Live data from Hacker News

FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

ftc.gov

711–720 of 930 posts

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but think that Amazon should be replaced with a non-profit or regulated public utility that provides a single unified online marketplace, part of internet infrastructure like ICANN. Sellers would select among competing fulfillment services (warehouse+shipping). Platform referral fees would go toward customer remediation, anti-counterfeiting, and review integrity. I don't merely say this as a "fuck Amazon…

Don't you think if we turned USPS into this it would be a another billions of dollars a year waste for taxpayers? Do we really need to be subsidizing drop shippers? > Amazon is not marshalling new capital to innovate or improve its digital marketplace. Rather, Amazon simply owns digital real estate and extracts rent, like some kind of futuristic dystopian corpo-baron. What on earth are you on about? They own a url.

Amazon owns one of the most sophisticated logistics networks in the world. They own warehouses and robots and trucks and planes. All of that adds up to a meaningful, valuable contribution to the world.

I buy tons of stuff on Amazon. I buy from them rather than from eBay or an independent online retailer because I know it'll actually get delivered to my house on time. For me, the marketplace is basically irrelevant - it's the promise of fulfilment by Amazon that I care about.

I sometimes reluctantly buy from an eBay seller or a random e-commerce site when the item I want isn't available on Amazon. Those retailers tend to offer "FREE DELIVERY", but they also tend to be very evasive about how long it'll take and which company will do the delivering. Sometimes they'll advertise next-day delivery, but take two or three days to actually dispatch the package. Sometimes they'll use an ultra-cheap delivery service that takes 3-5 days, with no prior warning of which day they'll actually try to deliver on. Sometimes their terrible delivery service will decide that they just can't be bothered to deliver to my house, so they'll lie about having tried to deliver it and tell me to collect it from a warehouse. Sometimes they deliver to somewhere random in the vague vicinity of my house (a neighbour, underneath a parked car, behind a bush) and I get to play a fun scavenger hunt where the prize is something I already paid for. These bad outcomes literally never happen to me when I buy from Amazon.

In the event that something did go wrong with a delivery, I'm confident that I could just contact Amazon and they'd make it right; when something goes wrong with $OnlineRetailer, I often find myself refereeing a dispute between the retailer and the logistics company, both of whom deny responsibility.

There are plenty of alternatives to Amazon, but from a customer's perspective they just suck.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#712

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Anker that was selling "offline" cameras that phoned home plaintext images? Yeah, no thanks.

Because your powerbank or charger definitely have those capabilities right?

Never use untrusted usb devices without protection.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#713

FBA seller here. A lot of mom and pop businesses (~$20 million) have been built on Amazon over the past 10 years. Most of us are in the $250k to $5 million dollar range. The impact of Amazon’s monopoly power is felt big time by us as we’re being squeezed with no place left to go online especially post-iOS change. Our second option used to be the Facebook/Instagram/TikTok to Shopify connection but with that being dead…

>A lot of mom and pop businesses (~$20 million) have been built on Amazon over the past 10 years. Most of us are in the $250k to $5 million dollar range.

It's interesting, Amazon also put a lot of mom and pop businesses out of business during this time period as well. The overhead that used to go to local commercial property owners, independent trucking and warehousing companies and such now all goes to Amazon. It's a total monopoly in the old school robber barron sense. Not only do they own the railroad they also own the steel plant and the coal mine.

Break 'em up like Bell I say!

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#714
post #444

FBA seller here. A lot of mom and pop businesses (~$20 million) have been built on Amazon over the past 10 years. Most of us are in the $250k to $5 million dollar range. The impact of Amazon’s monopoly power is felt big time by us as we’re being squeezed with no place left to go online especially post-iOS change. Our second option used to be the Facebook/Instagram/TikTok to Shopify connection but with that being dead…

From the Bloomberg article : "Chuck Gregorich, who sells fire pits and outdoor furniture, says turning a profit on Amazon is getting harder. One of his popular fire pits costs $200, of which Amazon takes $112 for its commission, warehouse storage, delivery and advertising. That leaves him with $88 to pay the manufacturer, ship the product in from China and cover his overhead." I have a hard time sympathizing here. Th…

This is a tangent but the consumerism that leads to people spending $200 instead of digging a hole in the ground for a fire pit is part of the issue.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#715
FBA seller here, too. I make and sell my own patented device which nobody else makes or sells. I have competitors in the same category but my product is novel, more functional, and more expensive to make.

