The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.
“According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising.”
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The advertising director's recommendation to increase the production company's advertising budget is an inadequate solution to address declining attendance at Super Screen's movies.
A more appropriate strategy could be developed by asking some questions about this recommendation and subsequent plan. Are the movie reviewers a representative sample of the movie-viewing population? Did the quality of Super Screen movies decline during the past year? And do movie-goers consider reviews at all in their decision to attend movies at Super Screen? Most likely there are other changes in the market or factors in attendance that better explain this decline; therefore Super Screen would be better served to reallocate budget in other areas.
First of all, it is possible that the movie-reviewers do not adequately represent the viewers. If all of the reviewers are paid staff with college degrees over 35 years old, then they are not well-suited to evaluate a movie that is targeted to teens or young adults. The reviewers would ideally share a range of demographic qualities that match the target audience. The reviewers should also be independent from the production company to elicit honest feedback.
Additionally, it is likely there was another change that led to a decline in attendance. For example, did another production company enter the area and take away market share? Even online platforms such as Netflix or HBO may have removed viewers from the big box theater model. Assuming that the market was relatively stable, Super Screen's quality of film is a factor: if scripts were rushed, lesser-known actors chosen, and special effects skipped then viewers may lose interest due to poor quality of the product.
A detrimental assumption made by the advertising director is that the reviews are a large factor in decision-making of moviegoers. He seems to want to increase the budget to advertise the reviews; however, it may be far more effective to advertise the movies in a wider market or spend those dollars on making improvements to the product itself.
Super Screen should consider other recommendations before shifting funds to advertising and reviews.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 99, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ot adequately represent the viewers. If all of the reviewers are paid staff with college d...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, for example, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2086.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 389.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.36246786632 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01975266642 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562982005141 0.468620217663 120% => OK
syllable_count: 650.7 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.3607333258 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.789473684 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4736842105 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279500518754 0.218282227539 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0849967601357 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0795186100783 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127811099501 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0747074234725 0.0628817314937 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.