ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
打印 上一主题 下一主题

【速度】+【越障练习】GMAT得阅读者得天下,大家一起来练阅读吧

  [复制链接]
61#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-9-14 15:02:22 | 只看该作者
wpx 发表于 2018-9-14 13:53
练习速度,一分钟完全读不完怎么办。。大概扫过一遍的话就不太懂这个部分讲的啥..所以速度练习是相当于 ...

因为GMAT要求的速度是150-200 words每分钟嘛,所以速度部分比这个快就行了,然后争取扫过每个词,对整体意思有个把握就行
62#
发表于 2018-9-14 19:11:53 | 只看该作者
进击的智人阿飞 发表于 2018-9-14 15:02
因为GMAT要求的速度是150-200 words每分钟嘛,所以速度部分比这个快就行了,然后争取扫过每个词,对整体 ...

好的好的!
63#
发表于 2018-9-14 22:24:49 | 只看该作者
10月10要一站gmat了但是感觉阅读根本找不到感觉。。感觉根本做不完的样子。。。好慌。。想和楼主一起打卡 请问不回视写文章大意的话,是需要读的时候做笔记么??还是说只单独凭印象来呢?
64#
发表于 2018-9-15 17:04:52 | 只看该作者
wpx 发表于 2018-9-14 13:53
练习速度,一分钟完全读不完怎么办。。大概扫过一遍的话就不太懂这个部分讲的啥..所以速度练习是相当于 ...

其实扫读快速的略读法,反而更容易看清文章的结构和脉络,而不要纠结于文章的细枝末节。你试试看,我做这个一分钟练习的感悟
65#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-9-15 19:50:43 来自手机 | 只看该作者
Cynthia_1 发表于 2018-9-14 22:24
10月10要一站gmat了但是感觉阅读根本找不到感觉。。感觉根本做不完的样子。。。好慌。。想和楼主一起打卡  ...

我的建议是最好不要写笔记吧,因为考试的时候没有时间做笔记,这个越障也是培养一下短期记忆能力。别慌别慌我也是10月要考一次,第三战了哈哈
66#
发表于 2018-9-15 20:40:04 | 只看该作者
考试真的要1分钟200词吗。。。
67#
发表于 2018-9-15 23:44:33 | 只看该作者
进击的智人阿飞 发表于 2018-9-15 19:50
我的建议是最好不要写笔记吧,因为考试的时候没有时间做笔记,这个越障也是培养一下短期记忆能力。别慌别 ...

哎 想哭哭 总是看着看着就忘了前面讲的啥了。。楼主加油!一起加油!!
68#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-9-16 00:11:47 | 只看该作者
考完雅思了,终于可以和GMAT相亲相爱了,有种小别胜新婚的欣喜(我是个变态
1分钟200词是我自己的目标哈,因为我是那种读懂文章也可能做不对题的人,所以做每道题的时候会看比较久。但每个人的阅读策略其实是不一样的嘛,大家还是要根据自己的pace来
以供参考: GMAT长文章一般400词左右,短文章300词+
69#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-9-16 00:15:33 | 只看该作者
Wilma_dc 发表于 2018-9-15 17:04
其实扫读快速的略读法,反而更容易看清文章的结构和脉络,而不要纠结于文章的细枝末节。你试试看,我做这 ...

对的对的,感觉就是这样,知道哪部分信息在哪可以找到就行
70#
 楼主| 发表于 2018-9-16 11:38:25 | 只看该作者
【越障1-6】    from:   The Economist (1089 words)


Global express-package companies  (商业金融)

And then there were three?
Plans to merge two of the world’s big four express-package firms have raised competition worries
UPS’s bid for TNT could be dynamite
THEY work while we sleep, unloading planes and lorries, feeding packages and letters into huge sorting machines, and reloading them for rapid delivery to the four corners of the earth. Each itemis coded and tracked on its dizzying journey through many hands. Four companies dominate this express-package business: FedEx and UPS, based in America, andDHL and TNT Express in Europe. They own and run airlines, and fleets of lorries and vans; they operate hubs at airports where the sorting is done.
TNT is the outsider in the group, being smaller and more competitive on price. It is the market leader in two big European countries,Britain and Italy, reckons Transport Intelligence, a research firm. FedEx and UPS are a near-duopoly in the United States. DHL has 32% of the German market,around 40% in Asia and over 50% in central Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
That may already appear a worrying level of concentration, with a risk of tacit collusion or at least “soft competition” on price. So reducing the number of “global integrators”—as they are called in the trade—from four to three might seem a step in the wrong direction. But UPS, eager to beef up its presencein Europe, made a bid for TNT in February; a month later they agreed on a priceof €5.2 billion ($6.8 billion). If allowed to proceed without any disposals,the planned combination would have more than a quarter of the market in Britainand Italy, and nearly a quarter in France.
The European Commission (EC) is investigating these sorts ofconcerns. A decision is expected by the end of the year. The commission is nota soft touch: in March it meted out fines totalling €169m to 14 freight-forwarding companies, a different part of the logistics business,including some UPS subsidiaries, for price collusion. (DHL escaped a fine only because it was a whistle-blower.)

