A new beverage company has been operating in two cities, one in City A and the other in City B. The company has stocked shelves equally in supermarkets in both cities, but has stocked twice as many shelves in UDS (up and down the street) stores in City A as in City B. The two cities have similar populations and economics and the sales at each store have been roughly equal. A consultant claims this shows that stocking shelves in UDS stores has not improved beverage sales.
In the table, select changes that the company could make in City A and City B, respectively, that together would probably be most helpful in testing the consultant's claim. Make only two selections, one in each column.
City A | City B | |
---|---|---|
|
|
Double shelf space allotted to the beverage company in supermarkets
|
|
|
Eliminate its presence in supermarkets
|
|
|
Eliminate its presence in UDS stores.
|
|
|
Selectively choose only the largest UDS stores to have a presence in
|
|
|
Add beverage shelf space in gas stations and discount
|
按照答案来解释:问UDS是否能促进销量,目前两个城市销量一样的。那么我把UDS从两个城市都拿掉看看。此时两个城市供货量完全一致的,如果此时两个城市最终的销量产生了差异(比如说B比A高),那么就证明之前在A city的UDS放2倍的库存,其实是促进了A city的销量。
为什么不能A减少B增加
那也得都给USD减少或增加啊,其他的选项都不是针对UDS,有啥用啊,AB都是增加supermarkets里的shelf space,E选项是gas station的,D选项又说选择性地在最大的UDSstore放更多的shelf,可是两地最大的UDS store可能情况不一样啊,也许一个在繁华地区,一个在偏僻地区,或者一个比另一个更大,又或者其他的。没有办法做到精准控制变量。只要这两地最大的UDS store有一点不一样,你都不能说是UDS本身的问题
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
一方在UDS销售,另一方不在UDS销售,这样作对比不是更能比对出结论吗?