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

Amazon Is a Monopoly

marketplacepulse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 348 posts

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#51

Post by toasterlovin »

theturtletalks wrote: post #47
jdietrich wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Chromebook does the same thing without consequences It's not the same at all. Microsoft were forced to unbundle IE from Windows because they were using their market dominance in one area (operating systems) to give themselves an artificial advantage in another area (web browsers). This bundling shielded IE from competition and squeezed other players out of the web browser market. Apple are within their rights to bun…

Ok so dominating the market is an important factor for anti-trust litigation. Google is dominating the search market and used this to push Chrome (searching from the url address bar was one of the main reasons people switched). Is that not the same as what Microsoft did? Now they dominate both markets and leveraged both to grow the other.

C'mon.

Microsoft controlled Windows, an operating system. A browser is a thing that can be included in an operating system. Google controls google.com, a website. A browser is not something that can be included in a website.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#52

Post by jdietrich »

theturtletalks wrote: post #47
jdietrich wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Chromebook does the same thing without consequences It's not the same at all. Microsoft were forced to unbundle IE from Windows because they were using their market dominance in one area (operating systems) to give themselves an artificial advantage in another area (web browsers). This bundling shielded IE from competition and squeezed other players out of the web browser market. Apple are within their rights to bun…

Ok so dominating the market is an important factor for anti-trust litigation. Google is dominating the search market and used this to push Chrome (searching from the url address bar was one of the main reasons people switched). Is that not the same as what Microsoft did? Now they dominate both markets and leveraged both to grow the other.

Google were sanctioned in 2017 for exploiting their dominance in the search market to promote their other services.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/27/15872354/google-eu-fine-a...

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#53

Post by Alupis »

toasterlovin wrote: post #46
Alupis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure that it can control prices Amazon very often competes directly with sellers on the Marketplace, and often undercuts them on price. There are products they sell below the purchase cost, sometimes below manufacturing cost. You can't compete with that unless you have piles of money to burn. They sell at a loss until they shake everyone loose from a product, then dominate all sales of that products on the…

> Amazon very often competes directly with sellers on the Marketplace, and often undercuts them on price. If Amazon can actually compete with you in a given product niche, then you're not bringing any value to the table (since they own the customer relationship, the fulfillment, the logistics, etc.), so why do you deserve to make money? There are a gazillion product categories on Amazon. There's no way they can bring…

Being on Amazon's Marketplace (the largest in the world), every sale gives Amazon all the statistics needed to pick only guaranteed profitable products. The sellers actually pay Amazon for the privilege of providing Amazon with these market tests!

Then Amazon requires the seller to produce invoices showing purchase of the items, usually with some sort of vague threat of suspending your account if they can't "verify the authenticity" of your products. The invoice, of course, has everything needed for Amazon to start sourcing the product themselves - and now they know your cost.

So they proceed to purchase the product, sell it at a loss until you can't hang anymore, and now Amazon is the sole source for the product.

It's brilliant, actually. But it's definitely Anti-Competitive.

Just like the "dumb pipes" argument with Net Neutrality - If you wanna run a Marketplace, you shouldn't be allowed to "compete" in the very same Marketplace. You should not be allowed to collect and then abuse all the data the Marketplace produces.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#54

Post by stcredzero »

philipov wrote: post #40
foota wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The classical theory has been that it doesn't matter if you dominate the market if you don't cause some harm (i.e., actively exclude competition or raise prices) as a result.

Likewise, if you cause harm, it doesn't matter if you technically dominate the market. The key word is trust, not monopoly. Cartels are also bad for markets, but aren't monopolies either. Monopolies have become a deprecated technology, but vertical integration lives on in new ways that resemble a feudal system more than a single empire. The economy as a whole has gotten so big that there is room for more than a singl…

As abusive, anti-competitive practices continue to be improved on, we should not be constrained by outdated theories that only focus on 19th and 20th century phenomena.

The same applies to censorship. Manufacturing Consent described how the western powers could have the effect of censorship without outright censorship, and that's from over 3 decades ago.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#55

Post by matthewmacleod »

theturtletalks wrote: post #28
taeric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an argument that doesn't feel to be in good faith, but to just stir reactions.

I can see why it seems that way but no one has been able to explain to me why Microsoft was pursued for antitrust litigation and Google was not for doing the exact same thing. Maybe instead of accusing someone of stirring up reactions, explain the double standard.

The core problem here is that you see the “thing” as “bundling a browser”, so your logical conclusion it that it is the “exact same thing”.

In reality, Microsoft was accused of several different acts - monopolisation, unlawful tying arrangements, unlawful exclusive dealing arrangements. It was not merely the fact that Microsoft bundled a browser, but the whole ecosystem and market position around that action. It is perfectly possible for two people or companies to perform the same action, and for it to be unlawful for one of them, because of the other circumstances surrounding the action.

