I observed a
A striking resemblance has been seenbetween the success rates of the Netherlands and that ofthe US. In the study byMartynova and Renneboog (2010) it already became clear found that shareholder protection was almost equal between the US and the Netherlandsin both countries. This correspondedcorresponds to the fact that they both have a success rate is of approximately the 40%.
At least one
More than 1 hedge fund acquired a share in 14 the company in fourteen of the 36 listed companies in my database. Of these, 10 of thosewere working together to achieve certain goals. The hedge funds held a share in the company for an average length of hedge funds holding a share in the company is531 days. Although Brav et al. (2008) considered may find this long-term period, I consider 531 days is still to be seen as to be short-term.
The average percentage of voting power
is initial ranges between 8.06% and the maximum voting power is 10.10%. From By looking at this data, it can be concluded that hedge funds are not generally involved in acquiring controlling blocks of stock. Due to the fact that Because shareholders have an opportunity to go to the OK, they have a fair reasonable chance of getting having their demands fulfilled. The OK likes prefers to solve disputes between shareholders and management by taking enacting provisional measures that improve the dialogue between the two parties. As a consequence, the parties often find compromises. Defensive measures that are taken by the management takes only to oppress shareholders are prohibited, and minority shareholders can change how they are treated by if a majority files an appeal.
Doing an extensive ly study of the shareholder activism undertaken by hedge funds in the Netherlands over a for the past decade required a great deal of precise work. But although Even though I did n’t not use any private information, this study pretty nice gives a provides insight into hedge fund activism in the country.
Example comment for Proofreading & Editing service:
“Since you indicated that you’re allowed to use first-person pronouns, consider using the active voice here. This is a simple way to make your writing clearer and more compelling. Read more about the active voice: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/passive-voice/.”
Example comment for Clarity Check:
“The extent to which this is an obvious consequence of the information you’ve provided is not entirely clear. Try to make this relationship more apparent. Reviewing your linking word choices may help you here.”
Example comment for Proofreading & Editing service:
“This is an example of an inflated phrase. Learn how to recognize such phrases and tighten your writing here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/write-shorter-sentences-clarify-dissertation/.“
Example comment for Structure Check:
“Make sure to include all the important elements of a discussion section. In particular, this section could be strengthened by discussing the limitations of the study in more detail. Read more about structuring your discussion here: https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation-structure/discussion/.”
Along with the edited document, you’ll receive a personal note in which the editor answers your questions and explains how your text has been improved.
Thanks for sending your thesis to Scribbr! Sustainability is an important issue these days, and you’ve done a good job of making a complex topic accessible and engaging.
Overall, your writing is clear, so I’ve focused on bringing the style and tone in line with academic standards. Many small inconsistencies have been corrected, and I’ve made your sentences more concise where appropriate. In the Most Common Mistakes overview, I’ve shared some academic writing tips to help you address these issues in the future.
To answer your question, I’m confident that your literature review chapter could be understood by a reader with little knowledge on the topic. That said, there are a few areas where additional context could be helpful. See my specific suggestions in the comments and checklists.
I hope that this feedback is helpful to you as you revise your thesis. Best of luck finishing up the project!
Language / Grammar / Capitalization
The names of theories, models, disciplines and ideas should generally not take capital letters.
Despite what the
Utility Maximization Model suggests, people do not always act in their own self-interest—a significant finding in Behavioral Economics .
Language / Punctuation / Apostrophes
Apostrophes should not be used to make plurals. This also applies to abbreviations, acronyms and decades.
NGO’s were especially active in the 1970’s .
Academic style / Word choice / Tone
Academic writing is generally more formal than other kinds of writing—avoid casual, everyday language and slang.
A lot of studies have tried to find out why we remember certain photos but not others.
Academic style / Word choice / Repetition and redundancy
Good academic writing is concise—it doesn’t use more words than necessary to make a point. If one or two words can take the place of several, choose the shorter option.
the year of 2018, the researchers interviewed a total of 75 individuals in order to better understand the concept of platform-based work.
Academic style / Conventions / Abbreviations
An acronym should not start a sentence, as this is typically considered too informal. Either revise the sentence so that the acronym no longer comes first, or spell out the full term.
NGOs provided their input during the planning phase.
You’ll also receive an overview of errors to watch out for, with personalized tips to improve your language and academic style.
The goal is to help you recognize your mistakes and become a better writer.
With the Structure Check, your editor provides feedback on structural issues such as repetition and redundancy, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the use of headings.
You’ll also receive a Structure Check Report focused on the organization of chapters and sections. The report identifies where you should focus your efforts as you revise the paper.
Tailored to your document type, it gives an overview of elements that are missing or out of place, along with links to in-depth articles that will help improve your structure.
The text has a logical beginning, middle and end.
Feedback editor: Your paper has a clear trajectory with a beginning, middle and end. You’ve done an excellent job of exploring your thesis that democracy always leads to demagogy. Nice work!
