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 business plan suggested by the manager of the Rialto Movie Theatre that it should make big changes and follow the footsteps of the Apex Theatre in the mall is logically unsound since, it disregards certain momentous assumptions.
Initially, the argument presumes that since the facilities like video arcade, plush carpeting and seats and the state-of-the-art sound system works for Apex Theatre, it may not necessarily work for Rialto Theatre. The reasons could be two-fold. First, that Apex Theatre is situated in a mall and people who go to the mall might indulge in those facilities. Second, the people going to Apex Theatre may prefer those facilities. Rialto Theatre, on the other hand is in downtown. The fact that the locations of both the theatres are different and the gentry going to them may also be different is not considered rendering this claim invalid.
Additionally, there is no statistical data provided to confirm that Apex Theatre is actually earning more profit because it has incorporated these facilities. And based on the fact that it is located outside the town, there is a possibility that people might not want to take longer drives to go the theatre. Had the writer proffered any documentation or study authenticating these facts, the assumption would not have been flawed.
Lastly, the argument puts forward a survey result saying that there is an 85 percent decrease in the movie-goers due to the increased costs of newly released movies the theatre business is plummeting anyway, so even if Rialto Movie Theatre makes these changes and follow Apex Theatre, there is no guarantee that people will come to watch movies at the former or the latter for that matter. On the other hand, it also depends on the people, they might prefer going to Rialto because it does not have any shenanigans and people, who just want to watch the move will enjoy the movie more in the peace and quiet.
Thus, the argument that Rialto theatre should make big changes incorporate the facilities like Apex theatre in order to make more profit and to hold on to its share in the declining pool of moviegoers fails to justify its claims and hence does not prove its conclusion.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 371 350
No. of Characters: 1782 1500
No. of Different Words: 183 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.389 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.803 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.491 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 84 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.538 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.533 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.375 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.562 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, anyway, first, hence, if, lastly, may, second, so, then, thus, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1829.0 2260.96107784 81% => OK
No of words: 370.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94324324324 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61559770442 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494594594595 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 705.55239521 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 94.6771530709 57.8364921388 164% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.692307692 119.503703932 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4615384615 23.324526521 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 5.70786347227 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193293850022 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0637213027024 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0798835407373 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124908981033 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0829708631018 0.0628817314937 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.3799401198 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 48.3550499002 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.