【Text 3】

When Microsoft bought task management app Wunderlist and mobile calendar Sunrise in 2015, it picked up two newcomers that were attracting considerable buzz in Silicon Valley. Microsoft’s own Office dominates the market for “productivity” software, but the start-ups represented a new wave of technology designed from the ground up for the smartphone world.

Both apps, however, were later scrapped, after Microsoft said it had used their best features in its own products. Their teams of engineers stayed on, making them two of the many “acqui-hires” that the biggest companies have used to feed their insatiable hunger for tech talent.

To Microsoft’s critics, the fates of Wunderlist and Sunrise are examples of a remorseless drive by Big Tech to chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path. “They bought the seedlings and closed them down,” complained Paul Arnold, a partner at San Francisco-based Switch Ventures, putting paid to businesses that might one day turn into competitors. Microsoft declined to comment.

Like other start-up investors, Mr Arnold’s own business often depends on selling start-ups to larger tech companies, though he admits to mixed feelings about the result: “I think these things are good for me, if I put my selfish hat on. But are they good for the American economy? I don’t know.”

The US Federal Trade Commission says it wants to find the answer to that question. This week, it asked the five most valuable US tech companies for information about their many small acquisitions over the past decade. Although only a research project at this stage, the request has raised the prospect of regulators wading into early-stage tech markets that until now have been beyond their reach.

Given their combined market value of more than $5.5tn, rifling through such small deals — many of them much less prominent than Wunderlist and Sunrise — might seem beside the point. Between them, the five companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Facebook) have spent an average of only $3.4bn a year on sub-$1bn acquisitions over the past five years — a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves, and the more than $130bn of venture capital that was invested in the US last year.

However, critics say that the big companies use such deals to buy their most threatening potential competitors before their businesses have a chance to gain momentum, in some cases as part of a “buy and kill” tactic to simply close them down.

31. What is true about Wunderlist and Sunrise after their acquisitions?

A. Their market values declined.

B. Their engineers were retained.

C. Their tech features improved.

D. Their products were re-priced.

32. Microsoft’s critics believe that the big tech companies tend to .

A. exaggerate their product quality

B. treat new tech talent unfairly

C. eliminate their potential competitors

D. ignore public opinions

33. Paul Arnold is concerned that small acquisitions might .

A. weaken big tech companies

B. worsen market competition

C. discourage start-up investors

D. harm the national economy

34. The US Federal Trade Commission intends to .

A. supervise start-ups’ operations

B. encourage research collaboration

C. limit Big Tech’s expansion

D. examine small acquisitions

35. For the five biggest tech companies, their small acquisitions have .

A. raised few management challenges

B. brought little financial pressure

C. set an example for future deals

D. generated considerable profits

【Text 3】

31.【答案】B(Their engineers were retained.)

【解析】本题为细节题。根据题干关键词Wunderlist and Sunrise定位到第一段①句和第三段①句。这两句无法解题,需结合上下文。文章第一段引出事件：Microsoft收购Wunderlist 和Sunrise，第二段介绍这两家初创企业被收购后所发生的事情，第三段介绍批评者对Microsoft此行为的评价。B项Their engineers were retained(他们的工程师被保留了下来)是对第二段②句中的Their teams of engineers stayed on(他们的工程师团队留了下来)的同义替换。所以本题选B。

32.【答案】C(eliminate their potential competitors)

【解析】本题为细节题。根据题干关键词Microsofts’ critics定位到第三段①句：To Microsoft’s critics, the fates of Wunderlist and Sunrise are examples of a remorseless drive by Big Tech to chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path。C项eliminate their potential competitors(消灭他们潜在的竞争对手)是对chew up innovative companies that lie in their path(毁掉挡他们路的创新公司)的同义替换。所以本题选C。

33.【答案】D(harm the national economy)

【解析】本题为细节题。根据题干关键词Paul Arnold定位到第三段②句和第四段。第三段②句指出Arnold对科技巨头将本可以发展成为其竞争对手的初创公司扼杀在萌芽阶段这一做法的不满，第四段进一步介绍Arnold作为初创公司投资人对科技巨头收购行为的看法。D项harm the national economy(损害国家经济)是对第四段中的I think these things are good for me … But are they good for the American economy? I don’t know(我觉得这些对我有好处……但它们对美国经济有好处吗?我不知道)的合理推断。所以本题选C。

34.【答案】D(examine small acquisitions)

【解析】本题为细节题。根据题干关键词The US Federal Trade Commission定位到第五段①句，该句无法解题，继续看下文。②句紧接着介绍US Federal Trade Commission的做法：This week, it asked the five most valuable US tech companies for information about their many small acquisitions over the past decade。D项examine small acquisitions(调查小规模收购)是对asked … for information about their many small acquisitions(向……询问他们许多小规模收购的相关信息)的概括总结。所以本题选D。

35.【答案】B(brought little financial pressure)

【解析】本题为细节题。根据题干关键词the five biggest tech companies定位到第六段②句：Between them, the five companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Facebook) have spent an average of only $3.4bn a year on sub-$1bn acquisitions over the past five years—a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves, and the more than $130bn of venture capital that was invested in the US last year。B项brought little financial pressure(几乎没有带来资金压力)是对a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves(与他们庞大的资金储备相比，这只是沧海一粟)的合理推断。所以本题选B。