The world is going through the biggest wave of mergers and acquisitions ever witnessed. The process sweeps from hyperactive America to Europe and reaches the emerging countries with unsurpassed might. Many in these countries are looking at this process and worrying: “Won't the wave of business concentration turn into an uncontrollable anti-competitive force?"

There's no question that the big are getting bigger and more powerful. Multinational corporations accounted for less than 20% of international trade in 1982. Today the figure is more than 25% and growing rapidly. International affiliates account for a fast-growing segment of production in economies that open up and welcome foreign investment. In Argentina, for instance, after the reforms of the early 1990s, multinationals went from 43% to almost 70% of the industrial production of the 200 largest firms. This phenomenon has created serious concerns over the role of smaller economic firms, of national businessmen and over the ultimate stability of the world economy.

I believe that the most important forces behind the massive M&A wave are the same that underlie the globalization process: falling transportation and communication costs, lower trade and investment barriers and enlarged markets that require enlarged operations capable of meeting customers' demands. All these are beneficial, not detrimental, to consumers. As productivity grows, the world's wealth increases.

Examples of benefits or costs of the current concentration wave are scanty. Yet it is hard to imagine that the merger of a few oil firms today could re-create the same threats to competition that were feared nearly a century ago in the U.S., when the Standard Oil trust was broken up. The mergers of telecom companies, such as WorldCom, hardly seem to bring higher prices for consumers or a reduction in the pace of technical progress. On the contrary, the price of communications is coming down fast. In cars, too, concentration is increasing—witness Daimler and Chrysler, Renault and Nissan—but it does not appear that consumers are being hurt.

Yet the fact remains that the merger movement must be watched. A few weeks ago, Alan Greenspan warned against the megamergers in the banking industry. Who is going to supervise, regulate and operate as lender of last resort with the gigantic banks that are being created? Won't multinationals shift production from one place to another when a nation gets too strict about infringements to fair competition? And should one country take upon itself the role of “defending competition" on issues that affect many other nations, as in the U.S. vs. Microsoft case?

33. What is the typical trend of businesses today?

[A]To take in more foreign funds

[B]To invest more abroad

[C]To combine and become bigger

[D]To trade with more countries

34. According to the author, one of the driving forces behind M&A wave is _________.

[A]the greater customer demands

[B]a surplus supply for the market

[C]a growing productivity

[D]the increase of the world's wealth

35. From paragraph 4 we can infer that _________.

[A]the increasing concentration is certain to hurt consumers

[B]WorldCom serves as a good example of both benefits and costs

[C]the costs of the globalization process are enormous

[D]the Standard Oil trust might have threatened competition

36. Toward the new business wave, the writer's attitude can be said to be _________.

[A]optimistic

[B]objective

[C]pessimistic

[D]biased

名师解析

33. What is the typical trend of businesses today? 今天的商业典型的发展趋势是什么？

[A]To take in more foreign funds 吸收更多外资

[B]To invest more abroad 进行更多对外投资

[C]To combine and become bigger 合并做强

[D]To trade with more countries 与更多国家贸易

【答案】 C

【考点】 事实细节题。

【分析】 文章第一段中说“世界正在经历一场前所未有的最大的的并购浪潮。这个浪潮从异常活跃的美国开始，横扫欧洲，并以不可比拟的威力影响到正在崛起的国家”，因此可以判断正确答案是 [C] 。

34. According to the author, one of the driving forces behind M&A wave is _______.

根据本文作者，在合并浪潮背后的一个驱动力是 ______ 。

[A]the greater customer demands 更大的消费需求

[B]a surplus supply for the market 对市场的剩余供给

[C]a growing productivity 日益增长的生产率

[D]the increase of the world’s wealth 世界财富的增长

【答案】 A

【考点】 事实细节题。

【分析】 根据“合并浪潮的推动力”可以定位到第三段。在作者看来，“日趋下降的运输与通讯费用，较低的贸易与投资壁垒，以及市场的扩大和为满足市场需求而进行的扩大生产，是推动这股巨大的并购浪潮的最主要的力量，也是推动全球化进程的力量”。将四个选项对比这三个因素，只有 [A] 包括了根据顾客的需要扩大市场这个因素。

