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 author argues here that the alpaca overcoat production will be resumed and this overcoat should sell very well.in the market. People are willing to pay higher price for this coat. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention many several keys on the basis it could be evaluated. In support of this expectations, the author noted that there are increasing demands from customers for this overcoat and the competitor stop production of this overcoat. However, careful scrutiny of evidence reveals tit provides little credible support to the recommendation. Hence, the argument can be considered incomplete and unsubstantiated.
First of all, the argument readily assumes the interest in alpaca overcoat is still the same although its fashion is five years old. This is merely assumption build without much solid ground. For example, is there a new overcoat that was introduced during this period of 5 years? Why does this alpaca still have the same interest? The argument would have been convincing if it had stated about other coats that may pop up in the market and the advantage of alpaca overcoat to still have the same interest.
Secondly, the author expected that there will be increasing customer demand. This again is a weak and unsupported as it does not state that they already got demands during this period of five years. It would have been convincing to the reader, if the company implemented a normed survey to ask customers about their demands of the overcoat.
Finally, the author noted that the competitor stopped production of this overcoat. This raises skeptical question. Why the competitor stopped production of this overcoat? There may be many possibilities for stopping such as the revenue of this overcoat became very low. Another possibility, there has many modern and fashionable overcoat than that one. Without stating the actual reasons behind that, the reader is left with the impression of the recommendation of the author is a wishful thinking.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it further, the author must provide more concrete evidence. Perhaps by a way of detailed analysis for current market demands. To better evaluate the argument, it would be necessary to know more information about the reason of stopping production of that product by the other competitors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 303, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...is it could be evaluated. In support of this expectations, the author noted that the...
^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...that product by the other competitors.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1982.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 381.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20209973753 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78065626101 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511811023622 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 617.4 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9817449664 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.5833333333 119.503703932 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.875 23.324526521 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.20833333333 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0236849050213 0.218282227539 11% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00874670140533 0.0743258471296 12% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0187779413348 0.0701772020484 27% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0157816631492 0.128457276422 12% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0121939612379 0.0628817314937 19% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.