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.
However, this method of eliminating competition cannot be profitable in the long run.
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. 航空公司的管理层认为如果新的竞争对手出现了,之前通过降低价格赶走竞争对手的公司很有可能会重新使用这个降价策略. 该信息的引申含义是再次出现竞争对手的可能性会比较小,所以挤走了竞争对手之后,长期来讲还是很有可能会盈利的. 因为其他航空公司的人认为如果他们再次参与竞争,使用的低价策略的赶走了竞争对手的航空公司会再次使用低价策略,要赢得竞争的风险太大.
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论