The argumentation makes sense.
Feedback editor: You talk about 50 people who disagree with the current political situation, but you do not specify the sources that substantiate this claim. I also recommend that you look at your statement that democracy is the best form of government. The question here is “According to whom?” If this is your own opinion, you need to make that clearer.
The information is presented in a logical order.
Feedback editor: Remember that your readers haven't studied this topic as much as you have. Be sure to give them the information they need to understand your arguments. For example, at the end of the introduction, explain the terms "macropartisanship" and “deterritorialization” to ensure your readers understand these concepts. In addition, I recommend elaborating on the related studies, so your readers have a proper framework for understanding your research.
The information seems valid and reliable based on the argumentation.
The text does not contain any unintentionally contradictory information or arguments.
Feedback editor: In Section 4.1, you state that no respondents were satisfied with the current situation. However, in your conclusion, you say that three respondents had no opinion. Be sure to reconcile these points or make corrections if necessary.
No information that is relevant for further understanding of the text seems to be missing.
The examples used are relevant.
Feedback editor: Yes, absolutely. However, you have included more than enough examples to make your point. In the comments, I've highlighted examples that you might consider deleting to keep your paper focused and concise.
You take into account that the reader might not know everything about this topic.
Feedback editor: You might consider adding more historical background information in Section 3.2 when you discuss democracy in the Middle East. At present, that discussion implies a high level of background information on the part of readers. It’s okay to assume that your readers have some familiarity with the events you’re talking about, but adding a few reminders for readers would be helpful. For example, the first time you refer to Mubarak, you might add an aside telling readers that he was Egypt’s president from 1981 to 2011.
The subject of the document is clear.
The purpose of the document is clear.
Feedback editor: Your goal is clear in principle, but only after reading the entire text. I recommend making this clearer earlier on. You can do so by explaining the factors that led you to form your your hypothesis that democracy always leads to demagogy in the Introduction chapter.
The most important question to be answered in the document is clear.
Feedback editor: Although I understand what you want to say, you have not specifically stated what the final conclusion of your text is. You should therefore take a careful look at my comment on page 54.
The answer to the above question, namely the conclusion, is clear.
The methods used to arrive at this answer are clear.
Terms are explained in a clear and precise manner.
Feedback editor: Yes. However, note that “macropartisanship" and “deterritorialization” need to be explained earlier, as I mentioned in the text logic checklist.
Further important information, such as the study’s limitations and recommendations, is described clearly.
Want to contact us directly? No problem. We are always here for you.
The fastest turnaround time is 24 hours.
You can upload your document at any time and choose between three deadlines:
At Scribbr, we promise to make every customer 100% happy with the service we offer.
Our philosophy: Your complaint is always justified – no denial, no doubts.
Our customer support team is here to find the solution that helps you the most, whether that’s a free new edit or a refund on the service.
Yes, if your document is longer than 30,000 words, you will get a sample of approximately 2,000 words. This sample edit gives you a first impression of the editor’s editing style and a chance to ask questions and give feedback.
You will receive the sample edit within 24 hours after placing your order. You then have 24 hours to let us know if you’re happy with the sample or if there’s something you would like the editor to do differently.
Yes, in the order process you can indicate your preference for American, British, or Australian English.
If you don’t choose one, your editor will follow the style of English you currently use. If your editor has any questions about this, we will contact you.
Yes, regardless of the deadline you choose, our editors can proofread your document during weekends and holidays.
Example: If you select the 24-hour service on Saturday, you will receive your edited document back within 24 hours on Sunday.
Our APA specialists default to APA 7 for editing and formatting. For the Reference Check you are able to choose between APA 6 and 7.
Scribbr can proofread any kind of academic admission document, including:
Every Scribbr order comes with our award-winning Proofreading & Editing service, which combines two important stages of the revision process.
You might be familiar with a different set of editing terms. To help you understand what you can expect at Scribbr, we created this table:
|Types of editing||Available at Scribbr?|
Correction of superficial mistakes, such as typos, misspellings, punctuation errors and consistency errors.
This is the “proofreading” in Scribbr’s standard service. It can only be selected in combination with editing.
Focus on grammar, syntax, style, tone and the conventions of the field. The editor also considers the internal logic of the text and flags any obvious contradictions.
This is the “editing” in Scribbr’s standard service. It can only be selected in combination with proofreading.
Focus on language, style, concision and choices. The editor helps you strengthen your story, polish your sentences and ensure that your use of language drives home your ideas.
Select the Structure Check and Clarity Check to receive a comprehensive edit equivalent to a line edit.
|Developmental editing (i.e. content editing, substantive editing)|
This is the first step of the editing process and applies to very early drafts. The editor helps you structure your ideas, decide what story to tell and find direction for your writing.
This kind of editing involves heavy rewriting and restructuring. Our editors cannot help with this.