ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 11464|回复: 11
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD-1-35

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2005-6-13 23:30:00 | 只看该作者

GWD-1-35

整篇文章没看懂 :-(


概念太多了,亏我还做了4年的营销,这些东东还是没看明白,高手们帮我解释一下吧,拜托了。



   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.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Q35:


Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?


              



  • The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.

  • The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.

  • The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.

  • The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.

  • The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.


  • --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    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.


  • --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Q37:


    According to the passage, which of the following factors distinguishes an indirect purchase from other purchases?




  • The ability of the purchasing company to subject potential suppliers of the purchased item to competitive scrutiny

  • The number of suppliers of the purchased item available to the purchasing company

  • The methods of negotiation that are available to the purchasing company

  • The relationship of the purchased item to the purchasing company’s end product

  • The degree of importance of the purchased item in the purchasing company’s business operations

  • 沙发
     楼主| 发表于 2005-6-14 06:41:00 | 只看该作者

    没人理我?


    555,救命呀。

    板凳
    发表于 2005-6-14 07:33:00 | 只看该作者

    偶说说偶的思路吧。不是牛银。


       In corporate purchasing,



           competitive scrutiny is typically


           limited to suppliers of items that are


    Line       directly related to end products.


    建立中心论点,和逻辑图的开头:competitive scrutiny 和suppliers of items 有个limited的联系。注意形容词typically, directly ,end。主要是为了后面区分。


      (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.


    在indirect purchasing中,公司用“supplier partnerships”,这个是一种列举的情况。这种strategy的效果就是which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny  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.


    两个因素影响公司去evaluate。导致四种情况:下面就是四种情况的列举。


    (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.


    四种情况中,两个因素一个多,一个少,或者同多同少。作者分别说出因素不同,导致公司选择的strategy是什么。主要要主意,不同的因素,有什么样的结果。



    整个说来,我觉得这篇文章和理科文中,那些有一大串吓死人的名词有点像。但是主要抓住各个概念之间的关系,文章并不难做。


    楼下偶来分析题目。


    [此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-14 7:35:50编辑过]
    地板
    发表于 2005-6-14 07:54:00 | 只看该作者

    Q35:


    Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?


                  



    1. The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.

    2. The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.

    3. The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.

    4. The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.

    5. The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.


    选C。定位点在


    that companies should


    (20)      use to evaluate the feasibility of


           subjecting suppliers of indirect


           purchases to competitive scrutiny.


    This can create four possible


    situations.。(这句话后面肯定就是列举了)


    感觉上,凡是structure type的题目,都是在要定位的句子,词语前面一点就会进行说明。


    Q36:


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



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

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

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

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

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

    选A。infer偶也做的不好。考试的时候就靠死记。 大家讨论吧。



    Q37:


    According to the passage, which of the following factors distinguishes an indirect purchase from other purchases?






    1. The ability of the purchasing company to subject potential suppliers of the purchased item to competitive scrutiny
    2. The number of suppliers of the purchased item available to the purchasing company

    3. The methods of negotiation that are available to the purchasing company

    4. The relationship of the purchased item to the purchasing company’s end product

    5. The degree of importance of the purchased item in the purchasing company’s business operations

    A。定位在第一段。In corporate purchasing,



           competitive scrutiny is typically


           limited to suppliers of items that are


    Line       directly related to end products.


    哎呀偶自己都说晕了,也不知道姐姐明白没。


    总结偶rc的做法就是,死记+逻辑图。欢迎大家拍砖。


    做完了对答案,偶的infer又错了。狂晕~~~~


    [此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-14 7:59:03编辑过]
    5#
     楼主| 发表于 2005-6-14 10:13:00 | 只看该作者

    谢谢蓝夕,你不仅是个牛mm,而且是个好mm。


    我就是对这些社科类的文章总也不开窍,被一大堆名词给吓倒。


    6#
    发表于 2005-9-26 07:58:00 | 只看该作者

    答案不对阿


    36.B    37.D


    7#
    发表于 2006-7-3 11:00:00 | 只看该作者

    36感觉好像无从下手 确定选B吗  我怎么觉得选E啊 定位 corporations often favor “supplier partnerships” (arrangements in which the purchaser forgoes the right to pursue alternative suppliers), which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny that might afford the purchaser economic leverage.上句说supplier partnership不换supplier的不好,E答案说当supplier不能换时 ,partnership是好的选择

    8#
    发表于 2012-3-18 17:42:11 | 只看该作者
    corporations often favor “supplier partnerships” (arrangements in which the purchaser forgoes the right to pursue alternative suppliers), which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny that might afford the purchaser economic leverage.

    E选项只说明了选择权被limited了,而原文中最后一句还有一个限定性条件 supplier也是few的。

    B项对应的这句话的意思企业支持supplier partnerships这种行为,这能够不恰当地在缜密的竞争审查中庇护供应商,而这种审查往往可以负担买方的经济杠杆。 言外之意就是买方可能会存在多付钱的现象
    个人意见
    9#
    发表于 2015-3-25 22:20:12 | 只看该作者
    顶一下8楼
    10#
    发表于 2015-12-13 00:58:02 | 只看该作者
    老帖子了,但是我想说我觉得36题选D.
    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, 2025-4-25 20:12
    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