Package deal
Antitrust regulators worry especially about the effects oncompetition and innovation when it is a mave rick, like the price-cutting TNT,that is being eliminated. Andreas Schwab and Jean-Paul Gauzès, both members ofthe European Parliament, wrote to Joaquín Almunia, the EC’s commissioner for competition, in June, expressing worries. They noted that the deal would leave only one European integrator, DHL, competing in Europe against the Americanduo, whereas there is no substantial European presence in the United States market. DHL withdrew from the American domestic market in 2009, and also pulled out of the British, Chinese and French markets, because the margins were too low. (It still runs international services to destinations in these countries.)
The EC will have to examine not only the nature of the international express-package market today, but also how it is changing. Allfour firms are adapting to diminished traffic in letters and important documents because of e-mail, and the growing demand for parcel delivery to end-consumers generated by e-commerce sites such as Amazon. The average size of parcels sent from business to business is also growing, as global firms increasingly depend on speedy supply, and guaranteed delivery times, of partsand supplies. That has blurred the line between express services and airfreight, and led to increasing use by integrators of spare hold capacity on passenger planes.
DHL has seen these types of business flourish even as recession bites in Europe. It is enjoying increased traffic in high-value technology items and in health-care products (an area in which all four firms are developing specialist divisions). One of TNT’s attractions for UPS is its customer base in the health-care and fashion industries. Another is the dense road network across the 39 European countries it covers.
Last year TNT was reeling: its operations lost money in Asia andthe Americas and its share price lagged those of its rivals. The first half of2012 saw the start of a turn around, with profits in Asia and lower losses inthe Americas. From looking like a company which needed a rich partner and araison d’être, TNT could now credibly stay independent, if the regulators sorule.
TNT’s business model, like that of DHL, relies on partnerships with other services, such as airlines and haulage companies. Around half of its operating expenses are incurred with subcontractors. TNT has made acquisitionsin Brazil, Chile and China, but its strategy, before the merger was announced,was to extend its coverage through partnerships. UPS and FedEx operate morecentrally from their headquarters in Atlanta and Memphis, though they do useagents in far-flung countries.
Staying faithful to Liège
DHL would benefit from a UPS-TNT merger in at least two ways.First, there would be one less competitor in Europe (though a stronger UPS,too). Second, UPS would be kept busy integrating TNT. UPS might also be hampered by “remedies” demanded by the EC to satisfy competition concerns. Fora start, under European Union law, UPS will have to ensure that TNT’s airline, TNT Airways, remains majority EU-owned. UPS has already undertaken to “seek to continue” using TNT’shub at Liège airport in Belgium: the temptation would be to divert business toits own hub in Cologne. It also promises to maintain a “centre of excellence”for sales, marketing and operations in the Netherlands.
These are not promises that can easily be kept. Liège is already suffering a relative decline in business, partly because of a decision by TNT to shift more of its European traffic on to roads. Maintaining a big Dutch headquarters as well as UPS’s bases in Brussels and Cologne may prove costly.
The needs of the market change constantly, and the integrator shave to be flexible and innovative to keep up. But it is harder to imagine suchtraits in a merged Leviathan than in a maverick. And barriers to entry arehigh. The integrators own airlines and lorry fleets and operate expensive hubs.They have built relationships with customs authorities that let them save timeby clearing items while they are still airborne. Such a company would be difficult to replicate quickly. So far, nobody has tried, although S.F.Express, a Chinese firm founded in Shenzhen three years ago, is growing fast.In express services and time-sensitive delivery “other integrators would be theonly significant competitive constraint” on the merged entity, noted the EC atthe start of its investigation. Finding fitting remedies will be hard.






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, 2024-11-13 06:41
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部