The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals.
One year ago we introduced our first product, Bargain Brand breakfast cereal. Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top-selling cereal companies. Although the companies producing the top brands have since tried to compete with us by lowering their prices and although several plan to introduce their own budget brands, not once have we needed to raise our prices to continue making a profit. Given our success in selling cereal, we recommend that Bargain Brand now expand its business and begin marketing other low-priced food products as quickly as possible.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The argument recommends the directors from Bargain Brand Cereals to expand their business and begin marketing more low-priced products because of the company’s preceding success on their low-priced cereal product. However, there are some questions needed to be addressed in order to justify the recommendation.
The first question needed to be answered is: is their first low-priced product actually successful, or it is just a hit among customers. As the argument suggests, the low-priced cereal drew customers away from the top-selling cereal companies. The phenomena appears to be fallacious, however, since the product may be exaggeratedly advertised as the best bargain and attracts customers to purchase or simply give it a try. Therefore, without answering the issue above, we cannot ensure if the success from Bargain Brand Cereals’ new product actually lives up its name, or it is only a transitory trend in the market.
Secondly, the other question is drawn due to the lack of information of products from the competitors. Although the argument states that no other new products and marketing strategies from the competitors are frightening, the success of the low-priced cereal is unstable because it fails to take the existing top-brand products into account. Customers prone to choose top-brand products to secure safety and quality and these products usually come along with a large number of loyal buyers. Even though Bargain Brand Cereals’ new product overpowers others, its influence on those existing products remains unknown. If the new low-priced cereal can also replace top-selling cereal that are on people’s shelves for years? Without realizing the answer to this question, the recommendation is vulnerable.
Finally, although Bargain Brand Cereal wants to expand its business and begin marketing other low-priced food products as quickly as possible, it calls into question that if the profit made in the first year is adequate to cover the following investment. Both expanding business and experimenting new products require time and money and it probably won’t be success. We have to know if the profit earned with low-priced cereal is enough to support not only ongoing business, but also to its expansion, including constructing factory sites, hiring new employees and investing new flavor for potential products. Thus, the amount of profit earned previously and the cost of upcoming projects are necessary to better evaluate the recommendation.
In sum, the argument makes a sense financially and logically. However, there are some questions need to be addressed before we justify the recommendation. That is, if the low-priced cereal is successful enough or just a fading trend, if the cereal can beat other existing top brand cereals from the competitors and if the profit earned by it can cover the potential investment and support the business to continue flourishing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 259, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'appear'.
Suggestion: appear
...selling cereal companies. The phenomena appears to be fallacious, however, since the pr...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 309, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le because it fails to take the existing top-brand products into account. Custome...
^^
Line 5, column 461, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... these products usually come along with a large number of loyal buyers. Even though Bargain Brand...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 58.6224719101 87% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2488.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 453.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49227373068 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99971653575 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476821192053 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 754.2 704.065955056 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5020884338 60.3974514979 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.947368421 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8421052632 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363226213451 0.243740707755 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119935162383 0.0831039109588 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104301541921 0.0758088955206 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233279478398 0.150359130593 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0620768057846 0.0667264976115 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 100.480337079 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.