The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian, a company that manufactures men's clothing."Five years ago, at a time when we had difficulties in obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric, we discontinued productio

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian, a company that manufactures men's clothing.

"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 vice president recommends that Sartorian should resume the production of the alpaca overcoat, as they recently find a new fabric supplier. Also, he predicts that the sales condition of the coat will be very good due to the high demand, thereby increasing the company’s profits considerably. The claim seems to be eloquent at first glance, but it reveals some logical flaws, which are based on some precarious assumptions.

To begin with, the vice president suggests that the company should resume the manufacturing of the overcoat due to their newly signed fabric supplier. As mentioned in the argument, the firm stopped the production of the overcoat because of the insufficient supply of high quality wool fabric. As there’s no detailed information about the new fabric supplier, which is essential to evaluate its ability to supply sufficient high quality fabric, the recommendation made by the vice president is unwarranted.

In addition, the vice president cites there will be a huge demand for alpaca overcoat, because they haven’t offered the overcoat for years and their main opponent no longer produces such overcoats. Such an assumption can only be justified by evidence which can prove that the market conditions remain unchanged during the last five years. Otherwise, it is entirely possible that the alpaca overcoat is outdated and that’s the reason the company’s major competitor has stopped producing this kind of overcoat. Therefore, without detailed investigation in the market conditions, I will not be convinced by the argument presented by the presidents.

Finally, the vice president presumes that customers are willing to pay higher price for alpaca overcoats, as other types of clothes’ prices have experienced a significant increase in past five years. However, the vice president probably premises the design and materials of these clothes are all the same, but it is entirely possible that the higher price of other types of clothes is due to their sophisticated design and better crude materials. Thus, if there’s no plausible evidence indicating the alpaca overcoat has a good quality same as other clothing, it is imprudent to draw the conclusion that the sales of the overcoat will contribute to the increase of the company’s profits.

In sum, the suggestion presented by the vice president is based on several unjustified assumptions. To bolster his suggestion, more detailed investigations, such as status of the new fabric supplier, market conditions in the past five years and comparisons between the overcoat and other clothes are required to make the recommendation more persuasive.

Average: 5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 477, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...rude materials. Thus, if there's no plausible evidence indicating the alpaca...

Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'in addition', 'kind of', 'such as', 'all the same', 'to begin with']

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.262396694215 0.25644967241 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.132231404959 0.15541462614 85% => OK
Adjectives: 0.105371900826 0.0836205057962 126% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0392561983471 0.0520304965353 75% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0268595041322 0.0272364105082 99% => OK
Prepositions: 0.111570247934 0.125424944231 89% => OK
Participles: 0.0330578512397 0.0416121511921 79% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.08221741265 2.79052419416 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0247933884298 0.026700313972 93% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.119834710744 0.113004496875 106% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0165289256198 0.0255425247493 65% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00619834710744 0.0127820249294 48% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'

Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2671.0 2731.13054187 98% => OK
No of words: 414.0 446.07635468 93% => OK
Chars per words: 6.45169082126 6.12365571057 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51076378781 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.415458937198 0.378187486979 110% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.333333333333 0.287650121315 116% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.270531400966 0.208842608468 130% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.188405797101 0.135150697306 139% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08221741265 2.79052419416 110% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 207.018472906 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492753623188 0.469332199767 105% => OK
Word variations: 54.2623963351 52.1807786196 104% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.039408867 75% => OK
Sentence length: 27.6 23.2022227129 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5025145533 57.7814097925 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 178.066666667 141.986410481 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.6 23.2022227129 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.933333333333 0.724660767414 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 60.9333333333 51.9672348444 117% => OK
Elegance: 2.05208333333 1.8405768891 111% => OK

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.361051617834 0.441005458295 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.130635301653 0.135418324435 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0775708230934 0.0829849096947 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.670038016599 0.58762219726 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.100449735818 0.147661913831 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.187042623304 0.193483328276 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0628040382989 0.0970749176394 65% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.505570035643 0.42659136922 119% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0499126612101 0.0774707102158 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.271212516718 0.312017818177 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366195514702 0.0698173142475 52% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.

Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.87684729064 58% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.