首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
•Read the following extract from an article about Over-Capacity in the Car Business. •For each question 15—20, mark one letter (
•Read the following extract from an article about Over-Capacity in the Car Business. •For each question 15—20, mark one letter (
admin
2013-02-14
30
问题
•Read the following extract from an article about Over-Capacity in the Car Business.
•For each question 15—20, mark one letter (A, B, C, or D) on your Answer Sheet for the answer you choose.
Since the days of Henry Ford’s dominance of the car market in the 1920s up to the present day, the car industry has continued to grow. Some companies, such as British Leyland, failed to survive the turbulent business world of the 1970s despite being government-owned. During the 1960s and 1970s, as growth in profit became more difficult to achieve due to increased competition, mainly from the Japanese, the industry turned to efficient production methods in order to create a competitive advantage. However, once all the major players in the industry had become as efficient as possible, developing a cost advantage was more difficult to achieve. In addition, car companies from Asia, such as Daewoo, Samsung and Kia, have developed cheaper, more affordable alternatives for the discerning western buyers. Such car companies are part-funded by their respective governments but enjoy considerably lower labor costs.
Increasing productive capacity has led to car companies aiming to use economies of scale as the main way of reducing cost, although this has unfortunately led to businesses having surplus capacity. This spare capacity occurs when the industry as a whole expands ahead of, or in anticipation of, a growth in customer demand. Such growth in capacity has meant that supply outstrips demand by some 30%, i.e., car companies could cut back on their capacity levels by 30%, and still meet all customer demands.
The result has been a series of joint agreements and mergers between car companies, with a view to either using capacity, or losing capacity altogether by selling off parts of a business. The other problem is the high cost of developing new vehicles: the standard response to the high cost is to either rejuvenate or re-launch old vehicles with new technology. But there are enough companies developing new models that any business, which does not, stands to lose out. The main fear in the car industry is over-capacity—experts predict that by 2001, the industry may produce 23 million cars more than it can sell!
In 1998 there was a spate of company mergers—e.g. In January 1999, Ford paid £4 billion for Volvo’s car division; Volvo claimed that it needed economies of scale, allowing it to focus on buses, engines and aerospace and to acquire shares in two major truck-making businesses. Ford intended to distribute Volvos with its own cars and hoped to use Volvo’s reputation for technological excellence to develop new cars, using common research platforms to save money.
Renault, on the other hand, announced a joint agreement with Nissan, the debt-ridden Japanese company, to purchase a 37% stake. For Renault, the problem was not over-capacity, but rather the lack of product range. Renault was 44% owned by the French government, which obviously wanted to protect one of its major companies and wealth creators. However, Renault had concentrated its major marketing effort on domestic demand in France; as the domestic market fell, profit tumbled. The expiry in 1999 of the "gentlemen’s agreement" which limited car sales from Japan was probably the main reason for teaming up with Nissan. Nissan, however, had borrowed approximately £15 billion in order to expand its productive capacity and had lost money in six of the last seven years. One estimate put 1998’s losses at nearly £1 billion. The cost savings for both companies are not likely to occur until 2002, resulting mainly from purchasing economies of scale. Renault seems to have got caught between the large manufacturers who achieve economies of scale and the smaller specialist manufacturers.
Why did Volvo sell its car division according to Volvo company’s claim?
选项
A、Because it had not the common research platform to save money.
B、Because it suffered a lot from surplus capacity.
C、Because it needed economies of scale.
D、Because it wanted to use its reputation to develop new vehicles.
答案
C
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/8F7d777K
本试题收录于:
BEC高级阅读题库BEC商务英语分类
0
BEC高级阅读
BEC商务英语
相关试题推荐
Accordingtothespeaker,whathasbeencompleted?
WhatkindofcompanyisLeeds?
TaskOne-Job•Forquestions13-17,matchtheextractswiththepeople,listedA-H.•Foreachextract,choosethejobeachsp
•YouwillheartheChairmanoftheBusinessBroadcastingCommitteeofatelevisioncompany.Heisaddressingameetingofthec
•YouwillheartheChairmanoftheBusinessBroadcastingCommitteeofatelevisioncompany.Heisaddressingameetingofthec
TASKONE—ADVANTAGE•Forquestions13—17,matchtheextractswiththeadvantages,listedA—H.•Foreachextract,choosetheadv
•Readthetextbelowaboutthelogistics.•Inmostofthelines41-52thereisoneextraword.Itiseithergrammaticallyinco
随机试题
下列哪种药物不能治疗消化性溃疡
上市5年以上的药品,其不良反应的报告范围主要是
外源的重组体与感受态细胞混合后,一般作短暂热刺激的温度是
患者,女,50岁。5天前左足第三、四趾缝足癣水疱溃破,次日局部红肿疼痛,并见红线一条向上走窜至小腿中段,边界清晰,伴有发热,左胯腹部淋巴结肿痛。其诊断是()
可作为保护性软膏基质的是()。
下列哪个场所应选用缆式定温探测器?(2007,117)
为了实现有序和科学的项目信息管理,应由( )。
甲公司2013年10月1日与乙公司签订一项咨询合同,该合同于当日生效。合同约定,咨询期为2年,咨询费为500万元。甲公司估计咨询劳务总成本为300万元。2013年发生的成本为30万元,预计还将发生成本270万元;2014年发生成本160万元,预计还将发生成
()与审计风险互为补数,与审计风险之和等于100%。
A、 B、 C、 D、 C
最新回复
(
0
)