ChaseDream

标题: [求助]OG11-12 [打印本页]

作者: yklinsmann 时间: 2008-7-24 11:56
标题: [求助]OG11-12

Cable-television spokesperson: Subscriptions to cable television are a bargain in comparison to "free" television. Remember that "free" television is not really free. It is consumers, in the end, who pay for the costly advertising that supports "free" television.

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the position of the cable-television spokesperson?
(A) Consumers who do not own television sets are less likely to be influenced in their purchasing
decisions by television advertising than are consumers who own television sets.
(B) Subscriptions to cable television include access to some public-television channels, which do
not accept advertising.
(C) For locations with poor television reception, cable television provides picture quality superior to
that provided by free television.
(D) There is as much advertising on many cable-television channels as there is on "free" tele-
vision channels.
(E) Cable-television subscribers can choose which channels they wish to receive, and the fees
vary accordingly.

看了OG的解释还是不太明白，所有OG上的题只有这道不明白了，一定是哪里想偏了，求哪位大虾给翻译一下，谢谢

作者: yklinsmann 时间: 2008-7-24 12:24
这道题没有人问过啊，怎么没人回呢。。。急啊

作者: rockmax 时间: 2008-7-24 17:01

结论: cable TV 比 "free"TV 便宜.

原因: "free"TV 并不 free, 消费者最终支付昂贵的广告

D 削弱, cable TV 与 "free"TV 的广告一样多.

clear?

作者: deedeexoxo 时间: 2008-7-24 17:02
答案是D吧？他说free tv不是免费的，因为consumer为广告最后在购买商品时付出费用。但是如果cable tv也有很多广告，那么consumer也在为cable tv的广告商在购买商品时付出费用。这样一来，相比cable tv， free tv就是免费的。不知道我说清楚了没有。国外的cable tv有月费，免费tv是有点事就可以看。

作者: yklinsmann 时间: 2008-7-24 17:17
明白了，谢谢各位拉

作者: xiaoniuren 时间: 2009-4-28 13:41

yes

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)