The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
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 topic raises a widely debated topic about the movies ratings provided by reviews and quantity of viewers. Indisputably, good reviews will attract more viewers to the theaters. Nevertheless, there should be more factors included there are not explored by the Super Screen Movie Production Company to de fact that people are not going to see its movies even with good reviews. Thus, I disagree with the fact that the main issue is the lack advertising from the newest realised movies.
First of all, the main problem could be within the theaters itself and not with the movie company. Numerous factors such as ticket prices, the movie’s available hours or number of places that the movie are being displayed. For instance, the movies might be available only on formats that are normally more expensive, included 3D or IMAX technology. In this way, the public could be preferring other “normal” releases that are cheaper. Also, considering that fact that the movies use those formats, not all theaters will be equiped to play them. In addition, the movies will be competing with other 3D ones, lowering the hours daily section available to the public. Consequently, the movies are already targeting fewer viewers, helping to create such low number of people that are attending the Super Screen-produced movies.
Secondly, another issue with the movies might be the content. Storylines that pleases the critics are normally the ones that the general public dislikes. It is not difficult to find a lot of “cult” or “indie” movies which have a 10/10 rating but a lot of people have never heard about them. Therefore, the company could try to create more friendly movies to try attract a different niche of people. They should find a balance between critics and viewers, even if a low grade accredited by the critics the movies might attract more people and thereby more revenue for the company.
Admittedly, the common sense shows that critics and quantity viewers at intimately related. Conversely, the movies company are experiencing the opposite and they need to try to revert that. The solution of increasing the budget creating more advertising may sound plausible. However, the conclusion above lacks more evidence that this is in fact the real problem and if the merchandising did not work the company could be in serious trouble. Therefore, the most conservative short-term solution should be perform further analysis to confirm the recommendation that they concluded.
In sum, although reaching more people with merchandising sounds a good solution, it could tend to veer off in irrelevant directions. Before spending more money on that, the company should evaluate all possibilities, including issues with the theaters and rating based on their general public and not only on specialized movie reviewers. Only after creating a concrete solution, the company would be able to focus their efforts more efficiently.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 388, Rule ID: AGREE_WITH_THE_FACT[1]
Message: Use simply 'disagree that'.
Suggestion: disagree that
... movies even with good reviews. Thus, I disagree with the fact that the main issue is the lack advertising ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...chnology. In this way, the public could be preferring other 'normal' releases that ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 130, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... critics are normally the ones that the general public dislikes. It is not difficult to find a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 507, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'performed'?
Suggestion: performed
...servative short-term solution should be perform further analysis to confirm the recomme...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 278, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... the theaters and rating based on their general public and not only on specialized movie revie...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for instance, in addition, in fact, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2491.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 473.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26638477801 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85169891609 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490486257928 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 763.2 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 15.0 4.99550561798 300% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.2704082797 60.3974514979 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.791666667 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7083333333 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.16666666667 5.21951772744 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163947954403 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0488778587626 0.0831039109588 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0559230961839 0.0758088955206 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0934506932083 0.150359130593 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0615297923689 0.0667264976115 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 100.480337079 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.