Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore • Hacker News Board

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#31

Post by hombre_fatal » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:33 PM UTC

jolmg wrote: post #18

jszymborski wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the primary barrier here is that, while you can assume based on IP/Locale, you don't entirely know where the customer intends on shipping the product, and therefore rates fluctuate. It would be great to allow customers to estimate shipping as soon as possible, rather than just before clicking the "give us money" button.

Also, you want to present the same price to all customers.

Yeah, I don't know why you'd do what they're prescribing. It's just misleading and seems more like a dark pattern. As if "free shipping" will manipulate them to make the purchase.

People already understand the price of an object vs the cost of sending that object somewhere in the world. Everyone understands $100 shoes with a shipping fee, not $105-$130 shoes that shape-shift depending on where the person lives that opens the link.

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#32

Post by jeltz » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:34 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #4

davidhyde wrote: post #3

People don't mind buying from a vendor's site directly but the vendor should do their best to reduce the admin / pain of doing so. Some tips I wish vendors would follow: 1. Don't capture more information than is absolutely necessary for the transaction. 2. Don't force the user to sign up or join anything if they just want to buy something. 3. Don't automatically add the user to your newsletter and send their details…

That would be ideal but every piece of data they capture is a component for a future sales funnel. The smart way to do this would be to have some boilerplate language about respecting user's privacy and having a minimum number of required fields and then baiting you to provide more info for discounts, insider info, and whatever else they are willing to give as digital tchotchkes in exchange for more and more marketin…

How is making it seem like the data is mandatory any better than it actually being mandatory? I will probably bounce as a customer either way before actually in detail investigating the huge form I was presented and buy from an online competitor or from a physical store.

And maybe I am an odd customer, but I also think that the customer who buys more sneakers just due to a spammy newsletter is too.

Edit: Online casinos here in Sweden recently went through a revolution where they added e-ID login (meaning that users do not need to complete a huge form on signup) and automatic withdrawal on logging out when possible. Sure, they were lucky that they could get almost all of the old data they gathered by using the e-ID, but even if they had not been able to I think it still would have been worth it to collect less data to get more sales. And apparently slowing down withdrawals was bad for business (who could have known!) despite making some gamblers lose their money while waiting for the withdrawal to be approved. Customer hostile greedy strategies can trap you in a local optima.

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#33

Post by chrisseaton » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:36 PM UTC

cobbzilla wrote: post #9

Why would anyone buy shoes on Amazon? They own Zappos, whose focus is specifically footwear, and have a pretty good shopping experience. Never had a problem with counterfeits on Zappos.

> Why would anyone buy shoes on Amazon?

Why wouldn't I? I already have the account, app, and shipping set up. Why are shoes different to anything else?

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#34

Post by hombre_fatal » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:39 PM UTC

cobbzilla wrote: post #9

Why would anyone buy shoes on Amazon? They own Zappos, whose focus is specifically footwear, and have a pretty good shopping experience. Never had a problem with counterfeits on Zappos.

> They own Zappos, whose focus is specifically footwear

Well, apparently not. They sell all sorts of clothes, eyewear, jewelry, etc.

It's just a smaller Amazon that has less, offers no obvious upside, and is yet another place you need to register an account for and give your payment details to. Though if counterfeiting is as big of a problem as it appears to be, that would be one reason to consider Zappos.

I just clicked the "Men's" section and got everything from pants to cute jock straps[1] before I saw my first shoe. So clearly they gave up their "shoes only" shtick.

[1]: https://www.zappos.com/p/2-x-ist-3-pack-stretch-jock-strap-b...

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#35

Post by dehrmann » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:40 PM UTC

davidhyde wrote: post #3

People don't mind buying from a vendor's site directly but the vendor should do their best to reduce the admin / pain of doing so. Some tips I wish vendors would follow: 1. Don't capture more information than is absolutely necessary for the transaction. 2. Don't force the user to sign up or join anything if they just want to buy something. 3. Don't automatically add the user to your newsletter and send their details…

I'm slightly surprised there isn't room for a logistics company that can give smaller retailers Amazon-level efficiencies, but not have ecommerce ambitions, itself. And it should be branded (like Amazon Prime), not just someone in the backround, so people know it will ship quickly, arrive quickly, and have a good level of support.

