The following is a recommendation from the Board of Directors of Monarch Books.
"We recommend that Monarch Books open a café in its store. Monarch, having been in business at the same location for more than twenty years, has a large customer base because it is known for its wide selection of books on all subjects. Clearly, opening the café would attract more customers. Space could be made for the café by discontinuing the children's book section, which will probably become less popular given that the most recent national census indicated a significant decline in the percentage of the population under age ten. Opening a café will allow Monarch to attract more customers and better compete with Regal Books, which recently opened its own café."
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 Board of Directors (bod) of Monarch Books (mb) recommends the opening of café in a book store in order to attract more customer and compete with Regal Books (rb), which has already done it. The bod has come to this recommendation on the basis of its large customer base, be in this location for more than 20 years and replacing the space reserved for Children books with space of café since national census predicted that percentage of children population going to decrease. However, the argument does not make a cogent case since it is rife with holes and assumptions. Before it can be properly evaluated, following questions must be answered.
First of all, are mb and rb comparable? Since, if not, the recommendation may not be true. For instance it may happen that after opening the café in rb, its revenue has not increased. And it is in a location entirely different from that of mb. For example, rb may exist where adult population is significantly higher than that of children and all these adults like to read only, but would not like to have coffee in the same store. Further, the question must be asked if rb has done it on the basis of same national census because it may happen that on the basis its own market research, it has decided that and because of which its revenue starts to fall since its own research predicted good market for adults while results of national census is verisimilitude. If both the examples were true, then the argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, do customers who come for reading books also inclined to having coffee? Since, if not, recommendation may be futile. For instance, it may happen that people who come to this rb have developed the habit of having coffee at some other store because of attractive price and ambience. Further, the answer must be sought on if the adults who are keen to come to mb for books, read only adult books. Since, it may happen that many of these adults are interested in reading child books, therefore, discontinuing the child books will lead to bad results. If both the instances were true, then the argument does not hold the water.
Thirdly, does children under age 10 contribute significantly in the overall revenue of mb? Because if not, then replacing its space will not bring in any positive results. Since, it may happen that children who are under 10 years of age and come to store for reading books just contribute 2 per cent to the total revenue, given the reading habits and penchant of children for books. Further, the bod must answer if national census predicted the same results for the location where it exists, since, it may happen that national census predicted the decline in children population at the country level but the population of children at the location of mb is going to increase significantly. And therefore, replacing its space with café will result in negative returns. Unless the recommendation is fully reliable and comprehensive, it cannot be used the support the argument.
While concluding, the recommendation as of now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the bod is offer to answer above questions and provide more answers, perhaps in the form of research study covering percentage contribution of children and adults, reading preferences of children and adults, population estimates for these two and its competitor’s strategy, then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 591 350
No. of Characters: 2815 1500
No. of Different Words: 225 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.931 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.763 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.672 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 185 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 145 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 106 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.64 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.359 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.288 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.46 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.04 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, while, for example, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 78.0 55.5748502994 140% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2905.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 591.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91539763113 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93056706295 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78325181181 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.399323181049 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 908.1 705.55239521 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 91.1251096021 57.8364921388 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.2 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.64 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.48 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => 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: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249142029318 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0689014103712 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0696719453427 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147336592919 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0793726115936 0.0628817314937 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.48 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 12.3882235529 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.