ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1731|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD1-36

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2006-1-13 10:21:00 | 只看该作者

GWD1-36

  In corporate purchasing,


       competitive scrutiny is typically


       limited to suppliers of items that are


Line       directly related to end products.


  (5)      With “indirect” purchases (such as


computers, advertising, and legal


services), which are not directly


related to production, corporations


often favor “supplier partnerships”


(10)      (arrangements in which the


purchaser forgoes the right to


pursue alternative suppliers), which


can inappropriately shelter suppliers


from rigorous competitive scrutiny


(15)      that might afford the purchaser


economic leverage.  There are two


independent variables—availability


of alternatives and ease of changing


suppliers—that companies should


(20)      use to evaluate the feasibility of


       subjecting suppliers of indirect


       purchases to competitive scrutiny.


This can create four possible


situations.


(25)            In Type 1 situations, there are


many alternatives and change is


relatively easy.  Open pursuit of


alternatives—by frequent com-


petitive bidding, if possible—will


(30)      likely yield the best results.  In


Type 2 situations, where there


are many alternatives but change


       is difficult—as for providers of


employee health-care benefits—it


(35)    is important to continuously test


the market and use the results to


secure concessions from existing


suppliers.  Alternatives provide a


      credible threat to suppliers, even if


(40)     the ability to switch is constrained.


In Type 3 situations, there ate few


alternatives, but the ability to switch


without difficulty creates a threat that


companies can use to negotiate


(45)      concessions from existing suppliers.


In Type 4 situations, where there


are few alternatives and change


is difficult, partnerships may be


unavoidable.


Q36:


Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?


              



  • They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.

  • They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.

  • They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.

  • They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers’ end products.

  • They are least appropriate when the purchasers’ ability to change suppliers is limited.

  • 起初选B,答案也选B,后来仔细读了一遍,发现原文根本没提及paying more。后来感觉了一下应该选D。现在仍在困惑中,望高手指教!多谢!

    沙发
    发表于 2006-1-13 13:22:00 | 只看该作者

    B是对的.D不对,因为全文除了第一句讲了"direct"只外,全是讲"indiect purchases ". 对于"direct"没说可行不可行"supplier partner". B答案在第二段的27-30行(type1里讲的).


    另外对于文章理解是: 讲在"indirect"里采取"supplier patterner"的形式有"inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny "的弊病,所以引出了"type1, 2, 3"的情行.我是这样理解的.


    大家讨论.


    加油啊!!!

    板凳
     楼主| 发表于 2006-1-13 18:48:00 | 只看该作者

    说实话,我也没发现有什么地方直接指出对direct是否可行,可是line27-30好象也没有直接说明corporations 会在SP的情况下paying more吧(我是这么理解的),如果我理解的不对,就麻烦高手帮我解释一下吧!多谢!


    顺便说一下我对D的理解,文章一开头便说在direct的情况下,corporations会进行competitive scrutiny.而在indirect的情况下corporations会favor SP,那是不是对indirect进行一下取非就可以得到D了。但取非需要有转折和对比的意思出现是才适用,这里没有,不过大家可以读出在direct和indirect之间有转折的含义么(我觉得有)

    地板
    发表于 2008-5-17 17:30:00 | 只看该作者

    按照GMAT惯常的出题思路,很少有答案和原文分散在两个段落的呀~更何况direct indirect 的确有转折相互可取非的味道。所以我觉得d更加好,b莫名的提到了paying more原文没有给出。

    您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

    Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

    手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-8-5 12:43
    京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

    ChaseDream 论坛

    © 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

    返回顶部