2. 考研
  3. According to the Wall Street Journal: "More and more shoppers are bypassing household names for the cheaper, no-name products on

According to the Wall Street Journal: "More and more shoppers are bypassing household names for the cheaper, no-name products on

admin2021-02-21  112
问题    According to the Wall Street Journal: "More and more shoppers are bypassing household names for the cheaper, no-name products one shelf over. This shows that even the biggest and strongest brands in the world are vulnerable."
   We may be witnessing the death of the brand. First, every story that now appears about the troubles being experienced by makers of luxury goods triggers wise nods and told-you-so frowns. Two days ago, LVMH in France, which owns Moet et Chandon champagne, Louis Vuitton and the Christian Lacroix fashion house, reported lower earnings for the first half of this year than it did a year ago. As David Jarvis, in charge of the European operations of Drinks Company Hiram Walker, puts it: "A few years ago, it might have been considered smart to wear a shirt with a designer’s logo decorated on the pocket; frankly, it now seems a bit unfashionable."
   This conclusion fits with one’s instincts. In the straitened nineties, with nearly 3 million out of work and 425,000 people officially classed as homeless in England alone, conspicuous consumption now seems vulgar rather than fashionable. But just because flashy, up-market brands have lost some of their appeal, it does not follow that all brands have done so. Tastes may have shifted downmarket, but that does not mean that they have shifted from flash-brand to no brand.
   The second strand of the brand argument is tied intimately with the effects of recession. No one yet knows to what extent the apparent lack of some brands’ appeal is merely a temporary phenomenon. It may well be that, deep down, we would still love to own a Louis Vuitton suitcase rather than one from Woolworth’s, but while we are out of work or fear that our job is at risk, we are not prepared to express that preference by actually spending the cash.
   Third, the example of Marlboro is an extreme one. The difference in price between premium brand cigarettes and budget rivals in the US had become huge during the 1980s: a packet of Marlboro or Camel might cost 80 per cent more than a budget variety. Few brands in any area of consumer goods could hope to maintain so great a premium indefinitely.
   And fourth, in looking at the brands argument globally, it is too easy to become misled by what is happening in an individual market. In the UK as a whole, about one third of groceries are under supermarkets’ own labels. In the USA the proportion is only 20 per cent.
   But it does seem that the gradual shift from manufacturer-branded to retailer-branded goods is worldwide. As David Jarvis of Hiram Walker says: "We believe that brands will retain their halo, but people are less inclined to pay for something just because it’s a fashion accessory. They need to be reassured that the product is intrinsically better." Reports of the death of the brand have been exaggerated. Reports of the death of the luxury brand may be premature, but sound much more plausible.
   [A] criticises the biggest and strongest brands for their vulnerability to the market
   [B] stresses that the intrinsic quality of a product is important for a brand.
   [C] suggests that well-known brands are favored by less and less consumers.
   [D] is not a better choice than Woolworth for someone who is jobless.
   [E] had kept a huge premium for a long time.
   [F] thinks that wearing a shirt with a designer’s logo isn’t out of fashion today.
   [G] reported a decrease in its first-half revenue compared with that of last year.
Louis Vuitton
选项
答案D
解析 Louis Vuitton出现在文中第二段和第四段，解题句在第四段。该段末句讲到，在内心深处，比起伍尔沃斯的手提箱，我们还是更青睐路易威登的，但是当我们失业，或者担心失去工作时，我们不会真的花钱去表达这种青睐之意。言下之意，如果失业的话，人们不会把路易威登手提箱看成是更好的选择。D正表达了这层意思，其中jobless与原文的out of work同义，故D为本题答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/gQY4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)