Before pouncing on the suggested move, it is important to scrutinize what has been presented here. A thorough analysis of certain points will help the Production Company in taking an informed decision about the next fortiuous strategy.
Before pouncing on the suggested move, it is important to scrutinize what has been presented here. A thorough analysis of certain points will help the Production Company in taking an informed decision about the next fortiuous strategy.
The memo assumes that viewership only relies on the number of people attending their shows physically at the screening. With the advent of on-demand streaming platforms, a lot of people prefer streaming the movies on their laptops than actually going to the screening. Therefore, it is not justified to assume that the paucity in the number of people attending implies that fewer people are watching the movie especially if there exist other media to watch the same movies.
Moreover, the memo does not provide any insight into how many people are actually reviewing the movie. It is important that the people who review the movie are representative of the general viewership if this has to be considered in the evaluation of the argument. Additionally, the set of people whose reviews are being compared with the reviews from before should be similar for the comparison to be fair and have any value. Reviews by apples should not be compared with reviews given by bananas.
It is also crucial to consider if there have been certain other changes in the customer's experience that has led them to feel pleasant about their experience in general. Such false sense of content can stem from improved seting, film quality or better sound. These changes can result in a better overall experience leading the custmer to feel more satisfied with the movie and the subsequent increase in the positive reviews. The reviews may not be reflective of the quality of content of the movies being screened; the company may be incorrect in assuming that the good quality of movie is what is driving up the increase in good reviews.
Another essential question that would need to be answered is about the demography of the people attedning then and now. The memo does not imply anywhere that similar kind of people are attending the movies now as before. To elucidiate with an example: it is possible that that the kind of movies screened during the past year appealed more to a younger audience who appreciate it and give better reviews; on the other hand, the movies completely alienate the older people in the area who have different consumption patterns and dislike the kind of movies that are being screened so they skip going to the screenig altogether. Advertising in this case will not help if the movies are restricted to a certain segement of the viewership.
Gaining clarity on these aspects of the argument will help the company in ascertaining that their move of allocating a bigger budget pie to advertising can actually result the fruits as has been envisioned.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 470 350
No. of Characters: 2294 1500
No. of Different Words: 220 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.656 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.881 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.561 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.706 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.32 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.603 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 17, column 268, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: that
...cidiate with an example: it is possible that that the kind of movies screened during the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, as to, in general, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2354.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 470.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0085106383 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65612321451 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6203827227 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470212765957 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 736.2 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => 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: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.2495523098 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.777777778 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1111111111 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61111111111 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211077071745 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.087572523174 0.0743258471296 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.179994727265 0.0701772020484 256% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20576402102 0.128457276422 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.357083130647 0.0628817314937 568% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => 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.