The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview."It is time for the city of Grandview to stop funding the Grandview Symphony Orchestra. It is true that the symphony struggled financially for many years, but last year priva

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the city of Grandview.
"It is time for the city of Grandview to stop funding the Grandview Symphony Orchestra. It is true that the symphony struggled financially for many years, but last year private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. In addition, the symphony has just announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. For these reasons, we recommend that the city eliminate funding for the Grandview Symphony Orchestra from next year's budget. We predict that the symphony will flourish in the years to come even without funding from the city."
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 memo cites that the Grandview Symphony Orchestra received two times donation, sold many sits out in their concerts-in-the-park series, and going to raise ticket price in the next year. For the above reasons, the budget planer concludes that the Grandview Symphony Orchestra could be profitable in the following years without any government funding. However, there are some questions rendering the argument a little unconvincing.

First of all, the author mentions that the symphony had accepted doubled private donation and sold out many tickets in the concerts-in-the-park series. Nevertheless, there is no causation between double selling than the last year and sufficient money. The donation and money from the tickets might still not enough to maintain their performance. It is possible that they only have 100 dollars in last year donation. Therefore, 200 dollars in this year is not enough, too. Furthermore, they might only a good sale in the concerts-in-the-park series, while other series have poor sales.

Secondly, the writer indicates that the symphony is going to increase the ticket prices in the next year. Nonetheless, there is no direct relation between the increase price and receive ample money. Probably, the selling in the next year are poor and then no matter they raise ticket prices or not, they receive no money. Therefore, selling expensive tickets does not mean that they have the ability to possess wealth or they are doing a lucrative business.

Finally, the budget planner suggests that the city stop supporting the Grandview Symphony Orchestra and they could function prosperous on their own without funding. Perhaps, the funding from the city might take an essential proportion of their major income. They might want to earn more wealth by themselves, so they appeal more private contribution and increase the ticket prices. Notwithstanding, all their efforts might only take a little part of their income. Hence, cutting off the budget might cause a severe damage to the symphony, and they cannot function normally without the budget.

In the conclusion, there are some questions about the exact number of the symphony's income and the ratio between the budget and their sales. To bolster the argument, the author should provide more information to answer the above questions.

Votes
Average: 8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Sentence: The memo cites that the Grandview Symphony Orchestra received two times donation, sold many sits out in their concerts-in-the-park series, and going to raise ticket price in the next year.
Description: A noun, plural, common is not usually followed by a noun, singular, common
Suggestion: Refer to times and donation

between the increase price and receive ample money
between the increasing price and the ample money which will receive

----------------
argument 1 -- OK

argument 2 -- OK

argument 3 -- OK
----------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 370 350
No. of Characters: 1897 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.386 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.127 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.559 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 139 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 67 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.371 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5