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

The Anti-Amazon Alliance

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 419 posts

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#31

Post by csharptwdec19 »

Bahamut wrote: post #15
btmiller wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might not want to hear it, but those that were fired recently were using their company email address to organize union discussions. You just can’t do that, no matter how justified one is to pursue unionizing.

That doesn't appear to be true: https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em... > Also, restrictions on your efforts to communicate with co-workers cannot be discriminatory. For example, your employer cannot prohibit you from talking about the union during working time if it permits you to talk about other non-work-related matters during working time.

At that point the devil is in the details.

I worked at a place where all emails had to be work related.

That was in the Cable TV Industry. Which, in it's own way makes sense; that industry has a 'Owner'->'Prime Contractor'->'Subcontractor' tiered setup for work that has always had the unspoken purpose of preventing field workers and installers from unionizing.

Wanted to send out an email about a fundraiser or special weekend craft thing? Had to have HR give the OK.

-IF- Amazon had and enforced such a policy it could be considered non-discriminatory. But I'm somehow doubting such a policy is fully enforced even if it is on the books.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#32

Post by jes5199 »

softwaredoug wrote: post #4

As a consultant, I see companies struggling to compete with Amazon (or Amazon-like companies). Most companies struggle for a couple of reasons - They are ego driven, with legacy execs & others relentlessly protecting their status - whereas Amazon is relentlessly data-driven - They have poor incentive structures and are feature factories. They value velocity over outcomes. Amazon, by being more data driven, is focused…

have you talked to engineers who actually work at Amazon? they aren’t exactly running a tight ship.

Market forces can make up for having a dysfunctional culture.

This is roughly analogous to the role of luck in personal success- people say “I must have done something right!” when in reality you have far less control than you imagine

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#33

Post by polskibus »

nitrogen wrote: post #20
zbobet2012 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your points, but I've also found another one that is far more common: They sell products at a loss to gain income in other places. For example, if you are a content producer you are competing with a company that sells "ad-free" video (Prime Video) attached to a low-cost service (Prime) so that they can sell more goods online. Amazon is killing content producers by running a negative margin content busine…

If they really are dumping, then I look forward to the lawsuit from all of their would-be competitors. That would help the increasingly centralized industry figure out what can be independent and what can only be done by monopolies.

I'm not sure if it can be called out as dumping if they are not dumping across all their services.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#34

Post by subhobroto »

CPLX wrote: post #22
softwaredoug wrote: post #4

As a consultant, I see companies struggling to compete with Amazon (or Amazon-like companies). Most companies struggle for a couple of reasons - They are ego driven, with legacy execs & others relentlessly protecting their status - whereas Amazon is relentlessly data-driven - They have poor incentive structures and are feature factories. They value velocity over outcomes. Amazon, by being more data driven, is focused…

These are all fine and perhaps valid, but it's not a serious conversation until you add this at the top: - Because Amazon has extreme market power and engages in predatory anti-competitive behavior

> - Because Amazon has extreme market power and engages in predatory anti-competitive behavior

Sure it does.

The American consumer continues to empower it to behave that way because no one other than Amazon gives them what they need.

Kind of like how people continue to complain about their cable provider being evil but they don't do anything about it except complain.

Want to solve your cable provider being evil? Start a cheap WISP. Anyone can do it, yet no one does.

Complaining is cheap. It takes a lot of work to actually do something.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#35

Post by polskibus »

zbobet2012 wrote: post #11
softwaredoug wrote: post #4

As a consultant, I see companies struggling to compete with Amazon (or Amazon-like companies). Most companies struggle for a couple of reasons - They are ego driven, with legacy execs & others relentlessly protecting their status - whereas Amazon is relentlessly data-driven - They have poor incentive structures and are feature factories. They value velocity over outcomes. Amazon, by being more data driven, is focused…

I agree with your points, but I've also found another one that is far more common: They sell products at a loss to gain income in other places. For example, if you are a content producer you are competing with a company that sells "ad-free" video (Prime Video) attached to a low-cost service (Prime) so that they can sell more goods online. Amazon is killing content producers by running a negative margin content busine…

don't forget they are also cannibalizing sellers that use their own platform by launching cheaper competition - Amazon basics etc.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#36

Post by CPLX »

subhobroto wrote: post #34
CPLX wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all fine and perhaps valid, but it's not a serious conversation until you add this at the top: - Because Amazon has extreme market power and engages in predatory anti-competitive behavior

> - Because Amazon has extreme market power and engages in predatory anti-competitive behavior Sure it does. The American consumer continues to empower it to behave that way because no one other than Amazon gives them what they need. Kind of like how people continue to complain about their cable provider being evil but they don't do anything about it except complain. Want to solve your cable provider being evil? Star…

It's not the job of the average consumer to conduct antitrust enforcement. That's what governments are for.

