221–230 of 930 posts
Maybe interesting to some, but during the recent Google updates (core and "helpful"), Amazon had more than $100M of search traffic value wiped out, https://i.imgur.com/5HpZT6Z.jpg Google absolutely launched a nuke at Amazon.
What were those updates exactly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feels like a non-sequitur? What are you trying to say? My specific point is that I would wager money that Amazon being required to have DRM on their devices is required by publishers for them to be able to have that publisher's offerings. If Amazon drops the DRM, they lose the ability to offer that content. I'm not as confident that they have the agreement include that they will not offer authors a way to have DRM fr…
DRM doesn't have to be proprietary. I should be able to buy books from any place and read them on any reader.
In my opinion, Amazon needs to be split into at least 4 independent entities: - Online marketplace - Consumer products - Internet infrastructure - Delivery logistics Similar to the three-tier distribution system for beer in most states (a brewer cannot be a wholesaler or a retailer). This makes it easier for smaller players can compete with the big ones on quality at least, if not price or recognition. (Edit: format)
Reminds me of the weird law in a lot of states where breweries and distilleries can't use the same equipment or physical location - which pushes out smaller more varied players since you need capital in order to operate multiple locations.
I wish they would add ebook DRM to the list. Amazon has essentially locked the Kindle so that it can only purchase from Amazon and Amazon ebooks can only be used on the Kindle. On top of that, they offer no way of transferring ebooks and, AFAIK, offer no way to remove DRM after a work enters the public domain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t have to use them. That’s the point of my argument. No one’s stopping you from selling it using Shopify where you can set up an e-commerce store within a couple of hours.
The whole point of the case is to show that they control a monopoly. When there's a monopoly, you can't go anywhere else!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grocery stores are not a monopoly.
Pretty close! Albertsons owns: Acme Markets, Safeway, Haggen, Jewel-Osco, Kings, Pavilions, Plated, Randalls, Shaw's, Tom Thumb, United Supermarkets, and Vons Kroger owns: Baker's, City Market, Dillons, Food 4 Less, Foods Co., Fred Meyer, Fry's, Gerbes, Harris Teeter, JayC, King Soopers, Kroger, Mariano's, Metro Market, Pay Less, Pick 'n Save, QFC, Ralphs, Ruler Foods, Smith's And now Albertsons and Kroger are mergin…
I'm honestly not sure how you could make the case that they aren't maintaining and abusing monopoly power. I mean they literally blatantly copy the designs of other companies who sell on amazon, then put their own results for their own products higher in search results than what they copied off of. It's incredibly blatantly anti-competitive.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/274255/market-share-of-t...
The simplest pro-Amazon case is that they do not have monopoly power, because they are not a monopoly.
Maybe interesting to some, but during the recent Google updates (core and "helpful"), Amazon had more than $100M of search traffic value wiped out, https://i.imgur.com/5HpZT6Z.jpg Google absolutely launched a nuke at Amazon.
> ... during the recent Google updates (core and "helpful")... What were those updates exactly?
Maybe interesting to some, but during the recent Google updates (core and "helpful"), Amazon had more than $100M of search traffic value wiped out, https://i.imgur.com/5HpZT6Z.jpg Google absolutely launched a nuke at Amazon.
Is it a meaningful volume for Amazon at all? I thought the majority of US/EU customers begin their search from Amazon and just skip Google when it comes to shopping.
Does anyone know more about Project Nessie? There's a portion of the complaint [0] that is heavily redacted from page 123 to 126. The only information that isn't redacted is this: * Project Nessie is an algorithmic pricing system * "Amazon's Project Nessie has already extracted over [redacted] from American households." * "this scheme belies its public claim that it “seek[s] to be Earth’s most customer-centric compan…
Amazon has implemented an algorithm for the express purpose of deterring other online stores from offering lower prices.
[redacted]
Rather than trying to compete, Amazon uses
[redacted]
Ultimately, this conduct is meant to deter rivals from attempting to compete on price altogether-competition that could bring lower prices to tens of millions of American households. As a result of this conduct, Amazon predicted, "prices will go up."