Legit Essay Writing Services Reviewed By Students

“Submit the instructions, let the writer do the job, download your paper! ” That seems like an easy process for getting academic content online. The website looks fine at first, but we were getting a bit concerned as we kept browsing through it. There is just too much content at the website (featured for the sake of SEO), and not enough of the information you need. The prices are okay, but the short deadlines are not specific. There is no blog or free samples, so you can’t assume what quality the writers deliver. That’s exactly why you need this ZEssay review. There are two main types of services here: academic writing (essays, term papers, theses and more) and business writing (articles, business plans, presentations and more). You can’t find a full list of services here, so you have to access the order form. Since this is a 4-step order form, you can’t see the full list of services offered before you create an account and provide full contact information.

That’s a huge problem. If you don’t find the service you need in the order form, you’ve wasted time for nothing and you’ll keep getting spam emails because you signed up. The range of prices seems affordable at first. There are 7 quality levels, ranging from High School to PhD. 47.73 per page, depending on the quality and deadline. Speaking of the deadline, that’s exactly where the problem is. ’t really know when you’ll get your paper, and the shortest deadlines are 13-23, 9-12, and 3-8 hours. There’s no certainty here. As it turns out, the prices are not that affordable after all. Unfortunately, the quality was NOT fine. We ordered an essay, just to make sure we were on the right track to reviewing this service for you. We received a draft of a paper, which was not edited at all. It lacked logical flow and we even noticed spelling mistakes. A professional writing service must not allow that to happen. 17 days. That’s a lot of waiting for a simple essay. When we asked for free revisions, the customer support representative said they didn’t offer such services. They say that the live chat is non-stop available, but you have to sign in if you want to access it. When you do access it, you won’t always find a representative online. You have to be really lucky for that. So we had to send email after email, just to get responses to our questions. After the delivery of our paper, we had to start a dispute. The customer representative was rude. When we tried to explain that every customer who paid for a paper deserves revisions, she said we were asking for something the service did not guarantee.

Focusing on remuneration as manager main motivation gives the opportunity to examine empirical evidence of what determines the amounts management receive. Martin Conyon and Paul Gregg Examined 170 firms between 1985 and 1990 . They looked into what factors determined top directors’ pay. In conclusion of their results, it is commented that the results they received pointed to previous, earlier studies , which showed that directors’ pay had very little to do with corporate performance. Therefore, from this evidence, profit, considered a major factor in determining corporate, would not affect the directors’ pay. This would be consistent with Baumol’s model and to a certain extent Marris’s model too. Baumol’s theory identifies sales maximisation as the primary aim. Marris’s model identifies the importance of growth which is identified as a factor with similar directors’ pay correlations. Conyon and Gregg also found from there results that there seemed to definite correlation between increases in directors’ remuneration and increase in sales again consistent with Baumol’s model. Paul Gregg, Stephen Machin and Stefan Szymanski, came to a similar conclusion in a later study (this study included the period from 1988 – 1991 when Britain was in recession).

Higher sales had a direct correlation with high directors’ remuneration and identified growth as a primary salary driver. David Shipley published a study in to pricing policies in British manufacturing firms in 1981 . Although his study was more specifically on the pricing policies his finding suggested that there was some support for profit maximisation in manufacturing firms’ management . The majority of firms in the study used multiple goals when setting pricing policies . This would not entirely be consistent with Baumol’s theory which states focus of management to maximise sales only and primarily. All other goals displayed by the study were, if not profit orientated, practiced under the premise that profit targets would be met. This is consistent with the operative profit constraint in Baumol’s theory and the job security constraint in Marris’s model. This study would point more towards Marris’s model as there is more emphasis on increasing profit if for no other reason than to improve the amount of money available to put into investment and improve growth while still satisfying shareholders.