The market for the luxury-goods industry is on the decline. Recent reports show that a higher unemployment rate, coupled with consumer fears, has decreased the amount of money the average household spends on both essential and nonessential items, but especially on nonessential items. Since luxury goods are, by nature, nonessential, this market will be the first to decrease in the present economic climate, and luxury retailers should refocus their attention to lower-priced markets.
An argument is made for luxury retailers to transition into lower price-tier markets due to economic decline. The following paragraphs will discuss the soundness and logic of this recommendation.
To recapitulate, the author cites high unemployment rates and consumer fear as a cause for reduction in average household spending on physical items. Consequently, as luxury items are deemed non-essential, the author posits that the luxury good market will see the most precipitous drop and thus, that retailers of such goods should pivot their business model to target another type of market. However, these assertions fail to consider several lines of reasoning that could undermine the conclusion; particularly, surrounding the nature of the consumers and the market conditions.
One glaring oversight is the fact that these reports only address the deleterious effects of the current economic climate on the average household. The target market of luxury goods may be those who are unaffected by unemployment and fear; it is entirely possible that the average household consumer only makes up a very small portion of the luxury goods consumer-base, leaving the overall sales largely unaffected. another assumption being made is that a luxury retailer would have greater success by undergoing a pivot into a lower price-range market. Not only is this a very risky move to make for a well established business, but there is no telling that consumers will buy more of their goods if quality and price are reduced, nor is there consideration for whether the economic downturn will even last long enough to make this conversion worthwhile; it could be safer just to ride it out.
Overall, if the author wishes to make a compelling argument, they would be better served by collecting consumer data on the specific audience of luxury retailers. Further, the author could make a more successful argument by citing past examples of businesses that downgraded their product line during economic crises and overcame the challenges that sunk those who did not adapt.
Ultimately, the author's assessment omits several key factors which could heavily influence the well-being of a business and jumps to a conclusion before verifying the nature of the consumer relationship with the products as well as the risks associated with altering a business model on-the-fly.
Comments
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: 11 15
No. of Words: 372 350
No. of Characters: 1950 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.392 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.242 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.821 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 147 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 33.818 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.607 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.362 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.679 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.057 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 417, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Another
...g the overall sales largely unaffected. another assumption being made is that a luxury ...
^^^^^^^
Line 25, column 17, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... did not adapt. Ultimately, the authors assessment omits several key factors wh...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, however, if, may, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2015.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 372.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41666666667 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39173103935 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91649075333 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561827956989 0.468620217663 120% => OK
syllable_count: 639.0 705.55239521 91% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 22.8473053892 136% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.9367789095 57.8364921388 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.916666667 119.503703932 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.0 23.324526521 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.21915331665 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0831942895117 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0697190179388 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112391977174 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0733940588062 0.0628817314937 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.6 14.3799401198 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 48.3550499002 65% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.197005988 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.75 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.18 8.32208582834 122% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.1389221557 129% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.