The writer of the argument presents a scenario that captures the need for the organization to focus on domesticated cheese rather than imported cheese as a way of improving profits. However, the writer fails to address certain issues, and proposes arguments that are weak, and need further clarity, deliberation, and wide range of discourse to proof his points, and ascersion, such as seen below.
One of the major concern in the writer's argument is the fact that the writer said a survey was conducted on the need for domesticated cheese. It may be that most of the subscribers have severe ailment that forces physicians to prescribe domesticated cheese for them. The subscribers may only be those who love domesticated cheese, and have not tasted imported cheese. The writer fails to clarify and gives more explanation as to why their subscriber base (with full statistics of the varying cheese they have tasted) chose domesticated cheese. Hence these renders the writer's argument invalid, void, and lack substantial evidence to justify his claim
A major concern is the writer's inability to clarify why most people would prefer domesticated cheese is the Price of the cheese. If the people pay less for domesticated cheese, and pay more for imported cheese, there would obviously be a shift in mindset towards the domesticated cheese. As the law of demand of supply, at low prices, demands go up. People's affinity for a lower good price is enriching, and can be come a great way to influence their choices. Since the writer failed to provide enough details regarding the price of goods, and how they affect the demand for the domesticated cheese, his argument should be thrown out of the window.
Furthermore, taste may have changed. People's preference for domesticated cheese now may not suffice next two years. It took only last year for people's preference for domesticated cheese to skyrocket. What if another brand brings in a new set of imported cheese, to compete with the domesticated cheese, and people suddenly fall in love with it. The firm loses a lot. It is a fallacy to hinge profits on consumer's immediate taste. Since there is a short time in which people preferred domesticated and imported cheese to preferring only domesticated cheese, then the writer's argument is verbose, and lacks intuitive meaning.
The firm may have had opportunity of scaling their business by maximizing profit from domesticated cheese (as been in huge demands by the populace), however the writer needs to provide concrete, viable, and substantial evidence to persuade the teeming populace on the need to focus only on domesticated cheese production, until then the writer's statement, assumptions, and arguments should be treated lightly, not considered, and truncated for the good of the company.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 456 350
No. of Characters: 2290 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.621 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.022 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.75 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 177 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.8 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.088 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.368 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.544 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.132 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 33, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...low. One of the major concern in the writers argument is the fact that the writer sa...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 543, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... have tasted chose domesticated cheese. Hence these renders the writers argument inva...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 567, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ticated cheese. Hence these renders the writers argument invalid, void, and lack substa...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 24, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ify his claim A major concern is the writers inability to clarify why most people wo...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 567, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ring only domesticated cheese, then the writers argument is verbose, and lacks intuitiv...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 336, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...cated cheese production, until then the writers statement, assumptions, and arguments s...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, hence, however, if, may, regarding, then, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2350.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 456.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15350877193 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80917885543 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473684210526 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 735.3 705.55239521 104% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 14.0 1.67365269461 836% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 96.2877152067 57.8364921388 166% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.684210526 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.63157894737 5.70786347227 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221929929565 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.084786388509 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0688529098452 0.0701772020484 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145343048036 0.128457276422 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309025335411 0.0628817314937 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.