The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore, a chain of video rental stores.
“In order to reverse the recent decline in our profits, we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore’s ten video rental stores. Since we are famous for our special bargains, raising our rental prices is not a viable way to improve profits. Last month our store in downtown Marston significantly decreased its operating expenses by closing at 6:00 PM rather than 9:00 PM and by reducing its stock by eliminating all movies released more than five years ago. Therefore, in order to increase profits without jeopardizing our reputation for offering great movies at low prices, we recommend implementing similar changes in our other nine Movies Galore stores.”
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 statement recommends a solution to hinder further decline in profits of Movies Galore which is a video rental store chain with ten stores. As the author claims, the Movies Galore owns its reputation to offering great movies at low prices. Therefore, the author concludes they cannot increase their prices. Instead, the author recommends to change opening hours and eliminate some types of movies as an alternative approach to compensate the recent decrease in profits. Although this solution was successful in downtown store of Marston, the author cannot reach at the conclusion that the recommendation is also applicable for other stores without answering ambiguities. So the argument is refutable.
The first problem with the recommendation is that the statement deprives of sufficient evidence regarding the true source of Movies Galore’s reputation. If the author seeks to rely on the fact of low prices as a reason of the Galore’s popularity, he should compare the prices of Galore to other video rental stores in the area and provide reliable statistics and information. Otherwise, one can conclude that alternative features such as long working hours or movie types made them favorable to customers and if they eliminate these qualities the recommendation is not valid.
Additionally, it is possible that people are inclined to use online movies stores to watch their favorite movies. In this case, suggesting the Movies Galore to create a website to provide customers with online services is more reasonable than reducing operating expenses. Furthermore, Galore can hire a team of marketing to assess their expenditures and advertise Galore’s movies in new online markets.
Another problem with the argument is that the recommendation is based on an experiment in downtown Marston where one of the rental stores is located. As the author argues, the store is in Marston has reduced working hours from 9 PM to 6 PM and has eradicated movies released more than five years ago. The results of this changes were successful for downtown Marston, but what if the people of other regions do not prefer the changes. Do the people of other regions have time to visit Galore before 6 PM? What movies do the people of other regions frequently watch? Do they prefer new movies or old ones? The author is required to answer these questions and illuminate the ambiguities to validate the recommendation.
To recapitulate, applying significant changes to all stores of the Movie Galore chain store requires further investigations and cannot be based on the results of one region. The recommendation needs to be examined according to the above mentioned possibilities and author has to bring concrete evidence to answer the questions, otherwise the recommendation is not tenable.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
also need to argue:
...and by reducing its stock by eliminating all movies released more than five years ago.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 445 350
No. of Characters: 2293 1500
No. of Different Words: 210 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.593 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.153 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.871 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 192 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.19 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.545 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.381 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.113 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 316, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ore than five years ago. The results of this changes were successful for downtown Ma...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, regarding, so, therefore, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2350.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 445.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2808988764 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59293186426 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00495403777 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478651685393 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 759.6 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.2877192612 57.8364921388 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.904761905 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1904761905 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.57142857143 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208687229371 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0648413225588 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0649691695389 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120683928813 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0514522745068 0.0628817314937 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.