What does this mean realistically? If I were Bezos, would I just have more companies on paper? Maybe more manangement and different companies doing business with each other but they all have the same owners?
The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
201–210 of 653 posts
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. The rules at the place you're trying to sell. Dictating how you sell elsewhere is a clear step beyond that.
They are not dictating how they sell elsewhere. They are saying they need to offer the best price on their site. It is easy to detect whether or not they actually are, and sellers are simply being called out. There is no obligation to sell on Amazon, nor a requirement for them to raise prices on other platforms. They could simply offer the lowest price everywhere. The result? Lower prices for Amazon customers. If the…
[deleted]
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
And if lots of items became available on other sites, but not Amazon (as per the theory being propounded), then Amazon would no longer control 35% of all US e-commerce.
This is a classic coordination problem: you need all the sellers to leave together so that individual merchants don't take a loss. And coordination problems like this are one of the main areas government action can help!
Also, I'd imagine that coordination would probably leave them vulnerable to their own set of anticompetitive allegations (i.e., some variant of cartel behavior/price-fixing). To the extent anyone acts, it would probably have to be government.
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#204FTC 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.
Big tech is no longer the disruptor. Mature big tech way too easily devolves into rent-seeking just like those other industries you listed, just with shinier tech.
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Customers who really need that will go find it at Walmart, or where-ever. So here's a weird externality. As a decently well off tech-worker, I don't care if I'm paying 5$ or 2$ for lightbulbs, even if I'm re-lighting my whole house. The seller will sell on Amazon, because it is the largest market and will set their prices on other markets to match Amazon. I'll buy on Amazon, because it isn't worth my time to check…
> And now people who do need to save money, can't also find this lightbulb at a cheaper price on competing marketplaces, even if this lightbulb is actually the best quality It's the opposite of what you're saying. Sellers not selling particular items on Amazon is good for consumers who are price conscious, because if they need that particular item they will search for it and find it cheaper on another store, strength…
> It's the opposite of what you're saying. Sellers not selling particular items on Amazon is good for consumers who are price conscious,
Sellers don't just 'not sell this item on Amazon', because it is the largest single market. This is like, the whole issue in question.
> because if they need that particular item they will search for it and find it cheaper on another store, strengthening that one and hurting Amazon.
This is the exact thing that isn't happening, because Amazon is abusing its market position.
But, even if this was the case and the seller chose to sell on a different marketplace and take the Amazon ban, then it still wouldn't be as good as having just having the item listed on both marketplaces at two different prices. Because then I wouldn't be able to buy the best lightbulbs in one convenient location.
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#206I think this demonstrates a way in which all centralized power becomes, for good or for ill, partially absorbed into state power. A major country's government will always be able to exert lots of leverage against, e.g. tech companies, whether for legitimate or illegitimate reasons, it matters not which. They can always threaten regulatory or legislative actions which would be annoying or devastating to shareholders.…
I guess this makes me a little demoralized about the utility of "anti-big-tech government actions," because to the extent any of these actions succeed, it's probably just sending a clear message to enhance state influence/access of other tech companies. If I get excited (and I want to) because "Amazon might be broken up!!1!", maybe that just means Google finally got the message and decided to put backdoors into on behalf of .
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#207What magic does apple work behind the scenes to avoid scrutiny? If we're talking about hidden taxes, surely the only app store allowed on 50% of smart phones taking 30% is a hidden tax? And if not that, surely visa/mastercard's fee is it's own hidden tax?
What's the android version of Amazon, again?
These are clearly different scales of manipulation. On one hand, you have a brand controlling their own luxury devices, and on the other, you have a brand controlling literally everything else.
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#208Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, break them all up. And for the love of crap, stop approving billion dollar mergers.
This. Also add most major telcos, ISPs and airlines to the list as well. We love capitalism. It’s basis is competition. Let’s get us some of that.
I object a lot less if the trustbusters don’t stop with tech and apply their hammer equally to other industries, agree with telcos/ISPs (I’m not sure how uncompetitive airlines are, they seem really low margin). I haven’t really seen evidence that Khan is interested in going after non-tech companies though. (Would love any pointers to the contrary.)
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very naive view of the free market. What has been happening is Amazon consolidated the market, creating artificial barriers to entry as they do so (e.g. any and all exclusivity deals). This was always their plan, and they operated in the red for a very long time to get there. Hardly fair competition.
What's the barrier to entry? It's hardly a requirement to sell on Amazon. It's extremely straightforward to sell stuff on the internet these days. Sellers are just complaining that they can't access Amazon's audience and do as they want. Luckily there's eBay, Shopify, Wix, etc. etc.
A free market is where everyone can sell their products in the town square. Amazon isn't a seller on the town square, they are (a large part of) the town square. And that's not in the best interest of consumers long term.
There are other examples, such as Apple's app store that have this pattern too. It's true that there are other players, but when Amazon has the market share it has, it's often not feasible to ignore that customer group. And that means customers pay too much.
Re: The FTC sues to break up Amazon over an economy-wide “hidden tax”
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm gonna disagree - the original act from 1890, still used, had interpretation issues from the start, which all of the "subversion" you speak of comes from. It is a difference in how the text is read for sure, but the text is badly written. It says ""Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is he…
Sure, but my point is that we don't "need" a new act, as the OP states. All hope is not lost if we don't get one. Bad precedence and an unclear act makes Lina Khan's actions very difficult, but not quite impossible. The split nature of Congress, its showmanship and quorum rules make getting a new act very difficult, but not quite impossible. We should be pursuing both paths in parallel.
"Bad precedence and an unclear act makes Lina Khan's actions very difficult, but not quite impossible."
No, but she's totally ineffective at knowing where to push or not - so it will be impossible, unfortunately.