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
36
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
Whatdoesthespeaker’scompanydo?
Accordingtothespeaker,whatisthecompany’spriority?
Iscorporatephilanthropyimportantornot?Canyougiveexplanationsforcorporatephilanthropy?
Theinterlocutorasksyouquestionsonanumberofwork-relatedandnonwork-relatedsubjects.
Answeringreceptionist’squestions回答接待员询问
TaskOne-Job•Forquestions13-17,matchtheextractswiththepeople,listedA-H.•Foreachextract,choosethejobeachsp
TaskOne-Job•Forquestions13-17,matchtheextractswiththepeople,listedA-H.•Foreachextract,choosethejobeachsp
•Readthetextbelowaboutthelogistics.•Inmostofthelines41-52thereisoneextraword.Itiseithergrammaticallyinco
•Readthetextbelowaboutthelogistics.•Inmostofthelines41-52thereisoneextraword.Itiseithergrammaticallyinco
随机试题
男,58岁。患肝炎已10余年,因无力、纳差、腹胀20天诊断为肝炎后肝硬化(失代偿期)入院,肝功能试验显著异常,其中白蛋白降低,球蛋白增高,白蛋白/球蛋白比例倒置。为治疗低蛋白血症,首选的血液制品是
A.心、肝、肾B.心、肝、脾、肺C.肺、脾、肾D.肝、胆、脾、胃E.肺、肾
请简要解释资格预审与资格后审。
肋柱式锚杆挡土墙可根据地形采用单级或多级,每级墙高度不宜大于8m,具体高度可视地质和施工条件而定,总高度不宜大于()。
某被评估设备购建于2014年12月,账面原值200万元,其中购买价为150万元,基础及安装费20万元,运杂费30万元。2017年12月对该设备进行技术改造,以使用某种专利技术,改造费用为80万元,2018年12月对该设备进行评估,评估机构制定了相应的评估汁
混合基金主要包括()。
设行列式则行列式
关于老年人权益,尤其是精神方面的权益,最近进行了立法,如果子女不回家看望父母,将受到法律的制裁。你对这一问题有什么看法?
有些自重的人尊重他人,而有些自重的人善解人意,所有善解人意的人都尊重他人,而所有没有尊重他人的人都是妄自菲薄的人。上述陈述最能支持以下哪项结论?
Atwork,asinlife,attractivewomengetalotofthebreaks.Studieshaveshownthattheyaremorelikelytobepromotedthan
最新回复
(
0
)