Em “I believe that restaurant owners that resist these apps are
hurting their brands by missing out on potential customers”
(3º parágrafo), a expressão sublinhada pode ser substituída,
sem prejuízo de sentido, por:
If you take a look at my smartphone, you’ll know that I like
to order out. But am I helping the small local businesses? You
would think that if you own a restaurant you’d be thrilled to
have an outsourced service that would take care of your
delivery operations while leveraging their marketing might to
expand your businesses’ brand. However, restaurant owners
have complained of lack of quality control once their food goes
out the door. They don’t like that the delivery people are the
face of their product when it gets into the customer’s hand.
Some of the delivery services have been accused of listing
restaurants on their apps without the owners’ permission, and
oftentimes publish menu items and prices that are incorrect or
out of date.
But there is another reason why restaurant owners aren’t
fond of delivery services. It’s the costs, which, for some, are
becoming unsustainable. Even with the increased revenues
from the delivery services, the fees wind up killing a
restaurant’s margins to the extent that it’s at best marginally
profitable. Therefore, some restaurants are pushing harder to
drive orders from their own websites and offering special deals
for customers that use their in-house delivery people.
The simple fact is that these delivery apps are here to stay.
They are enormously popular and have significantly grown. I
believe that restaurant owners that resist these apps are
hurting their brands by missing out on potential customers.
The good news is that the delivery platforms are not as evil as
some would portray them. They have some skin in the game.
They are competing against other services. They want their
listed restaurants to profit. Maybe instead of fighting, the
nation’s restaurant industry needs to proactively embrace the
delivery service industry and figure out ways to profitably work
together.
The Guardian. 02 December, 2020. Adaptado.
If you take a look at my smartphone, you’ll know that I like to order out. But am I helping the small local businesses? You would think that if you own a restaurant you’d be thrilled to have an outsourced service that would take care of your delivery operations while leveraging their marketing might to expand your businesses’ brand. However, restaurant owners have complained of lack of quality control once their food goes out the door. They don’t like that the delivery people are the face of their product when it gets into the customer’s hand. Some of the delivery services have been accused of listing restaurants on their apps without the owners’ permission, and oftentimes publish menu items and prices that are incorrect or out of date.
But there is another reason why restaurant owners aren’t fond of delivery services. It’s the costs, which, for some, are becoming unsustainable. Even with the increased revenues from the delivery services, the fees wind up killing a restaurant’s margins to the extent that it’s at best marginally profitable. Therefore, some restaurants are pushing harder to drive orders from their own websites and offering special deals for customers that use their in-house delivery people.
The simple fact is that these delivery apps are here to stay. They are enormously popular and have significantly grown. I believe that restaurant owners that resist these apps are hurting their brands by missing out on potential customers. The good news is that the delivery platforms are not as evil as some would portray them. They have some skin in the game. They are competing against other services. They want their listed restaurants to profit. Maybe instead of fighting, the nation’s restaurant industry needs to proactively embrace the delivery service industry and figure out ways to profitably work together.
The Guardian. 02 December, 2020. Adaptado.
Gabarito comentado
Tema central: A questão aborda sinônimos em inglês (synonyms), especificamente a substituição da expressão “missing out” por outra palavra de igual sentido no contexto do texto.
Explicação do Tema: Reconhecer sinônimos é habilidade fundamental em provas de inglês para concursos, exigindo interpretação contextual. Segundo dicionários renomados, “to miss out” significa “perder” uma oportunidade, ou “deixar de aproveitar algo”. No fragmento analisado — “… hurting their brands by missing out on potential customers…” — refere-se a perder clientes em potencial ao resistir ao uso dos aplicativos de entrega.
Justificativa da Alternativa Correta:
A alternativa D) losing (perdendo) é a correta, pois traduz exatamente o sentido de “missing out” neste contexto. O dono do restaurante perde — isto é, deixa de conquistar — esses clientes ao não aderir aos apps. Essa escolha mantém intacto o sentido original da frase, conforme bons dicionários e gramáticas, como Cambridge e Oxford.
Análise das Alternativas Incorretas:
A) harming = prejudicando — alteraria o sentido, pois o foco da expressão não é prejuízo direto, mas perda de oportunidade.
B) deceiving = enganando — totalmente incoerente, pois não há ação de enganar.
C) challenging = desafiando — não há elemento de desafio no contexto.
E) disturbing = perturbando — também não se aplica, já que não há perturbação envolvida.
Estratégias e Dicas:
Em questões sobre sinônimos, priorize o sentido no contexto e desconfie de palavras “parecidas” apenas superficialmente. Analise a frase inteira: o erro mais comum é escolher uma palavra conhecida sem verificar sua adequação contextual.
Olhe sempre o sentido global: aqui, a ideia central era perder a chance de atingir novos clientes — ou seja, to lose (perder).
Gostou do comentário? Deixe sua avaliação aqui embaixo!