35. From paragraph 4 we can infer that _____.

从第四段中我们可以推断出 _____ 。

[A] the increasing concentration is certain to hurt consumers

日益增长的集中肯定会损害消费者的利益

[B] WorldCom serves as a good example of both benefits and costs

世通就是一个合并利与弊的好例子

[C] the costs of the globalization process are enormous

全球化进程的成本很高

[D] the Standard Oil trust might have threatened competition

标准石油托拉斯或许已经威胁到竞争

【答案】 D

【考点】 推断题。

【分析】 [A] “日益增长的集中肯定会损害消费者的利益”与原文第四段第一句不符合，因为作者说“这股合并浪潮是带来益处还是弊端的实例还很少”，因此很难说肯定会带来损害。 [B] 提到“世通”，说是一个带来利益和降低成本的好例子。这句说是“价格没有随着合并而提高”，并没有提到价格降低问题，因此，合并虽然没有伤害消费者，也没有给他们带来利益。 [C] 本段没有涉及。 [D] 可以从文中“很难想像当今的几个石油公司的合并能够再次造成像 100 年前美国标准石油托拉斯对竞争形成的威胁”，这说明当年这个石油公司肯定曾经对竞争造成巨大威胁。

36. Toward the new business wave, the writer’s attitude can be said to be _____.

作者看待新的商业浪潮的态度可以说是 _______ 。

[A]optimistic 乐观的 [B]objective 客观的

[C]pessimistic 悲观的 [D]biased 歧视的

【答案】 B

【考点】 作者态度题。

【分析】 本题考查考生是否了解作者的态度。文中作者提到了“合并”的益处，但是同时也在第四段中提到“我们必须警惕这样的合并浪潮”。作者是从两个方面来谈论这个问题的，因此我们可以判断作者的态度应该是客观的。

难句解析 ：

1. This phenomenon has created serious concerns over the role of smaller economic firms, of national businessmen and over the ultimate stability of the world economy.

【结构分析】 本题的主干是“ This phenomenon has created serious concerns ”，两个“ over ”引导介宾短语，是并列的成分，做“ concern ”的定语。而“ of smaller economic firms ”与“ of national businessmen ”都是第一个“ role ”的定语。

2. I believe that the most important forces behind the massive M&A wave are the same that underlie the globalization process: falling transportation and communication costs, lower trade and investment barriers and enlarged markets that require enlarged operations capable of meeting customers’ demands.

【结构分析】 本句主句是“ I believe ” ，“ that ”引导一个宾语从句，在这个宾语从句中，后面的“ that ”前面省略了“ forces ”，这个“ that ”引导一个定语从句，修饰这个省略的“ forces ”。冒号后面的部分是“ the most important forces ”的同位语，其中“ markets ”后面的“ that ”引导定语从句修饰“ markets ”，“ capable of meeting customers' demands ”是“ operations ”的定语。

全文翻译：

世界正在经历一场前所未有的最大的的并购浪潮。这个浪潮从异常活跃的美国开始，横扫欧洲，并以不可比拟的威力影响到正在崛起的国家。这些国家的许多人面对这个浪潮，倍感忧虑：“商业集中的浪潮会不会演变成一股无法控制的反竞争的力量？”

无疑，大企业正在变得更大、更强。 1982 年，跨国公司占国际贸易不到 20 ％的份额。而如今，这个数字已经超过 25 ％，并且还在迅速上升。在那些对外开放并鼓励外资的经济体中，国际分公司在生产中也正占据一个越来越大的份额。比如，在阿根廷，经过 90 年代初的改革之后，跨国公司在 200 家大型企业的工业生产中从 43 ％增加到几乎 70 ％。这个现象使人们开始重视小型企业和民族资本的作用以及世界经济的最终稳定。

我认为，日趋下降的运输与通讯费用，较低的贸易与投资壁垒，以及市场的扩大和为满足市场需求而进行的扩大生产，是推动这股巨大的并购浪潮的最主要的力量，也是推动全球化进程的力量。所有这些对消费者来说都是有益而无害的。随着生产力的提高，世界的财富也在增长。

这股合并浪潮是带来益处还是弊端的实例还很少。但是很难想像当今的几个石油公司的合并能够再次造成像 100 年前美国标准石油托拉斯对竞争形成的威胁，人们当时很害怕这家公司，结果导致了它最终的解散。像世通这样的通讯公司的合并似乎不会抬高消费价格，或者减缓技术进步的速度，与之相反的是通信的价格的快速下降。汽车行业的合并也同样在增加——瞧瞧戴姆勒与克莱斯勒，雷诺与尼桑的合并——但看起来消费者并未受到伤害。

但是有一个事实，那就是合并必须受到密切关注。就在几星期以前，格林斯潘对银行业的大规模合并发出了警告。正在创建的这样的巨大的银行一旦出现，谁来充当最终的借贷者，谁来发挥监督、规范和运作的作用呢？当一个国家对破坏公平竞争的行为的处理过于严厉时，跨国公司会不会把它们的生产从一地转到另一地呢？在那些将会影响许多其他国家的问题上，一个国家是否应该发挥“保护竞争”的作用，就如同美国政府对微软公司案例那样？