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

Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 438 posts

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#171

Post by NeedMoreTea »

partialrecall wrote: post #160
jastanton wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one difference is that the Amazon Basics products seem to have a quality bar higher than the other random re-labeled products.

I'm not sure about Amazon Basics, but with Amazon's Choice products they're plainly not evaluating products before selecting them. LockpickingLawyer on youtube has done reviews on several Amazon's Choice locks and safes and they've all been abysmal borderline fraudulent products.

Amazon's Choice is a purely algorithmic tag decided by the computer. It's utterly meaningless. I guess they change periodically on some reason known only to the code.

Amazon Basics must have had at least a couple of humans involved to agree getting it branded Amazon.

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#172

Post by cptskippy »

toasterlovin wrote: post #133
cptskippy wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly Newegg is following in Amazon's footsteps with it's affiliate program. You have to choose Newegg as the seller or you run into the same issues. As soon as Newegg starts mingling stock like Amazon does, then we'll have to go back to big box retailers to ensure we're getting the item we're paying for.

Small nitpick, but what you are referring to is not an affiliate program. An affiliate program is where a website gets a cut of the sales for providing links to a retailer's site. So, The Wirecutter makes money by using affiliate links to Amazon and other retailers on their product review articles.

Yeah you're right. I'm not sure what the correct term is.

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#173

Post by Pxtl »

sokoloff wrote: post #81
Pxtl wrote: post #34

Considering how shopping at Amazon now feels like shopping at an electronics bazaar in Singapore with giant bins of random knock-off products of suspicious quality, tweaking the algo to push name-brand options (even if it's their own name-brand) would be a welcome move to me as a buyer. Obviously it's grossly unfair to their vendors, but from a strictly user-centric view it's an improvement. Otherwise, Amazon feels l…

It’s odd to me to think that something which is user-centric could be “grossly unfair” to vendors. If you view vendors on the platform as existing to serve the users (as I do), the contradiction evaporates. If you view users as existing to serve the vendors, then it’s possible.

I'm mostly referring to established companies that have reputations as-good-or-better-than AmazonBasics and I would be more than happy to see them in the same premium position.

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#174

Post by _jal »

sokoloff wrote: post #81
Pxtl wrote: post #34

Considering how shopping at Amazon now feels like shopping at an electronics bazaar in Singapore with giant bins of random knock-off products of suspicious quality, tweaking the algo to push name-brand options (even if it's their own name-brand) would be a welcome move to me as a buyer. Obviously it's grossly unfair to their vendors, but from a strictly user-centric view it's an improvement. Otherwise, Amazon feels l…

It’s odd to me to think that something which is user-centric could be “grossly unfair” to vendors. If you view vendors on the platform as existing to serve the users (as I do), the contradiction evaporates. If you view users as existing to serve the vendors, then it’s possible.

There are things known as two-sided marketplaces. This isn't novel; malls and similar have existed for a very long time.

I get that US culture is heavy on "the customer is always right"[1], etc. but two-sided markets don't exist without recognizing both sides.

[1] In reality, that ends up being more of an employee control mechanism than a dedication to customers, but that's a different topic.

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#175

Post by jonknee »

agumonkey wrote: post #161
toasterlovin wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there is not a direct analogy because Amazon is not a monopoly . They aren't even the largest retailer.

who is it ? I thought amazon was #1 in many metrics

Walmart dwarfs Amazon in annual sales (and also plays hardball with its vendors).

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#176

Post by NeedMoreTea »

ikeboy wrote: post #92
VBprogrammer wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, Samsung had to scrap a whole phone model because of battery problems. The Boeing 787 suffered with problems of batteries catching fire (and according to some reports still does). It's a tricky problem to avoid.

Anecdotally I've spoken to people who compete with Amazon private label in electronics and they tell me Amazon doesn't care about quality, and that the factories they were buying from were known to be lower quality. I've also heard the opposite about Anker - that they always get the best quality.

Anker are difficult to gauge, I've a few products of theirs, mostly bought a few years ago, with nothing recent - those have been excellent quality and value. Yet I've also started to notice precisely identical unknown brands for most of their products on Amazon.

So I no longer have any certainty. Are Anker merely badge engineering some random white label product, or are Amazon / Anker just not caring or able to do anything about dozens of clear counterfeits?

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#177

Post by benologist »

toasterlovin wrote: post #148
pixelpoet wrote: post #140

ANTITRUST! If Microsoft can get hammered for packaging Internet Explorer with Windows (and probably rightly so, given the market conditions at the time), there is a direct analogy to be made here. Pick what you want to be: if you want to be the greatest goods index and shipment company in the world, fantastic. But you have to accept that you cannot sneak some of your own other-products to the top using that power. In…

No, there is not a direct analogy because Amazon is not a monopoly . They aren't even the largest retailer.

It was actually abusing their platform to deliberately harm other companies that sparked the antitrust. That abuse created a monopoly but the monopoly was not why they got in trouble.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#178

Post by emiliobumachar »

pixelpoet wrote: post #140

ANTITRUST! If Microsoft can get hammered for packaging Internet Explorer with Windows (and probably rightly so, given the market conditions at the time), there is a direct analogy to be made here. Pick what you want to be: if you want to be the greatest goods index and shipment company in the world, fantastic. But you have to accept that you cannot sneak some of your own other-products to the top using that power. In…

Tangential, but MS got hammered for a package of practices, including worst stuff (IMO, IIRC), such as exclusivity deals, i.e. hiking Windows prices or outright refusing to sell Windows to PC manufacturers unless they ditched Linux from all product lines.

For some reason, the browser bundling is what stuck to the public consciousness.

Re: Amazon Changed Search Algorithm in Ways That Boost Its Own Products

#180

Post by Spare_account »

partialrecall wrote: post #166
kortilla wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those two programs have nothing to do with each other.

It reflects poorly on the brand in general. If I can't trust Amazon's Choice, how can I trust anything Amazon decides to put their name on?

You can't, and you shouldn't. If this dichotomy is what raised the issue to our attention then we should be glad that it happened.
Post reply on HN