T-4-Q15

T-4-Q15

TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?                                           BC

1. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring damage during shipping than are typical electronic products.

2. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most other products shipped by mail-order companies

3. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping

4. Whether there are cases in which customers blame themselves for product damage that, though present on arrival of the product, is not discovered until later

5. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping companies it uses to ship products to its customers

我把它当成评价来做的，意思也看得懂，就是说这个投递公司要求用新而且贵的包装材料去包装货物，但是呢，经理说总的成本不会受到影响，因为它等于因为没有包装好又重新推回来的商品的成本．

现在想想Ｂ是肯定８对的，可是这个c怎么解释呢～～～～～～

原文重述一下，新包装增加的成本与原来因为运输过程产生损坏而换货增加的成本基本相等。也就是说，用了新包装可以消除运输中的损伤，也就不需要支付额外的换货成本。

C的意思是，在原来产生换货的货物损坏中是否有相当数量的损坏是在运输前就产生的？就是说，存在一种可能，十间换货中有８件在运输前就是坏的，在这种情况下及时更换包装也不能解决问题。

yeah!i got it!

many thx!!

A为什么不对?就是看这个产品是否更容易损坏?如果容易损坏的话,就可以采用新的包装,如果不容易,就可以不换包装呀?

想不出这个怎么错了

thanks

啊哦..老贴被ls的翻出来了~~呵呵

是这样的,A实际上是无关选项,它问的是包装和成本的关系,你说了它里面的product显然是无关的啦..

the 2ed floor has explained it very clearly~ good luck

我还是有点不太理解，所以不好意思翻了老帖。

A和B都是比较产品的。做两级回答，如果产品易损坏，那么是支持原文；如果产品不易损坏，那么花成本去包装的话，不是削弱吗？

无辜小弟的建议：

货物出现损坏要赔偿，换包装可以避免。

黑老大（选项C 的意思）：

要评估这个方案，最重要的是比较采用新包装导致的增加的成本与更换运输途中的货物损害而造成的损失孰大孰小。而该题没有提供这个选项,所以继续往下推：

第二步，因为通常不能直接评估后者，我们通常需要知道出厂损坏率、运输导致的损坏率、以及客户退换货物率，通过这三者计算到底有多少退换是直接由运输损坏引起的。

所以C中所说的退换产品中由于出厂损坏的比例是否大，就是上述所述衍生的一种估算方法。而AB那些拿这种产品和其他产品比较的方法，实际生活中可能也会用到，前提是已知道其他产品的相关损害率的数值，通过类比来计算所述的比率。而这题中显然是没有牵涉到这些信息。