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? 原文说:要不要采用贵的包装材料;有没有效 A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring damage during shipping than are typical electronic products. 说一般货物比ELEC更易受损 B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most other products shipped by mail-order companies说elec 比其他更容易受损 most other绝对化 C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping 多少比例的货物被挽救 和原文有没有效有关
D. 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说尽管货物来了,顾客还是要责备 无关 E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping companies it uses to ship products to its customers TS是否监视货运公司 无关 -- by 会员 mobilecdpyn (2010/2/23 10:31:45)
我发现我对题目的意思理解有偏差了,题目问的是哪个选项能评价这个方案是否取得预期的效果,即unaffected or not,而不是我理解的降低成本 还有一个地方就是,是那个等式写错了,newer,more expensive materials 代表原来也有包装费,所以是运输费+原包装+赔偿金=运输费+贵包装(贵包装=原包装+extral costs,而extral costs=赔偿金,所以等式是大致相等的),如果C选项的答案是YES,那么cost会受到影响,因为右边的等式还要加上赔偿金,如果答案是NO,那么cost不会受影响,也就是原文的叙述是正确的。
应该就是这样理解的。 |