Over the past five years, the price gap between name-brand cereals and less expensive store-brand cereals has become so wide that consumers have been switching increasingly to store brands despite the name brands' reputation for better quality. To attract these consumers back, several manufacturers of name-brand cereals plan to narrow the price gap between their cereals and store brands to less than what it was five years ago.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the likelihood that the manufacturers' plan will succeed in attracting back a large percentage of consumers who have switched to store brands?
There is no significant difference among manufacturers of name-brand cereals in the prices they charge for their products.
Consumers who have switched to store-brand cereals have generally been satisfied with the quality of those cereals.
Many consumers would never think of switching to store-brand cereals because they believe the name brand cereals to be of better quality.
Because of lower advertising costs, stores are able to offer their own brands of cereals at significantly lower prices than those charged for name-brand cereals
Total annual sales of cereals-including both name-brand and store-brand cereals-have not increased significantly over the past five years.
B:顾客已经很满意store brand的质量了,所以即使名牌降价,顾客也不会买,直接削弱。
D:说的是store brand由于广告费用低,所以有能力比name brand提供更低的价格。进一步分析:之前name brand顾客流失的原因是由于namebrand和storebrand价格差距太大,以至于即使namebrand质量更高,顾客也不愿意买了。那么现在价格差距减小了,我们却不能判断顾客对缩小之后的价格差的接受程度。①如果顾客认为价格差距已经小到多付一点点钱就可以获得很多很多的高质量的商品时,那顾客就会买name brand。 ②如果顾客认为缩小后的价格差还是没有达到自己的预期,自己更愿意花更少的钱买相对质量不那么高的产品,那么商家的措施还是没用。 所以,D没办法直接削弱。
你的說法很好,但考试根本沒法想得這麼透
你的名字很好
这位老哥的名字。。。登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
要击破NB的想法,主要从筹码上攻破,也就是质量。如果顾客已经对SB的质量感到满意了,就没必要再换到更高价格的NB,因为顾客对NB的高质量已经不再有需求。
此时,d无论NB怎么弥补价格差都没用了,因为质量方面NB和SB给顾客的是一样的满意度。
老哥你这一会NB一会SB把👴都看懵了。
哈哈哈哈哈看到NB的时候愣了一下,看到SB的时候又愣了一下登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
当我打下这段字的时候。。。我发现名牌只是想缩小差距,那么D就白说了。。。要怪就怪B太明显。。。让人不敢选。。。
CR题经常在细节上作文章。
A选项无关,排除
D选项提及store brand可以提供更低的价格,提到了store可以更低价格的原因,但没有直接表明对于能否吸引顾客的影响
B选项十分直接的说明:顾客满意store brand的质量,因此哪怕降价也不会被store brand吸引(做题的时候看到原文despite the reputation of quality 再看B选项就直接排除了==)还是抓紧plan的目的和weaken的方向来选择才行
-> 顾客因为价格而选择了store brand
现在:name brand质量好,价格降;store brand质量和价格没变。
name brand的goal:吸引顾客
为什么吸引不到顾客?因为顾客现在觉得store brand的质量也挺好的,而且name brand只是缩小gap,意味着它的价格依然比stor高,那么它的高价就没有价值了。
D意思说store brand的价格可以永远比name brand低,但实际上如果两家一起降价了,一旦name brand价格降到让顾客觉得挺超值的了,还是会选择name brand。所以不能直接削弱
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the likelihood that the manufacturers' plan will 【succeed in attracting back】...
要击破NB的想法,主要从筹码上攻破,也就是质量。如果顾客已经对SB的质量感到满意了,就没必要再换到更高价格的NB,因为顾客对NB的高质量已经不再有需求。
此时,d无论NB怎么弥补价格差都没用了,因为质量方面NB和SB给顾客的是一样的满意度。
B也有逻辑漏洞吧:因为大家逐渐适应了自制燕麦片的质量,并不能佐证大家不会因为知名燕麦片价格更低了而转过头来消费知名燕麦片啊;根据题目,客户之所以转向消费自制燕麦片,就是因为这个price gap,要是这个price gap补上了,反过来就很可能转过头去消费知名燕麦片了啊,感觉和质量没什么关系,根本没提到过是因为质量的原因。
同时,D选项看上去,因为自制燕麦片不需要广告费,在没有给出两家有任何产品更新或技术更新的情况下(这个降价并不是因为成本降低了,纯粹只是策略),自制燕麦片永远都可以比知名燕麦片的定价更低啊,你定50我就可以定30,你定20我就可以定10,这种恶意竞争下降价策略就不好用了。