It n a modern context, Google is not in the same position as Microsoft of the 90s. Microsoft, as the only viable provider of consumer operating systems, was in a unique market position. This alone is reason enough to scrutinise decisions to bundle products.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#56

Post by youeseh »

indopedia wrote: post #45

She forgets that the Amazon marketplace is made up of sellers and the prices aren't controlled by Amazon for a lot of their products. These are inherited from the distributor in most cases. Sure Amazon fulfills the orders but it's not like Walmart that controls the entire process. There is more freedom in Amazon. Anyways, this is just the hip thing of today. How about making a service better than Amazon? No that's im…

> Anyways, this is just the hip thing of today

Observing that Amazon may be monopolizing isn't a new observation.

When they began competing against their vendors is when they crossed the line, in my opinion. The same goes for any marketplace. It is one thing to provide your vendors the tools and information they need to operate better, but then to act on that information yourself - the operator of the marketplace - that is pretty shady.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#57

Post by gwright »

indopedia wrote: post #45

She forgets that the Amazon marketplace is made up of sellers and the prices aren't controlled by Amazon for a lot of their products. These are inherited from the distributor in most cases. Sure Amazon fulfills the orders but it's not like Walmart that controls the entire process. There is more freedom in Amazon. Anyways, this is just the hip thing of today. How about making a service better than Amazon? No that's im…

> There is more freedom in Amazon.

I have a friend who has been an online merchant for many years selling through their own website, Ebay, and Amazon.

I suspect they would burst out laughing, fall down, and start rolling around on the ground in hysterics if I repeated that to him.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#58

Post by theturtletalks »

jdietrich wrote: post #48
theturtletalks wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Windows operating system. Bundling them is alleged to have been responsible for Microsoft's victory in the browser wars as every Windows user had a copy of IE. It was further alleged that this restricted the market for competing web browsers (such as Netscape Navigator or Opera)…

>How is different than what Chromebook does? Or what Google does bundling Google search with Chrome as the default search engine? ChromeOS doesn't have a dominant position in the operating systems market, so there's no case to answer - you can't exploit dominance that you don't have. Android does have a dominant position in the mobile OS market, so Google are being forced to unbundle Chrome and Google Search from And…

The EU forced them to unbundle, not the US. We’re discussing US anti-trust cases which Google has not faced after years on dominance. And regardless, it’s too late. Google has already established dominance so unbundling now won’t stop people from downloading Chrome on Android. And how are they unbundling google search when it’s built into their voice search and google assistant?

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#59

Post by Nasrudith »

losteric wrote: post #13
changoplatanero wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we should call it hypercompetitive instead of anticompetitive.

Why is that a more appropriate term for behaviors that reduce competition?

If sub-divided into how they do it perhaps? One would be "things that anyone with enough scale and willingness to take low margins could technically do" as opposed "things that serve only to lock out competition".

For the later if there is a proprietary format on something major and it shuts out competition for no benefit like say "screws only they manufacture and cannot easily take other standards" that would be "anti-competitive" as it does nothing to compete better.

For the previous say "better infastructure to lower per unit cost" and producing at an industry standard percentage profit margin could be called hypercompetitive as it does nothing to stop those with sufficient capital from scaling up.

In practice however both are classically anti-competitive. The later would by definition reduce the number of potential competitors to those with more resources.

There could be some arguements about how they are relatively bad they are and should be treated. Even if both should be "illegal" they are two different types like say arson and murder.

Re: Amazon Is a Monopoly

#60

Post by kevinsundar »

youeseh wrote: post #56
indopedia wrote: post #45

She forgets that the Amazon marketplace is made up of sellers and the prices aren't controlled by Amazon for a lot of their products. These are inherited from the distributor in most cases. Sure Amazon fulfills the orders but it's not like Walmart that controls the entire process. There is more freedom in Amazon. Anyways, this is just the hip thing of today. How about making a service better than Amazon? No that's im…

> Anyways, this is just the hip thing of today Observing that Amazon may be monopolizing isn't a new observation. When they began competing against their vendors is when they crossed the line, in my opinion. The same goes for any marketplace. It is one thing to provide your vendors the tools and information they need to operate better, but then to act on that information yourself - the operator of the marketplace - t…

Yes but EVERY retailer does this. Every single store brand product you see (Costco, Target, Walmart, CVS, Walgreens, etc.) is a result of this. Cheaper products that meet the same demand as brand name vendor goods.

In fact customers are already trained for this. I walk into a store and I immediately price compare against the store brand. So if people doing the same on Amazon, why shouldn't Amazon be allowed to fulfill that? This was a thing in retailers a long time before Amazon started doing it.

If you look around in retail stores today its easy to see how everyone strong arms vendors just the same. For example, ever notice that all of Target's pen section all have a certain color and text printed on the bottom of their packaging indicating the type of pen (Gel, ballpoint, etc)? Target has forced every single vendor (massive companies like Bic, Sharpie, etc.) that sells writing implements in Target to change their packaging, create new SKUs, do different production runs, and handle the logistics of different versions of the same pen. All to be undercut in price by the Target brand pen.

Post reply on HN