The argument claims that Monarch Books needs to open a cafeteria in its store to contend with its opponent, Regal Books. Stated in this way the argument: reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning and ill-defined terminology and fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily states that there would be a sharp decrease in the proportion of people in the less than ten age group, therefore Monarch Books should demolish children’s book section to make way for a cafe bar. This statement is a stretch since the author does not carefully consider the drawbacks when knocking down this book section. Suppose, for example, what if children’s books account for a huge amount of revenue of the store? Clearly, it would be a precipitate decision if it is just based on a single source of data. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that the recommendation comes from careful consideration.
Second, the argument claims that because Monarch Books has a large customer base, opening a cafe inside its store could help it have more customers. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between large customer base and having more customers when opening a cafe. To illustrate for the objection, how does the author ensure book buyers are would like to eat or drink at place? If the argument had provided evidence that indicating interests or habits of book readers of the store about food and beverage then the argument would have been a lot more cogent.
Finally, the statement is still ambiguous in many aspects. Does the Board of Directors do market research about their customer base? How many percent of their customers tends to stay at the store for a significant amount of time and would like to buy other things than books? Are there any trusted sources other than the national survey could be used to make the suggestion more reasonable? Does Regal Books successfully attract more customers since it opens its own cafe? Without persuasive answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore implausible. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts to support the opinion.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 432 350
No. of Characters: 2127 1500
No. of Different Words: 227 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.559 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.924 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.654 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.571 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.731 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.476 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.52 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.065 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 129, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'has'?
Suggestion: has
...g a cafe inside its store could help it have more customers. This is again a very we...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, if, second, so, still, then, therefore, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2192.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 432.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07407407407 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78784825772 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527777777778 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 678.6 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8915381387 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.380952381 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2380952381 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288074754821 0.218282227539 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0821153294497 0.0743258471296 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0761612268319 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146717625947 0.128457276422 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0793077945602 0.0628817314937 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.