Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?
- They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
- They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
- They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
- They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers’ end products.
- They are least appropriate when the purchasers’ ability to change suppliers is limited.
原文：
In corporate purchasing,
competitive scrutiny is typically
limited to suppliers of items that are
Line directly related to end products.
(5) With “indirect” purchases (such as
computers, advertising, and legal
services), which are not directly
related to production, corporations
often favor “supplier partnerships”
(10) (arrangements in which the
purchaser forgoes the right to
pursue alternative suppliers), which
can inappropriately shelter suppliers
from rigorous competitive scrutiny
(15) that might afford the purchaser
economic leverage. There are two
independent variables—availability
of alternatives and ease of changing
suppliers—that companies should
(20) use to evaluate the feasibility of
subjecting suppliers of indirect
purchases to competitive scrutiny.
This can create four possible
situations.
答案选B。我不否认B是对的答案，但是D又错在哪里呢？我觉得D正确啊？supplier partnerships存在于购买商和
那些提供给购买商的间接产品的供应商之间，而且还要满足不可替代性和可依赖性。原文的确没有提到直接产品相关的供应商是如何与购买商交易的，不排除也有合作的可能。可以这样理解吗？
哪位高人指点一二呢？
| 
