The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of marketing at Dura-Socks, Inc.
"A recent study of Dura-Socks customers suggests that our company is wasting the money it spends on its patented Endure manufacturing process, which ensures that our socks are strong enough to last for two years. We have always advertised our use of the Endure process, but the new study shows that despite the socks' durability, our customers, on average, actually purchase new Dura-Socks every three months. Furthermore, customers surveyed in our largest market — northeastern United States cities — say that they most value Dura-Socks' stylish appearance and availability in many colors. These findings suggest that we can increase our profits by discontinuing use of the Endure manufacturing process."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Dura-Socks's customers suggest that company spending a lot amount of money in their patented enduring process that ensure the durability of socks. However, it is worthless as per customer. Because they change their socks and buy at every three months. Also, survey done in northeastern in USA reveals that socks are stylish and elegant and available in plethora of colours so there is no use of that enduring process. Hence, they will likely to discontinue use of an enduring process in order to take more benefits. Stated in this way argument fails to mention sevaral points based on which, it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on an assumption for which, there in no any strong evidence. AS a result the author's argument unsubstantiated and unsupported.
First and foremost, the argument readily assumes that money spending on enduring process is worthless; because, many customers change their socks in every three months. This is merely an argument without a strong background. It might be possible most customers are biased towards changing the new socks because they like the design pattern on socks. so, durability might be not a problem. Also, how many customers change their socks in every three month? there is no any statistical information regarding customer survey who changes their socks in sort time span. Hence, the argument relies on shallow information that are not compelling as required.
Secondly, the argument claims that survey done in northeastern reveals that customer consider appearance of the socks rather than durability. Therefore, company should turn of the enduring process for profits. This is again very weak and unsupportive claim. It may be possible many customers consider the colour of the socks in that particualr area. Bur, in other county customers are more conscious towards quality. Therefore, survey of one area not able to tell the whole story about penchant of customers.
Lastly, the argument claims that we always do the advertisement of enduring process. still, people change their socks in three months. Here, argument fails to mention several points how many customers watched their advertise? Also, showing the enduring process does not provide a guarantee that customer consider that particular product.
To conclude, the author's argument is unpersuasive it stands. To bolster it, author must provide more concrete evidence. It could be considerably strengthened if author mentions all relevant facts. But without clearity of the information the conclusion is unplausible. As a result author's conclusion has a no legs to stand.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 409 350
No. of Characters: 2123 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.497 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.191 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.688 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.148 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.508 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.63 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.274 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.457 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 674, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...es on an assumption for which, there in no any strong evidence. AS a result the au...
^^
Line 1, column 714, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...no any strong evidence. AS a result the authors argument unsubstantiated and unsupporte...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 351, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: So
... they like the design pattern on socks. so, durability might be not a problem. Als...
^^
Line 5, column 456, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...hange their socks in every three month? there is no any statistical information regar...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 465, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...ir socks in every three month? there is no any statistical information regarding c...
^^
Line 13, column 86, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Still
... the advertisement of enduring process. still, people change their socks in three mon...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 18, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rticular product. To conclude, the authors argument is unpersuasive it stands. To ...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 269, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ormation the conclusion is unplausible. As a result authors conclusion has a no le...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2199.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 409.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37652811736 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49708221141 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77549515686 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484107579462 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 671.4 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 19.7664670659 152% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 22.8473053892 57% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.4438996373 57.8364921388 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 73.3 119.503703932 61% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.6333333333 23.324526521 58% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 3.96666666667 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.196673033133 0.218282227539 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0487189268966 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0705911489595 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109407959904 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0661145059525 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.33 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 11.1389221557 65% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.