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#36

Post by patwolfe » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #35

davidhyde wrote: post #3

People don't mind buying from a vendor's site directly but the vendor should do their best to reduce the admin / pain of doing so. Some tips I wish vendors would follow: 1. Don't capture more information than is absolutely necessary for the transaction. 2. Don't force the user to sign up or join anything if they just want to buy something. 3. Don't automatically add the user to your newsletter and send their details…

I'm slightly surprised there isn't room for a logistics company that can give smaller retailers Amazon-level efficiencies, but not have ecommerce ambitions, itself. And it should be branded (like Amazon Prime), not just someone in the backround, so people know it will ship quickly, arrive quickly, and have a good level of support.

Isn't this Shopify [0]?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopify

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#37

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:43 PM UTC

hombre_fatal wrote: post #31

jolmg wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, you want to present the same price to all customers.

Yeah, I don't know why you'd do what they're prescribing. It's just misleading and seems more like a dark pattern. As if "free shipping" will manipulate them to make the purchase. People already understand the price of an object vs the cost of sending that object somewhere in the world. Everyone understands $100 shoes with a shipping fee, not $105-$130 shoes that shape-shift depending on where the person lives that o…

But seeing $100 shoes then seeing $5 shipping fees tacked on separately will make people feel cheated, and abandon the purchase. They made a decision to spend $100, and now you're trying to make them make another decision to spend $105 instead.

Disclosing the shipping fees up front helps a bit, but not completely.

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#38

Post by jeltz » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

anbotero wrote: post #30

davidhyde wrote: post #3

People don't mind buying from a vendor's site directly but the vendor should do their best to reduce the admin / pain of doing so. Some tips I wish vendors would follow: 1. Don't capture more information than is absolutely necessary for the transaction. 2. Don't force the user to sign up or join anything if they just want to buy something. 3. Don't automatically add the user to your newsletter and send their details…

You know who has to suffer from this? International buyers. I buy a lot from Amazon, and I live in Colombia. While these days there are a lot of direct, global shipments from Amazon, I still buy a lot of things I leave at my aunt's house in Miami by the time I travel to pick it all up. I remember not being able to buy a custom Converse shoe on their vendor site because I didn't have a local US credit card. I hate it,…

Even in Europe we suffer from this. I never buy from Amazon anymore due to their website being as bad as the average small webbshop if you are not in one of the countries Amazon is in (e.g. US, UK or Germany).

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#39

Post by hombre_fatal » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:47 PM UTC

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #37

hombre_fatal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't know why you'd do what they're prescribing. It's just misleading and seems more like a dark pattern. As if "free shipping" will manipulate them to make the purchase. People already understand the price of an object vs the cost of sending that object somewhere in the world. Everyone understands $100 shoes with a shipping fee, not $105-$130 shoes that shape-shift depending on where the person lives that o…

But seeing $100 shoes then seeing $5 shipping fees tacked on separately will make people feel cheated, and abandon the purchase. They made a decision to spend $100, and now you're trying to make them make another decision to spend $105 instead. Disclosing the shipping fees up front helps a bit, but not completely.

That's what I'm saying. I don't think people feel cheated seeing $100 + $5 S/H. I mean, speak for yourself: do you really feel cheated by the transparency?

And if people do feel cheated (I'm unconvinced), I still don't believe they need to be manipulated into thinking that shipping doesn't have cost. These kinds of reality-distortion practices are all too common in tech and ecommerce.

It's like Verizon manipulating people into thinking they get a "free iPhone" when they sign a 2-year contract. It's 100% misleading.

If people are surprised by shipping fees, it's only because this misleading practice is widespread and we're racing to the bottom on dark patterns. All the more reason to be principled, imo.

Re: Nike won’t sell directly to Amazon anymore

#40

Post by undersuit » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

lotyrin wrote: post #29

mikece wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be ideal but every piece of data they capture is a component for a future sales funnel. The smart way to do this would be to have some boilerplate language about respecting user's privacy and having a minimum number of required fields and then baiting you to provide more info for discounts, insider info, and whatever else they are willing to give as digital tchotchkes in exchange for more and more marketin…

I buy the number of shoes per year that I'm going to buy and I'm going to buy them first based on a value calculation that considers things like their price and my expectation of their longevity and secondly based on whether or not I'm contributing to business practices that externalize costs of my purchase to others. I will forever opt out and unsubscribe from anything I can, and furiously report spam for the remain…

>Who are these people that, having bought some sneakers already, get a email about other sneakers into their nearly bottomless inbox full of junk (presumedly, given they don't avoid these kinds of marketing messages) will actually notice it amongst the noise and then actually be compelled to buy additional shoes they wouldn't have otherwise

They exist, I just think it's stupid to build your business around them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/17/sothebys-sells-sneaker-colle...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWSGN0Er18E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw9_tB1tzT4

https://www.sacbee.com/sports/nba/sacramento-kings/article23...