The following appeared as part of a business plan developed by the manager of the Rialto Movie Theater.
"Despite its downtown location, the Rialto Movie Theater, a local institution for five decades, must make big changes or close its doors forever. It should follow the example of the new Apex Theater in the mall outside of town. When the Apex opened last year, it featured a video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system. Furthermore, in a recent survey, over 85 percent of respondents reported that the high price of newly released movies prevents them from going to the movies more than five times per year. Thus, if the Rialto intends to hold on to its share of a decreasing pool of moviegoers, it must offer the same features as Apex."
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 argument appears to be sound at the first glance. However, as more light is shed on the issue and more detailed factors are conceived, it is easy to see that the argument suffers from several grave fallacies in its assumption as well as commits a false analogy. The comparative study based on another theater with the present one cannot be taken as a suitable one to arrive at a proper decision.
Firstly, the reason behind the fall of Rialto movie theater is not mentioned clearly in the business plan. Since it is situated in downtown for a period of five decades, a good number indeed, a plausible solution could be arrived only if the details of the theatre are provided in detail. Also, it is mentioned that the apex theatre featured a video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system. Does it imply that the theatre under study lacked the above features and resources? if so, then how did it sustain for the myriad number of years? Was it desolate with no movie goers or people did not visit due to a proper lack of infrastructure? The above questions need to be answered to arrive at a proper solution to the problem mentioned in the passage.
Secondly, it has been noted that, in the apex theatre, in a recent survey, over 85 percent of respondents reported that the high price of newly released movies prevents them from going to the movies more than five times per year. The use of statistics is a shaky way of bolstering an already decent argument. if this is the case, then how can the manager be assured that moviegoers will come in more numbers to his theatre in large numbers? As a comparison has been made, do they intend to decrease the price of the tickets? further, a decrease in cost and lack of structure and facilities will not attract moviegoers as it is very important to maintain the structure for a good utilization.
Moreover, what is the guarantee that, with a posh attractive setup and an audio video system, more people will visit the place? The argument fails to address this issue which makes it unsound. Instead of choosing the same features offered by another theatre, the manager could think out of the box to come up with creative ideas like opening a cafeteria or play areas for kids, which could increase the moviegoers. As there is no evidence mentioned regarding the profit of apex theatre or the number of moviegoers, a proper conclusion or a solution cannot be offered based on the given data.
thus, it can be reiterated that, comparisons made blindly could only yield fatal results which could further decrease the chances of a good fortune. Before any final decisions are made, much work is left for the arguer to do to make his/her argument more logical and cogent. A comparative study could prove futile if the advantageous and disadvantageous are not measured properly which could only lead to further complications. thus, a careful study and examination is required to proceed further in implementing the ideas which would be considered a cliché’ rather than a fruitful one.
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: 19 15
No. of Words: 533 350
No. of Characters: 2469 1500
No. of Different Words: 263 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.805 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.632 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.555 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: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.053 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.66 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.058 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 507, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...acked the above features and resources? if so, then how did it sustain for the myr...
^^
Line 9, column 310, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
... bolstering an already decent argument. if this is the case, then how can the mana...
^^
Line 9, column 526, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Further
...d to decrease the price of the tickets? further, a decrease in cost and lack of structu...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...e offered based on the given data. thus, it can be reiterated that, comparisons...
^^^^
Line 17, column 429, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...uld only lead to further complications. thus, a careful study and examination is req...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2551.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 531.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80414312618 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80035803286 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68606819589 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 204.123752495 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5065913371 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 811.8 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5672387078 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.913043478 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0869565217 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95652173913 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.111184954529 0.218282227539 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0311041588024 0.0743258471296 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511306963877 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0581813924327 0.128457276422 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.039000636429 0.0628817314937 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 98.500998004 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
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.