This is what happens when the internet is essentially taken over by the walled gardens of "platforms" where the only choices you have are the ones your masters in charge of the platform you have subjugated yourself to allow you to have.
Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
51–60 of 135 posts
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#52If you can't succeed because somebody made a low effort, low quality copy of your product, then you don't deserve to make money. Especially in light of the fact that Coke has been around for 150 years and is essentially just sugar water.
Amazon has copied 50,000+ items, some open source, some proprietary SaaS, they surely weren't all garbage undeserving of success. Predatory platforms might be the actual problem.
Source?
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#53Allbirds shoes look very very cheap. I stopped into their NYC store downtown twice. Each time I noticed a ton of glue that had seeped onto the wool when they glued the fabric on. I thought the first time it was a one-off issue. The pattern continues. Allbirds really needs to step up their quality. If you look at the product quality of Merrel, Danner, US Made Red Wing Shoes, it's night and day! I would never buy an Al…
You're comparing work boots to what are effectively wool slippers with rubber soles - of course there's a difference in quality because they're not even the same market segment. I agree with you they're overpriced, but not for the reasons you stated.
Maybe they should aim for a different market segment then. Common Projects, a plain but very well made luxury sneaker seems to be doing well. I'd imagine fighting for scraps against Amazon/Walmart isn't going to go well.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question. Why is it dodgy?
Because designers spend an entire year designing what they are going to sell as their line for the year and when they show it on the runway, Zara takes a photo and has it mass produced and sent to stores in two weeks. They do this consistently. It is dodgy.
The obvious counterargument is that people like the designer clothing not because of the amount of effort spent designing it, but because of the designer brand itself.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly does seem to be anticompetitive to (1) own the market, (2) collect the data about the market, and (3) actively use that data to replace or compete with third parties on the market. As per a comment below[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21597614
If this is anticompetitive then many brick and mortar stores are in trouble. Go into any large grocery store and popular items will almost always have a store brand equivalent prominently displayed and discounted next to the name brands.
CVS even explicitly has signs that point out some house brand product has the same ingredients as X well known branded product.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#56This is why I stopped selling on Amazon. It's compelling because there's a built-in customer base. But in the long-run, they will use your selling data against you and eventually attempt to put you out of business by finding a cheaper supplier.
We have built a good business selling on Amazon in a product category where the competition (including Amazon Basics) is half of our price. If all you bring to Amazon is something that is undifferentiated and can be easily copied, then it'll be a race to the bottom and you'll lose to factories in China selling direct or players like Amazon who can achieve massive economies of scale.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because designers spend an entire year designing what they are going to sell as their line for the year and when they show it on the runway, Zara takes a photo and has it mass produced and sent to stores in two weeks. They do this consistently. It is dodgy.
The obvious counterargument is that people like the designer clothing not because of the amount of effort spent designing it, but because of the designer brand itself.
For what it's worth, I spend extra money on Ugmonk clothes not because I want you to go, "Wow, Ugmonk!" I do it because of the quality of the goods and design and because I want to support the designer. Originally I wore Allbirds because of this too.
I don't know if I am normal nationally, but locally this is a big part of the culture around these more costly goods. It is in the same vein, I might add, as "buying American".
Is this part of "brand?" Certainly. Does that divorce it from effort or quality? Certainly not.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Coke actually has regulatory protections in place. They can use flavor extracted from coca plant through a special arrangement with the dea. Anyway they sell all kinds of varieties of sugar water, and the margins are extremely thin.
Margins are thin? "Coca-Cola's latest twelve months Net Income Margin % is 23.1%." "Coca-Cola's Net Income Margin % for fiscal years ending Dec, 2014 to 2018 averaged 14.3%." https://finbox.com/KO/explorer/ni_margin
They split off Coca Cola Enterprises to achieve this.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#59If you can't succeed because somebody made a low effort, low quality copy of your product, then you don't deserve to make money. Especially in light of the fact that Coke has been around for 150 years and is essentially just sugar water.
No, it's why trademark and copyright exist.
Nobody is complaining that Amazon can 'make better shoes'.
The issue is about copying design.
Re: Allbirds CEO on Amazon's copycat strategy
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because designers spend an entire year designing what they are going to sell as their line for the year and when they show it on the runway, Zara takes a photo and has it mass produced and sent to stores in two weeks. They do this consistently. It is dodgy.
It’s not dodgy, it’s capitalism. And thanks to this downward pricing pressure, we enjoy a lot of luxuries today at prices the masses can afford. If someone can make an Allbirds shoe for $5 that is basically 95% identical as the real thing then the consumer has won.
This is an opinion, not a fact. It's not at all clear that design theft actually leads to better goods at lower prices. It is at least as valid and interpretation that design theft changes the coarse shape by parasitical copying of designer's work, without changing the quality.