Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon, the Brand Buster

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 123 posts

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#21

Post by anilshanbhag »

New York Times with its typical anti-capitalist spin. Amazon Basics doesn't sell because its Amazon or they used ‘Data That No One Else Has', it is simply the same product at a cheaper price.

The same is true at Kirkland at Costco, Great Value at Walmart and Signature at Safeway/Albertsons. You can buy Signature batteries at Safeway. Brands clearly add a brand tax which is unjustified. They have larger distribution/scale than store brands, yet they charge more. Market forces are driving prices down and that is a good thing.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#22

Post by petepete »

dmoy wrote: post #8

I don't get this argument. I just went to CVS and bought their white labeled lotion and some band aids, that were nearly identical in ingredients to the branded stuff sitting right next to it on the shelf. My soap at home is similarly target's in house stuff. Half the things I buy from Costco are Kirkland. Why do I do it? Because it's like half the price. Just like buying say AmazonBasics batteries vs Energizer.

A side note, the AmazonBasics rechargeable batteries are excellent. I believe they are rebranded (or something very similar to) Panasonic Eneloops.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#23

Post by autokad »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #12
dmoy wrote: post #8

I don't get this argument. I just went to CVS and bought their white labeled lotion and some band aids, that were nearly identical in ingredients to the branded stuff sitting right next to it on the shelf. My soap at home is similarly target's in house stuff. Half the things I buy from Costco are Kirkland. Why do I do it? Because it's like half the price. Just like buying say AmazonBasics batteries vs Energizer.

I think the example given with Alexa voice purchases ("Buy batteries" only results in AmazomBasics batteries being purchased) is a pretty major difference that makes the in-store comparison not really a great analogy. Every CVS I've been to always has the CVS brand pretty much right next to the major label brand - they're equally accessible. If I ask a store worker where the shampoo is, he'll point me to the shampoo…

IN healthcare, when I order a prescription they default the knock off brands. I honestly dont have a problem with Alexa defaulting to the cheapest option with near equal quality

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#24

Post by autokad »

hakfoo wrote: post #18
subpixel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument isn't that Amazon is making things hard on consumers. It's that they are killing brands on a battlefield they control absolutely. Think of it from the brand perspective. CVS pays you to stock their product on their shelves, so while they compete with you, they also send you money every month regardless. On the other hand, you have to pay Amazon to include your products in their catalog. So while they com…

I find, across the board, Amazon often feels like their incentives don't align with those of a customer. They're always trying to push Prime (and to a lesser extent their video and music service) which represents extra clicks to sale. It's a significant auto-renewing commitment, not a $5 casual impulse add-on-- repeatedly dangling it in front of me and hoping I misclick into it borders on a dark pattern. I'd love to…

I'm an absolute luddite when it comes to shopping online, but I found Amazon to be one of the easiest. i throw lots of stuff in my cart, and then pull things away at the end based off shipping cost/time. I have had shopping carts open for years. I also like the wish list and buy again options.

When I order an air purifier, amazon reminds me I might need to buy extra filters, stuff like that. many times i have ordered stuff from websites, and key components that make what i ordered useful were not part of the order.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#25

Post by badminton1 »

Amazon has full visibility over what is sold on their platform and can sell directly that directly without extensive market research.

Same with ads. They know what the search terms are and how to exactly target those ads.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#26

Post by alfredallan1 »

nicodjimenez wrote: post #14

I think this article is a little misguided. Sure, commodity products such as Duracell or cheap clothing companies might be in trouble, but such companies were weak brands in the first place. Their main appeal was low cost, good enough, and Amazon is just doing the whole low cost, good enough thing better than anyone. But high end brands like Apple, Nike, Louis Vuitton, Gucci, are not going anywhere, that's for sure!

Not immediately, no. 10 years back, Duracell seemed a very strong brand. All it is going to take for LVMH, etc. to start getting replaced is a new generation of online shoppers seeing Amazon house brands right next to these and subconsciously associating them together as brands of equal value.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#27

Post by p1mrx »

User23 wrote: post #17
pietroglyph wrote: post #5

I think this illustrates the unfair advantage pretty well: https://www.amazon.com/s/&field-keywords=batteries

You're right. It's absolutely unfair that Energizer is ripping customers off to the tune of 30%. Also wow this is terrible reporting. "Around 2009..." is it too much effort to find a real date?

The real ripoff is that none of the alkaline batteries have a mAh (or mWh) rating. They literally sell energetic cylinders without telling you how much energy's in them; how is this still a thing?

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#28

Post by tempay »

p1mrx wrote: post #27
User23 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. It's absolutely unfair that Energizer is ripping customers off to the tune of 30%. Also wow this is terrible reporting. "Around 2009..." is it too much effort to find a real date?

The real ripoff is that none of the alkaline batteries have a mAh (or mWh) rating. They literally sell energetic cylinders without telling you how much energy's in them; how is this still a thing?

Giving alkaline batteries a mAh rating is difficult as it is highly variable depending on the environment and load characteristics. You can find data sheets for the major manufactures on their websites for example: http://data.energizer.com/pdfs/en91.pdf

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#29

Post by manigandham »

hakfoo wrote: post #18
subpixel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument isn't that Amazon is making things hard on consumers. It's that they are killing brands on a battlefield they control absolutely. Think of it from the brand perspective. CVS pays you to stock their product on their shelves, so while they compete with you, they also send you money every month regardless. On the other hand, you have to pay Amazon to include your products in their catalog. So while they com…

I find, across the board, Amazon often feels like their incentives don't align with those of a customer. They're always trying to push Prime (and to a lesser extent their video and music service) which represents extra clicks to sale. It's a significant auto-renewing commitment, not a $5 casual impulse add-on-- repeatedly dangling it in front of me and hoping I misclick into it borders on a dark pattern. I'd love to…

> I find, across the board, Amazon often feels like their incentives don't align with those of a customer.

That's a strange interpretation. Their checkout flow is as little as 1 click and their incredible growth is from only caring about the customer and delivering value better than anyone else. Many people do almost all of their shopping on Amazon because it's fast, easy, and reliable, even if the prices aren't the best.

Re: Amazon, the Brand Buster

#30

Post by akvadrako »

bshepard wrote: post #4

How much do consumers pay in Bezos tax for goods on Amazon? i.e, if the site simply let consumers buy from Chinese manufacturers (which, in the end, is what much of Amazon is) without the fee to the owners of the marketplace (i.e, "Bezos Tax), how much cheaper would it be?

Often I comparison shop between aliexpress.com and amazon.de. When the "brand" or equivalent quality product is on both, AliExpress is almost always cheaper, sometimes up to 50%. I would say on average 25% less and with free shipping even for small orders.
Post reply on HN