, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...year ago and now it is different so the authors argument does not hold water. It may al...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 142, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...oducts from a well established company. There is also chance that the companies alrea...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 652, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'considered'.
Suggestion: considered
...er in the market. The author could have consider these all assumptions and made more str...
^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 692, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'stronger' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: stronger
...consider these all assumptions and made more stronger argument. To sum up, the author assu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 173, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'stronger' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: stronger
...ons author could have made his argument more stronger.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, may, so, well, while, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => 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: 1982.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 400.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.955 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40283166285 2.78398813304 86% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.44 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 604.8 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.7273177386 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.315789474 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0526315789 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.15789473684 5.70786347227 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325211404613 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100407226719 0.0743258471296 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127744341518 0.0701772020484 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197005083864 0.128457276422 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.141132999893 0.0628817314937 224% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.36 8.32208582834 88% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.