The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States Only about 2 percent of customers have complain

Essay topics:

The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.

"Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, to avoid the expense of purchasing butter and to increase profitability, the Happy Pancake House should extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well."

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.

Since only about 2 percent of customers have complained, the author infers that Happy Pancake restaurants can replace the Butter with Margarine. As a result, the company will earn more profits. However, this conclusion is unreasonable, because many questions needed to be explained.

To begin with, a threshold question involves the definition of no complain. The arguer fails to define this critical term. If 98 people out of 100 defined as no complaining, then no complaining is irrelevant to happing. For example, maybe people are not happy but also not complain, or think butter is not significant. In short, without a clear definition of no complain, it is impossible to assess the strength of the argument.

Even though 98 people out of 100 defined as happy, the validity of sampling methodology conducted at Happy Pancake House restaurants is doubtful. Because people cannot know how many servers and customers attend the survey, this sampling data could not represent the real case. Furthermore, severs’ answer would not have reference value. Therefore, if not offer the specific number of customers and servers, the validity of survey is doubtful.

Further, the author’s conclusion that to avoid the expense of purchasing butter will cause to increase profitability is unwarranted. Profit is a factor relating to not only revenue, but also cost. It’s entirely possible that customers do not want to come here, and costs are not decreasing will offset, even outweigh the revenue. Besides, a myriad of other unexpected occurrences, such as unfavorable economic depression, might prevent Happy Pancake House restaurants from being as
profitable as the argument predicts.

To sum up, since many questions needed to be explained, this conclusion is unwarranted. First of all, the author must make clear the definition of term about no complaining and happy. Secondly, the number of servers and customers attending the survey must be offered. Finally, author have to preclude some other possible factors that will undermine the profits. If author can complete this recommendation, the conclusion will be more reasonable.

Votes
Average: 6 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 92, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'increasing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: increasing
...expense of purchasing butter will cause to increase profitability is unwarranted. Profit is...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 436, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rable economic depression, might prevent Happy Pancake House restaurants from bei...
^^
Line 7, column 483, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... Pancake House restaurants from being as profitable as the argument predicts. ...
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, for example, in short, such as, as a result, first of all, to begin with, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1816.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 334.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4371257485 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95040701838 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541916167665 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 556.2 705.55239521 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9672992686 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.4761904762 119.503703932 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9047619048 23.324526521 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 5.70786347227 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.223234474714 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0590165326911 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0891102964372 0.0701772020484 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109778383495 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0803155182553 0.0628817314937 128% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.3550499002 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 12.3882235529 44% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 334 350
No. of Characters: 1736 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.275 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.198 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.796 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.905 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.004 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.27 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.5 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.016 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5