Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#491

Post by shawnz » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #488

shawnz wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The board of a corporation is tasked with protecting the shareholders' investments by overseeing the selection of a CEO and corporate structural issues. And that's it. Right. So they have a duty to select a CEO who doesn't enable the unnecessary waste of corporate money on optional taxes.

No, that's exactly wrong. They don't have a duty to minimize waste, otherwise they would have a duty to not award golden parachutes or large executive compensation packages or even to pay themselves more than a few hundred bucks a year.

> otherwise they would have a duty to not award golden parachutes or large executive compensation packages

That's actually true though, they do have such a duty.

http://www.shareholderoppression.com/excessive-compensation

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#492

Post by one2zero » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 6:25 PM UTC

What nobody is touching on here is that there are UPP/MAP restrictions on many items from different manufacturers. You'll see notice this in action when you see a price that's obfuscated behind some magical "add to cart" wall.

Regardless of the PR value here (which is worth more than this stunt IMO) I'm going to bet there are going to be more than a few MFRs whipping out their contracts for some type of damages here based on those ULP/MAP guidelines. The cost here is going to be much more than the gross loss on the items individually.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#493

Post by crazy_monkey » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 6:32 PM UTC

c22 wrote: post #485

ajhurliman wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you had actually experienced both situations you would be less shaken by the robbery from a rich person because you might have had less confidence that they would actually shoot you. This doesn't change the post hoc moral reasoning, but it night have incurred less impact on you.

I'm not sure which point you're trying to make, but I would feel extremely uncomfortable being robbed at gunpoint by a person I knew to be "rich". A rich person has much better odds of getting away with it, or receiving reduced punishment. Also, the rich person has no material need to threaten me at gunpoint, so they have clearly become unhinged and are past the point of rational decision making. A poor person who ro…

Real rich people don't rob citizens at gunpoint. They have better, legal ways to do so... One could say that exploiting tax loopholes is robbery against everyone...

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#494

Post by la_barba » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 6:52 PM UTC

jjeaff wrote: post #490

la_barba wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you make a distinction between stealing from a rich person versus a poor person?

Do you make a distinction between stealing a pack of gum and stealing a car?

Depends on the exact nature of your question. If you want to argue on simple moral terms, both are wrong because stealing is stealing. But the "wrongness" of each action can be debated so obviously under most legal systems the punishment is not identical - and that is a related but a different conversation. But note that the punishment for stealing, in most cases, is not dependent on the personal wealth of a victim. I say most because I'm sure some pedant is going to find the odd outlier.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#495

Post by zip6 » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:58 PM UTC

sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

A while ago I ordered a 10TB backup drive for $80, knowing it was a pricing mistake. Amazon cancelled the order and gave me a $20 gift card. I believe whether or not the retailer has to honour pricing mistakes depends which country you live in (I'm in UK). Annoyingly, the $20 gift card wasn't applied automatically to the next purchase, as it was supposed to (maybe because it only applies to USA Amazon?)

(Funnily enough, the pricing mistake did manage to get the product to be the #1 best seller.)

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#496

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 8:05 PM UTC

qntty wrote: post #409

megla_ wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't understand the morality of an average HN user. There was a post a few days ago about Spotifree (which mutes your ads), and everyone took it as a personal offense, every possible negative word was said about the person who made it, and the people that use it are lowlives who don't deserve anything in life if they won't cough up $10. But now when it's Amazon losing thousands of dollars per product, it's…

I personally think that this is moral. I think that capitalism is inherently immoral so it's not immoral to "steal" from giant corporations. I consider myself a very moral person (you have to take morality very seriously if you disagree with the people around you about moral issues) but this doesn't bother me.

Do you mind when people steal from you?

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#497

Post by FiberBundle » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 8:45 PM UTC

cloakandswagger wrote: post #472

FiberBundle wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Amazon's stock going to $0 would necessarily entail wealth destruction. The money doesn't just disappear, people who have sold at the high have profited. Wealth destruction only happens when credit is involved.

If you're confused by the downvotes, it's because the stock market is not a zero-sum game. This is a common misconception about equities. The stock market can both create and destroy wealth because it is not a zero-sum game.

I'm not an expert and I would love for someone to tell me I'm wrong. Having said that I think what I wrote in the previous post is wrong, Amazon going to $0 would clearly entail some wealth destruction, namely at least the amount that was raised in the IPO and any further issuing of stock (options not included since they only dilute). But besides that any temporary increase in the stock's value, is not equivalent to each stockholder getting an equivalent amount of cash (which was what the OP claimed and what I assumed he meant with wealth creation/destruction) just as a decrease in the stock price is not the same as an overall decrease in money in the population. Some people sell at a high or at any price above the price of the IPO/ price at which money was raised, which captures some of the temporary increase, any loss that includes the money that was actually raised by Amazon would be actual wealth destruction (cash losses), but I don't see how the rest of those losses would also correspond to actual cash losses.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#498

Post by hello_tyler » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 8:53 PM UTC

Amazon can eat that loss without batting an eye. If it's resellers, etc, I'm not sure how the situation would be remedied. I think cancelling the orders would be fair, because some small camera shop can't be expected to eat the same losses as the #2 multinational retailer. While I wish I had gotten one of those cameras, as 10kUSD would completely change my life, I can understand both sides I think...

If it was Amazon it would be the best PR for the next prime day you could think of. People will be scouring the site for these kind of deals next year.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#499

Post by coryfklein » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 8:59 PM UTC

kls wrote: post #108

Sounds to me like someone at Amazon is good at marketing. Let a few things go for an insane deal, knowing it will hit the front page of every blog. Then reap the rush of next years prime day with people scouring the site for pricing "errors". Pretty cheap and effective marketing. Kind of like a raffle but without having to get all the lawyers involved to make sure you comply with raffle laws.

The Klein effect strikes again!

> I need to coin a term for this concept, I see it on every Hacker News thread once it reaches a certain size. It is the attribution of the topic to some nefarious intention of a dude in marketing. Once you start noticing it you can't unsee.

> Intel fires their CEO? It's a PR stunt.

> Startup abandons Europe due to GDPR? PR STUNT!

> AlphaZero beats professionals at Dota 2? You guessed it, it's just PR for oligarchy parent Alphabet.

> I see this so often now it's becoming humorous. As if some how this being all about PR explains everything. It doesn't explain anything! Although I'm sure Bill over in marketing loves that he has subsumed the historical role of deity in explaining the unknown.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17499447

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#500

Post by rapind » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

merpnderp wrote: post #440

rapind wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shit begets shit. If you're buying from a local mom and pop where the owners are part of your community it's far less likely you would take advantage of the situation. People still return wallets full of money. How are they morally bankrupt? Amazon is an example of unfettered capitalism, and are seen differently in the eyes of the consumer. Right or wrong, people just don't care about a megacorps well being (and I do…

What is unfettered capitalism? The "unfettered" part leads me to believe this is a pejorative. Wikipedia redirects to economic liberalism, which is just free markets in opposition to planned economies. Is there anyone even remotely serious who thinks planned economies are superior? Is there a planned economy in the world that isn't in tattered ruins, impoverishing its people in the most hideous and evil fashion, whil…

By unfettered capitalism I just mean a system where you end up with disparities of 500x, massive multinationals, and horrible behaviour by many (yesterday we had an article about Cargill for example) that's too hidden or abstract for most of society to fully realize. I believe it's unsustainable and will inevitably come crashing down.

Personally I'm in favour of worker coops with a capped pay disparity between the least and most valued workers (like 8x).

I'm not advocating for planned economies or a Chinese or Russian approach (power in the hands of the few).