The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax” • Hacker News Board

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#71

Post by xgl5k » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:20 PM UTC

seatac76 wrote: post #41

xgl5k wrote: post #35

FTC should go after other industries that are far more harmful to customers than tech. ISPs, healthcare/insurance, etc. Tech should be no where near the top of concerns for the FTC. This is a political stunt. If Lena Khan and the FTC were actually interested in consumer protection, they would go after other industries first.

Tech is omnipresent, is flush with cash that it frequently uses to disrupt (drive existing businesses out and then monopolize) and has an outsize influence on people. It absolutely should be first on the list for anti trust action. and it’s Lina Khan.

Most of the disruption is done by startups not the big companies.

The influence is nowhere near as negative as the impact from the other industries I mentioned.

They gained gained market share by providing better goods and services than the alternatives.

Still, there are viable alternatives to essentially every good or service provided by these companies.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#72

Post by endisneigh » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:20 PM UTC

mjsweet wrote: post #61

endisneigh wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are able to do so, but Amazon is not obligated to have them on their platform if they aren't providing the best price to their customers.

Amazon is a product search engine and should be treated as such. Vendors must have the freedom to set pricing on any platform as they see fit. If all product search engines and ecommerce platforms behaved in this anticompetitive behaviour then what would we have? A weird commercial landscape that lacks flexibility… in the end the consumer looses because free market forces are not in play.

Amazon is not a product search engine, so the rest of your post is irrelevant. They are a store and describe themselves as such. You cannot find products on Amazon that are not for sale by them or sellers who agree to their rules, an actual product search engine would allow this.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#73

Post by proamdev123 » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:21 PM UTC

Jensson wrote: post #31

endisneigh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the problem with this. They don't have to sell on Amazon to begin with. Amazon obviously wants their customers to have the best price available. Sellers can just go off Amazon if they don't like it. If sellers end up raising the price on other platforms as a result of this rule, then that says more about them than Amazon. Demanding the lowest price does not harm consumers. Overstock, Wayfair, Walmart and…

It is none of Amazons business what prices they put when they list their wares on other services, the only reason they care is that they want to crush the competition. Dictating how retailers can interact with your competitors is anti-competitive. Dictating what prices they can offer when they put up listings is a part of that, it is anti-competitive.

> It is none of Amazons business what prices they put when they list their wares on other services…

It is literally Amazon’s business to offer pricing at equal to or better than their competitors.

> …the only reason they care is that they want to crush the competition.

Every company wants to beat their competition, and many (most?) want to “crush” their competition. Don’t you think Target wants to crush Amazon? Don’t you think Google wants to crush Apple in smartphone sales? Don’t you think a local retailer would love to crush Amazon for products in their niche?

The only question here is whether Amazon is doing this in an abusive way and/or a way that negatively impacts consumers.

We’ll find out in the trial…

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#74

Post by endisneigh » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:21 PM UTC

Jensson wrote: post #64

endisneigh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is not forcing them to raise prices on other platforms? Amazon is telling their sellers that they must offer the best price on their platform. That does not necessarily mean they have to raise prices on other platforms.

> That does not necessarily mean they have to raise prices on other platforms. It does, since losing sales on Amazon costs them more than raising the price on other platforms then that is what they will do, since companies are motivated by profit. Amazon knows this, that as a dominant market player if they add this rules the vendors will have to abide it since they will lose more from not using Amazon. This is how an…

What you're saying doesn't make any sense. They could also just lower prices on other platforms - good for the customer. They can and should continue to lower prices, also good for the customer, until it is no longer profitable for them.

If they decide to raise prices, then that has more to do with the seller than Amazon.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#75

Post by ToValueFunfetti » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:25 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #51

kibwen wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even know where to begin with this comment. Do you know what anticompetitive behavior is? Do you know how markets are supposed to work? Amazon is leveraging their position in the market to unfairly disadvantage their competitors, thereby distorting the market, decreasing its efficiency, and increasing end prices for consumers everywhere. Market-distorting behavior like this is why antitrust regulation is nece…

Everything you're stating is false. Amazon is trying to do right by its customers, and they are not obligated to let sellers not give their customers the best price available. Sellers are not obligated to sell on Amazon. Your conclusion that this increases end pries for consumers has nothing to do with Amazon, but the sellers themselves.

Amazon was already told not to do this for anti-trust reasons, and they promised to oblige. Unless the government, Amazon, and the general public are all incorrect about what constitutes monopolistic behavior, you are. The idea that Amazon is openly defying pro-consumer laws to do right by its customers is absurd.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#76

Post by endisneigh » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:25 PM UTC

someonehere wrote: post #54

What does breaking up Amazon look like? I’m genuinely curious because half the comments I see in here are “break up Amazon!” or “break up FAANG!” What does that look like? What would Amazon look like if broken up? In the end we all know lobbyists from Amazon will somehow influence their outcome.

It doesn't really matter because Amazon isn't going to be broken up to begin with.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#77

Post by woooooo » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:25 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #47

woooooo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some would say that the way commerce works is sellers can sell anywhere at any price that a buyer wants to pay.

That's not how commerce works. Commerce works by following the rules of places that you are trying to sell at. You can't sell anything anywhere.

Sure. The rules at the place you're trying to sell.

Dictating how you sell elsewhere is a clear step beyond that.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#78

Post by wallaBBB » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:26 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #34

Jensson wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is none of Amazons business what prices they put when they list their wares on other services, the only reason they care is that they want to crush the competition. Dictating how retailers can interact with your competitors is anti-competitive. Dictating what prices they can offer when they put up listings is a part of that, it is anti-competitive.

[flagged]

You can repeat that comment here as many times as you want but it will not make it a valid one. Amazon is practically a monopoly, and they have reached that position by often selling goods below COG prices, incurring losses but outliving the competition. Now without a competitive marketplace for quite a lot of stuff they can dictate the prices at a loss for everyone except them. If somebody was to challenge them with lower prices they can just repeat the cycle. They simply do not have proper competition for a lot of stuff and they are abusing it.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#79

Post by anonymousab » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:26 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #56

tartuffe78 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're obligated to by the grip Amazon already has on the e-commerce market. Letting Amazon make anti-competitive moves that increase their grip will only worsen the situation.

This grip you're describing only exists because they don't leave, and nothing is stopping them. Again, no one is forcing people to sell on Amazon. They could use Shopify or sell on eBay. People act as if you have to sell on Amazon. You don't. That assumption and expectation is why Amazon is dominant to begin with. Sellers should leave if they don't like it, and that will naturally soften Amazon dominance.

> and nothing is stopping them.

Imminent collapse and bankruptcy when they leave due to Amazon's dominant market position. That you can set up a shop anywhere does not mean anything when all of your potential customers are only going to the Amazon digital strip mall.

Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”

#80

Post by smoldesu » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 1:27 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #69

smoldesu wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No manufacturer is obligated to buy Standard Oil or Carnegie steel, so this entire premise is false."

Yes, because there are not literally thousands of e-commerce stores out there. Amazon is the only one. UPS, USPS and FedEx don't exist either. You must use Prime to transport your stuff.

Look, with this reasoning there is literally no world in which Amazon can be implicated for monopoly abuse of power. Apparently, having any other option (even if it is damaged by monopoly abuse) is good enough for you.

Clearly the FTC disagrees with your logic, and I'm glad they do. FedEx, UPS and USPS should be sued too if they did what Amazon is doing.