Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker’s consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker’s consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee.
The argument states that because the trend has been that the consumption of coffee increases with age and that of cola decreases, we should switch investments from cola to coffee. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it relies on. The conclusion is extreme and based on a leap of faith rather than logical deduction. As such, the argument remains weak, flawed, and unconvincing.
The first claim made by the author is the study suggesting an average coffee consumption increases with age from 10 to 60, where as that of cola declines. This claim itself does not substantiate the author's conclusion for several reasons. For example, the total consumption of coffee and cola is not stated. It could very well be that, even after the full decline, the total consumption of cola is still higher than that of cola. In which case the market size of cola remains larger, and we should not switch investment. Also, more important of information would be the trend of total consumption of the products rather than the trend in age; if coffee consumption is increaseing with respect to consumer age but the total consumption as a whole is decreasing, it means that the market size is shrinking.
The second point the author makes is that the trend remained stable for 40 years. The implicit conclusion here is that the trend will continue in the future. There is absolutely no guarantee that this will be the case. For instance, a new study suggesting the health problem caused by caffeine intake might very well cause the decline of coffee consumption. Also, Cola Loca may invent new recipe for a next mega hit softdrink. With little information provided in the argument, the implicit conclusion does not hold.
Finally, the author claims that the number of older adults will increase as the population ages over next 20 years, hence the demand of coffee will increase and that of cola will decrease. However, this conclusion is logically flawed. Surely the current 20 year old will become 40 year old after 20 years, but current newborn babies will become 20 as well. In fact, since the birth rate is increasing and population growth is positive, there will be more younger generation than the old. Therefore, the correct inference is that the demand of cola will increase. Unless the author provides additional evidence that supports his conclusion, the claim renders not only meaningless but also misleading.
In conclusion, the conclusion drawn by the author is extreme and unsubstantiated. The author could strengthen his argument by providing more relevant information such as the study of trend of overall consumption of the products and population growth by generation. Until such information is provided, one is left with an impression that the argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 124, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
...ption increases with age from 10 to 60, where as that of cola declines. This claim itsel...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... claim itself does not substantiate the authors conclusion for several reasons. For exa...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 352, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'well' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'wells'.
Suggestion: wells
...urrent newborn babies will become 20 as well. In fact, since the birth rate is incre...
^^^^
Line 7, column 451, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'younger' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: younger
...ation growth is positive, there will be more younger generation than the old. Therefore, the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, still, then, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, such as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 16.3942115768 183% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2403.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 479.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01670146138 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70770430551 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459290187891 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 721.8 705.55239521 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.918715026 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.12 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.16 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.76 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318247282245 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0841133750674 0.0743258471296 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123920144383 0.0701772020484 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172100511151 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.141539673344 0.0628817314937 225% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.3799401198 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.