Dear Aspirants,
As IBPS has released its official calendar of Online CWE for RRBs and PSBs examinations 2019, so its high time to start preparations for the coming year. Looking at the calendar, we have now started subject-wise quizzes for the exam. It will include quizzes of all the subjects- Quantitative Aptitude, English, Reasoning and Computer. All these quizzes will be strictly based on the latest pattern of all the upcoming competitive exams and will be beneficial for your preparations. So, keep following the quizzes which will provide you a set of 10 questions daily.
Here, we are providing you important questions of English Language for all banking exams.
Q1-5. Read each part of the sentence to find out if there is any error in it. The error, if any, will be in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is no error, mark your answer as (5).
Q1. The Election Commission has told a parliamentary committee (1)/ that it does not support state (2)/ funding of elections but instead seeks "radical" reforms (3)/ in the way funds are spend by political parties. (4)/ No error (5)
Q2. The soldiers must be truthful, honesty,(1)/ and maintain the highest standards of integrity, honour and discipline.(2)/ Uphold the dharma, it urges,(3)/ and maintain military professionalism. (4)/ No Error (5)
Q3. It is “urgent” to reach an agreement (1)/ on a loan program for Greece but a commitment (2)/ is still required from Athens on reforms and (3)/ from Europe at debt relief, a senior IMF official said. (4)/ No Error (5)
Q4. Despite pressure from European heavyweight (1)/ Germany, the IMF so far has refused to participation in the 86 billion euro (2)/ loan program the eurozone agreed with Greece in mid-215, the third (3)/ since 21, largely over the issue of the nation’s debt sustainability. (4)/ No Error (5)
Q5. The high court says that it cannot issue directions (1)/ for the use of VVPAT equipment attached to electronic voting machines in the upcoming (2)/ MCD polls without any knowledge about its (3)/ availability for the Election Commission. (4)/ No Error (5)
Q6-10. Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.
Chances are transport regulators in Karnataka have never read the aforementioned quote. And if they have, it appears they have not internalized its teachings in their day job. Little else explains their recent proposal to prescribe both a floor and a cap for cab aggregators operating in the state. Not to be left behind in this race to the bottom, neighbouring Maharashtra too is following suit.
These initiatives are in response to protests by two groups—the driver-partners that operate using the cab- aggregator applications to find matching riders, who have recently struck work to demand higher incentives, and the traditional taxi operators who have lately faced the brunt of competition from the cab-aggregation industry. The commissioner, transport and road safety, in Karnataka has been quoted as saying that these minimum price mandates are being implemented “to prevent unfair trade practices by aggregators, in which drivers lose out. If the operators cut prices, drivers are impacted.” Newspaper reports indicate a committee set up by the Karnataka government has recommended that the cab aggregators be mandated to double their respective minimum fares.
In the context of these (admittedly stylized) facts, let’s now analyse if the good intentions of the government will come to fruition. Cab aggregators aggregate riders on one end of the platform and drivers on the other end. They are what economists refer to as “two-sided markets”. In two-sided markets, intermediaries follow pricing strategies that incentivise the more price-sensitive group of consumers to aggregate through discounts, cash-backs and other incentives, and then utilize the network effects to attract people on the other end of the platform (drivers). Thus, the larger the group of consumers, the greater the advantage each additional driver will have when he will link up her cab to the cab aggregator.
Two-sided markets are ubiquitous. Seen in the context of this market structure, the impact of minimum price mandates will have exactly the opposite effect to the one the transport commissioner has in mind. Since minimum price mandates will raise the price higher than the going rate, the most price-sensitive segment among riders using the cab-aggregator app will prefer alternative means to commute. Ironically, therefore, fewer trips may originate on the cab-aggregator application. Since the driver-partner and the app share revenue, fewer trips will mean less take-home for the driver-partners.
Of course, the intra-city transport market is not completely commoditized and cab aggregators can compete through product differentiation in lieu of price to lock in consumers it has retained (presumably, these are riders for whom such differentiation has value).Money expended on advertising, cash-backs/discounts and other assorted luxuries in the absence of the minimum price regulation could be used towards higher driver-partner wages, enhancing safety standards and greater research and development in logistics/algorithm of the cab aggregator. To the extent that the regulation creates incentives to divert the money to retention, it imposes wasteful costs on society.
Some have argued that cab aggregators’ prices are so low that they constitute predatory pricing under the relevant antitrust law. The last word from the Competition Commission of India/Supreme Court is yet to be heard on this, but as we discussed above, very low (or near-cost) prices are in fact socially beneficial in the context of two-sided markets because in the absence of these pricing strategies, the markets and transactions won’t emerge in the first place.
Thus far we have discussed the explicit costs of mandatory minimum price regulation. Consider now the impact of such regulations on, say, a start-up at the Indian Institute of Technology campus that can match riders to drivers without the surge-pricing mechanism. Or to driver-owned cab aggregators that wish to compete with incumbents offering lower fares. For both these groups of emerging competitors, the minimum mandatory price regulation operates as an entry barrier. Thus, to the extent that consumers cannot benefit from their innovation, the incumbents gain at the expense of entrepreneurs, consumers and drivers.
Q6. Seen in the context of two-sided market structure, what impact will it have of minimum price mandates?
1. It will exactly have the same effect that can match riders to drivers.
2. It will exactly have the same effect to the one the transport commissioner has in mind.
3. It will exactly be the same as the Competition Commission of India/Supreme Court is to declare.
4. It will exactly have the opposite effect that can never match riders to drivers.
5. exactly the opposite effect to the one the transport commissioner has in mind.
Q7. Which of the following statement is NOT TRUE according to the passage?
1. The minimum price mandates will raise the price higher than the going rate.
2. The most price-sensitive segment among riders using the cab-aggregator app will prefer alternative means to commute.
3. The last word from the Competition Commission of India/Supreme Court is yet to be heard.
4. The larger the group of consumers, the greater the advantage each additional driver will have when he will link up her cab to the cab aggregator.
5. If the operators cut prices, customers are impacted.
Q8. As per the passage, except assorted luxuries where else could the money be utilised?
1. towards higher driver-partner wages.
2. towards enhancing safety standards.
3. towards greater research and development in logistics/algorithm of the cab aggregator.
4. Both 2 and 3
5. All 1, 2 and 3
Q9. As per the passage, where is the money expended in the absence of the minimum price regulation?
A. On advertising
B. On cash-backs/discounts
C. On other assorted luxuries
1. Both A and B
2. Only C
3. Both B and C
4. All A, B and C
5. Only A
Q10. As per the passage, why are very low prices socially beneficial in the context of two-sided markets?
1. because expense of entrepreneurs, consumers and drivers is more.
2. because in the absence of the pricing strategies, the markets and transactions won’t emerge in the first place.
3. because of the explicit costs of mandatory minimum price regulation.
4. Both 1 and 2
5. Both 2 and 3
Answers:
Q1 (4)
Q2 (1)
Q3 (4)
Q4 (2)
Q5 (4)
Q6 (5)
Q7 (5)
Q8 (5)
Q9 (4)
Q10 (2)
