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 author’s argument that the Rialto must offer the same features as Apex to hold its share of moviegoers is flawed for various reasons. In the argument, the author not only draws a strong conclusion based on vague and unwarranted statements, but also tries to concludes to follow Apex without analysing the reasons for the decreasing pool of moviegoers. Furthermore, the author assumes that the Rialto Movie Theatre is similar to the Apex Theatre and the Rialto Movie Theatre can hold its share of moviegoers by following the Apex theatre which is flawed.
First, the author bases his conclusion on many vague and unwarranted statements. For example, when the new Apex theatre was opened last year with a video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system, the author doesn’t consider the magnitude of the response that was received by the Apex theatre. The underlying assumption is that the reaction would not provide any information on the outcome of following the footsteps of Apex. For example, if the response of the Apex theatre is not great, it is incorrect to conclude that Rialto theatre would be able to hold its share of moviegoers by just offering the features as Apex theatre. Furthermore, when 85 percent of respondents reported that the high price of newly released movies prevents them from going to movies more than five times per year in a recent survey, the author makes an assumption that the Rialto can increase its share of moviegoers by following the Apex theatre. The assumption is unwarranted because the author does not cite any evidence or analysis that relates the premise and conclusion. Since the author doesn’t provide any information about the kind of response the Apex theatre had received, analysis or evidence that can relate the survey outcome and his conclusion, it is challenging to draw such a firm conclusion.
Second, the author concludes to follow Apex theatre without analysing the reasons for the decreasing pool of moviegoers. The underlying assumption is that the reason for the decreasing pool of moviegoers would not provide any extra information in analysing the situation which is incorrect.
In conclusion, Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, the author fails to make a convincing case that the Rialto must offer the same features as Apex to hold its share of moviegoers is flawed for various reasons.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 396 350
No. of Characters: 1976 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.461 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.99 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.664 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.462 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.66 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.47 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.62 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.146 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 268, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'conclude'.
Suggestion: conclude
...warranted statements, but also tries to concludes to follow Apex without analysing the re...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1298, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'drawing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: drawing
...e and his conclusion, it is challenging to draw such a firm conclusion. Second, the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, second, so, for example, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2036.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 393.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18066157761 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84999999716 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 204.123752495 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.404580152672 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 628.2 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
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: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.7410586016 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.615384615 119.503703932 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.2307692308 23.324526521 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.14751968845 0.218282227539 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0646340904196 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0632071200292 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112593267408 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0493436766914 0.0628817314937 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 14.3799401198 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.36 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.