I was doing FBM (fulfillment by merchant) because I like shipping my product directly from my place of business but I had to switch to FBA to get my sales to go up. They were already getting half but now Amazon is getting more than half of my revenue.

I also have my own site where I can sell for the same price and keep much more of the revenue, but most shoppers won’t buy if they didn’t find it on Amazon. If I leave Amazon or raise my Amazon price to recoup the costs or stop paying for FBA and Amazon ads, I lose almost all of my sales. This is all because Amazon is doing anticompetitive things with its monopoly power. Enforcement is needed. I don’t know what the injunctions will propose to do but I’m eager to find out.

What really kills me is knowing how my customers would feel if I told them how much of their purchase price is being kept by Amazon. They value my product enough to buy it for that price. The few who really understand Amazon always offer to buy it directly from me so I get to keep more of the money. If only everyone understood that.

I have to spend some more time and money optimizing my Amazon listings and then I will turn my focus onto my site and spend all my effort building my business to survive in spite of Amazon.

Literally in spite.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Anyone who disagrees must be engaged in nitpicking, PR tactics, and astroturfing. This all seems very rational. Lina, is that you?

Do you know when the astroturfing checks come in by the way? Also is that W-4 income or am I contractor?

You are human? You must be amazon's first gen astroturfing infra, mechanical turk style. I'm part of amazon's skunkworks Astroturf-LLM service. Automated, at scale astroturfing. I believe we will make it public facing via AWS soon.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to. They could get their own distribution channel. Distribution is a thing, you can't just complain that you don't have it for free.

That's literally the meaning of being a monopoly: There are no other distribution channels that can compete with Amazon. They are a distribution monopoly.

? Sure there is

Newegg Best Buy Walmart Home Depot bh photo wayfair webpage that takes you to shoppay or something else

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#718
post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read both - I don't see anything odd here. Seems like like the thesis of the FTC's case includes the natural continuation of some of Lina Khan's ideas, plus additional focus on the Amazon Seller economiy.

The abstract of the link is that Amazon’s monopoly power has manifested itself in _under_ pricing products. The FTC claim is that Amazon _over_ prices products. They are in direct opposition.

I read it more that an actor can lower prices in one market or at one time and raise them in others or at another time, and that regulators should police predatory pricing because of the harm to competition and consumers, even if in some markets or at some times prices are lower. That's consistent with what the FTC is doing here.

Further, the essay was written six years ago, and to an audience of legal scholars. This case is about Amazon today and the audience are courts. The facts and arguments derived from them are naturally different.

I would suggest reading the entire thing, especially the excellent summary on the history of legal and economic theory applied to anti-trust to understand the deeper meaning behind the abstract itself. It's hard to boil down a nuanced and complex argument into a single paragraph. There's a lot of meat there.

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#719

FBA seller here. A lot of mom and pop businesses (~$20 million) have been built on Amazon over the past 10 years. Most of us are in the $250k to $5 million dollar range. The impact of Amazon’s monopoly power is felt big time by us as we’re being squeezed with no place left to go online especially post-iOS change. Our second option used to be the Facebook/Instagram/TikTok to Shopify connection but with that being dead…

what is the biggest barrier to moving to the second option, customers?

Re: FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power

#720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to. They could get their own distribution channel. Distribution is a thing, you can't just complain that you don't have it for free.

That's literally the meaning of being a monopoly: There are no other distribution channels that can compete with Amazon. They are a distribution monopoly.

Most things aren't bought on Amazon, but if you're a middleman droppshipping stuff from China, Amazon is an easy way to get in front of a lot of eyeballs.

It's not clear to me why droppshippers deserve special care and treatment by the FTC.

Post reply on HN