The argument claims that the new venture of Techcorporation into satellite television will prove to be highly profitable for those who invest in it now.This is based on the premise that for the first time in 10 years, a company that has developed satellite technology has been approved by the FTA to compete with the current satellite provider. The author has also based his conclusion on a survey conducted last year, that indicated over 80% of respondents were dissatisfied with the current satellite provider, and would want to switch to another provider if the industry were not a monopoly. While the message the author is trying to convey in his argument is conspicuous, the way he goes about it is flawed.Though, at first glance the advice that the author gives, seems convincing, on a closer inspection we realise that it is not foolproof.
Based on the results of a survey conducted last year, the author has concluded that investment in Techcorporation will be lucrative.However, the author fails to consider the actual numbers.He makes an egregious mistake of relying on the feedback of 80% of the respondents of the survey.This reliance would not have been erroneous, if the the author had corroborated the survey result with the actual number of people who took the survey, and if they were the right representation of the desired investors, whom the author wants to convince. This is a common quintessence of misinterpretation of the results of sampling.If only 100 people took the survey, then the result is not impactful enough to make a decision of advising investors to invest in Techcorporation, rendering author's argument untenable.
Furthermore, just because Techcorporation has received the approbation by FTA, doesn't make it a reliable satellite provider, or an equally good competitor. Only because its technology is good, doesn't guarantee that there will be no problem in broadcast when catering to a huge demand or in telecast to remote places. Had the author buttresed his argument with beta test results that indicated that Techcorporation was able to address all the challenges faced by current satellite providers, his argument wouldn't have been contentious.
Likewise, had the author presented substantiated evidence as to tech corporation will not give in to the monopoly by charging exorbitantly; if at all the competitors are doing so currently, the willingness of the consumers to switch to another provider will be justified.The author doesn't tell us why the consumer are dissatisfied with the current providers - is it because of the content, or the charges or the timing or the signal quality or frequent interferences and thus attenuation of signals. If it is only content and pricing, then i wonder how a new technology will be able to improve on that. If it is the technical glitches that is causing the dissatisfaction, then a technology may justify the shift. It is these questions that the author must address to make his argument more convincing.
Thus, while the author tries his best to raise his advocate to urge investors to pick Techcoporation for investment this term, his argument is riddled with many unwarranted assumptions. There in no conclusive information in the given paragraph, to espouse his view, that the new venture of Techcorporation will prove to be highly profitable for those who invest in it now.
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
the arguments are not on the right track.
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 559 350
No. of Characters: 2760 1500
No. of Different Words: 252 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.862 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.937 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.03 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 203 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 154 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 115 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 80 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 37.267 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 21.877 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.36 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.602 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.132 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 153, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...ofitable for those who invest in it now.This is based on the premise that for the fi...
^^^^
Line 2, column 116, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Though
...ous, the way he goes about it is flawed.Though, at first glance the advice that the au...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 133, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...nt in Techcorporation will be lucrative.However, the author fails to consider the actua...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 190, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: He
...or fails to consider the actual numbers.He makes an egregious mistake of relying o...
^^
Line 4, column 287, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...of 80% of the respondents of the survey.This reliance would not have been erroneous,...
^^^^
Line 4, column 335, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...iance would not have been erroneous, if the the author had corroborated the survey resu...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 335, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...iance would not have been erroneous, if the the author had corroborated the survey resu...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 620, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: If
...terpretation of the results of sampling.If only 100 people took the survey, then t...
^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... rendering authors argument untenable. Furthermore, just because Techcorporatio...
^^^
Line 6, column 80, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...on has received the approbation by FTA, doesnt make it a reliable satellite provider, ...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 194, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...r. Only because its technology is good, doesnt guarantee that there will be no problem...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 505, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...rrent satellite providers, his argument wouldnt have been contentious. Likewise, had...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 272, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...h to another provider will be justified.The author doesnt tell us why the consumer ...
^^^
Line 8, column 283, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...r provider will be justified.The author doesnt tell us why the consumer are dissatisfi...
^^^^^^
Line 8, column 541, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...If it is only content and pricing, then i wonder how a new technology will be abl...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, likewise, may, so, then, thus, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2830.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 548.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16423357664 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83832613839 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21336669685 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 254.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.463503649635 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 883.8 705.55239521 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 39.0 22.8473053892 171% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 133.088297374 57.8364921388 230% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 202.142857143 119.503703932 169% => OK
Words per sentence: 39.1428571429 23.324526521 168% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.21428571429 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 15.0 5.25449101796 285% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186258605539 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0657249039632 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0687457023967 0.0701772020484 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0995608301655 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0676272821317 0.0628817314937 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.4 14.3799401198 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.89 48.3550499002 66% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.5 12.197005988 152% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.24 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 29.5 12.3882235529 238% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 17.6 11.1389221557 158% => OK
text_standard: 30.0 11.9071856287 252% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.