Some airlines allegedly reduce fares on certain routes to a level at which they lose money, in order to drive competitors off those routes. However, this method of eliminating competition cannot be profitable in the long run. Once an airline successfully implements this method, any attempt to recoup the earlier losses by charging high fares on that route for an extended period would only provide competitors with a better opportunity to undercut the airline's fares.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
In some countries it is not illegal for a company to drive away competitors by selling a product below cost.
Airline executives generally believe that a company that once underpriced its fares to drive away competitors is very likely to do so again if new competitors emerge.
As part of promotions designed to attract new customers, airlines sometimes reduce their ticket prices to below an economically sustainable level.
On deciding to stop serving particular routes, most airlines shift resources to other routes rather than reduce the size of their operations.
When airlines dramatically reduce their fares on a particular route, the total number of air passengers on that route increases greatly.
P 低价策略 G 吸引其竞争者的顾客
A 违不违法和这题没关系
B 只要有一次降价的经历,之后竞争者出现,还会继续降价。。那竞争者采用同样策略就行不通了。好
C 描述降价程度,无关
D 无关
E 当降价时,乘客人数就多了。这是客观供求关系的结论呀。 反驳不了竞争者采用同样战略会怎么样
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论