Should Super Screen spend more on advertising?
The advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company proposes that a greater percentage of budget should be allocated to advertising, claiming that the reason why a decreasing number of people attended its movies lies in the lack of public's awareness of the high-quality movies. However, his statement is untenable upon scrutiny.
In the first place, the percentage of positive reviews increased while fewer people attended the movies does not necessarily indicate satisfactory quality. A decrease in the total amount of reviews will increase the proportion of positive reviews itself, even when the number of positive reviews remains the same or even be smaller.
Even if indeed more positive reviews than before were received, we still cannot conclude that the movies are of good qualities. On the contrary, it could actually be an evidence of poor qualities. Perhaps lots of people did not go to see a Super Screen-produced movies because they saw one before and it was unsatisfactory. And those who still attend the new movies are the people who really enjoy movies made by Super Screen for some reasons. Then there is no wonder why they will give positive feedback. Therefore, customer surveys should be conducted to investigate the real opinions of customers and see if there are quality problems.
In addition, no evidence is given to support the argument of public's lack of awareness. It is entirely possible that people are well informed of Super Screen and its movies but they are just not interested, which again indicates problems of movie qualities.
Even though the advertising was indeed not effective, it would not necessarily due to lack of funds. Perhaps sufficient funds were allocated but the ways or channels of advertising are inappropriate, or advertisements were targeted to wrong groups of people. If this is the case, then what Super Screen should do is not to allocate more funds, but to improve it marketing strategies.
To sum up, whether the decline in audiences is resulted from qualities of movies or ineffectiveness of advertising should be investigated further and multiple ways of addressing the problem should be cautiously compared and the best one chosen.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/following-taken-me…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 357 350
No. of Characters: 1821 1500
No. of Different Words: 190 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.347 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.101 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.838 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.312 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.544 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.601 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.066 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, really, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, in addition, on the contrary, to sum up, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1871.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 357.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24089635854 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92412289545 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 597.6 705.55239521 85% => 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: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.4478532457 57.8364921388 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.9375 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3125 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.9375 5.70786347227 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249862594923 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0751216635728 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0787815734607 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133931798833 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0842253668245 0.0628817314937 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.