The fact that ours is for sale to the highest bidder is problematic, clearly, but the whole point of antitrust as a concept is you can't just start a competitor, because of the predatory anti-competitive actions of the monopolist.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#37

Post by [deleted] »

seph-reed wrote: post #29
subhobroto wrote: post #21

Amazon is successful because they allow people to order cheap consumer goods real fast, sometimes same day and have a great return policy to boot. The typical consumer does not care about "Made in U.S.A" vs "Made in China" vs "Made in Taiwan". They do care whether it's $9 vs $27. The typical consumer does not care whether the workers were paid fair wages and given enough bathroom breaks so as not to urinate in a bott…

> Jeff Bezos is not the monster here - he's just responding to market forces. Market forces are not moral. You don't get a free pass on your actions because you made a bunch of money.

[deleted]

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#38

Post by siruncledrew »

softwaredoug wrote: post #4

As a consultant, I see companies struggling to compete with Amazon (or Amazon-like companies). Most companies struggle for a couple of reasons - They are ego driven, with legacy execs & others relentlessly protecting their status - whereas Amazon is relentlessly data-driven - They have poor incentive structures and are feature factories. They value velocity over outcomes. Amazon, by being more data driven, is focused…

Who are some of these companies competing with Amazon in your experience?

Are they big, small? What kinds of firepower could they compete with?

Just wondering about the efficacy for these companies of trying to compete against a behemoth like Amazon versus carving out their own niche or redefining their market.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#39

Post by lotsofpulp »

subhobroto wrote: post #21

Amazon is successful because they allow people to order cheap consumer goods real fast, sometimes same day and have a great return policy to boot. The typical consumer does not care about "Made in U.S.A" vs "Made in China" vs "Made in Taiwan". They do care whether it's $9 vs $27. The typical consumer does not care whether the workers were paid fair wages and given enough bathroom breaks so as not to urinate in a bott…

>The typical consumer does not care whether the IP of a company was stolen and cheap copies were made that were defective and buggy compared to the original product. They do care whether it's $9 vs $27.

People might not care if they are knowingly buying a counterfeit item, but they certainly do care if they think they are getting a legitimate brand name item and then receive a different (especially inferior) product.

Re: The Anti-Amazon Alliance

#40

Post by zbobet2012 »

nitrogen wrote: post #20
zbobet2012 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your points, but I've also found another one that is far more common: They sell products at a loss to gain income in other places. For example, if you are a content producer you are competing with a company that sells "ad-free" video (Prime Video) attached to a low-cost service (Prime) so that they can sell more goods online. Amazon is killing content producers by running a negative margin content busine…

If they really are dumping, then I look forward to the lawsuit from all of their would-be competitors. That would help the increasingly centralized industry figure out what can be independent and what can only be done by monopolies.

Amazon paid 7 billion in content costs this year, I would estimate it cost another 1.5billion to do the distribution. That doesn't include internal development costs, advertising costs, etc.

Prime all together only made 14 billion. Considering that prime almost assuredly doesn't cover its 2day shipping we can be very sure, the video unit is _certainly_ not positive.

What's even more important is this quote from Bezos, which directly states it's their strategy:

"We get to monetize [our subscription video] in a very unusual way," Bezos said. "When we win a Golden Globe, it helps us sell more shoes. And it does that in a very direct way. Because if you look at Prime members, they buy more on Amazon than non-Prime members, and one of the reasons they do that is once they pay their annual fee, they're looking around to see, 'How can I get more value out of the program?' And so they look across more categories — they shop more. A lot of their behaviors change in ways that are very attractive to us as a business. And the customers utilize more of our services"

https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-said-s...

It's a _publically stated strategy_.

Post reply on HN