11–20 of 75 posts
Title is misleading; this only applies to items that are lost/damaged prior to being sold. “For items that are lost or damaged after a customer order in Amazon’s store, we’ll continue to reimburse you for the sales price on the original order minus applicable fees”
Previously when Amazon lost or damaged items in their warehouses, they would reimburse sellers the full sales price. Starting March 2025, Amazon will only reimburse the manufacturing cost of lost or damaged items. Sellers have to either accept Amazon's estimated manufacturing cost or provide documentation of their actual manufacturing costs.
Later in life I wondered whether this was really fair, as things cost money to order, process, and store. (Though this is normally baked into retail pricing in the markup and also there is normally an accounting allotment for shrinkage.)
Later still I realized that this was perfectly fair! It's an opening point in a negotiation.
Title is misleading; this only applies to items that are lost/damaged prior to being sold. “For items that are lost or damaged after a customer order in Amazon’s store, we’ll continue to reimburse you for the sales price on the original order minus applicable fees”
Even so, it is a fairly hostile policy. If Amazon looses or destroys an item under their control, I’d expect them to cover the cost of getting a new item “in inventory”. Car insurance is often for “replacement value”, right?
>Car insurance is often for “replacement value”, right?
I think it depends upon your insurance. The insurance I have for cars is always based upon the value of the car at accident time, usually far less then its replacement value.
Title is misleading; this only applies to items that are lost/damaged prior to being sold. “For items that are lost or damaged after a customer order in Amazon’s store, we’ll continue to reimburse you for the sales price on the original order minus applicable fees”
Even so, it is a fairly hostile policy. If Amazon looses or destroys an item under their control, I’d expect them to cover the cost of getting a new item “in inventory”. Car insurance is often for “replacement value”, right?
0. https://marketplacelearn.walmart.com/guides/Walmart%20Fulfil...
I had one of the largest retailers to reach out to my company with an interesting problem. Given a weight and ingredients of packaged food they wanted to predict the content of each ingredient so that they could calculate the suppliers COGS so that they could use it as negotiating leverage against the suppliers...
Should the DOJ be hearing about stuff like this?
What's to stop sellers from lying or fudging the numbers in a realistic direction? Either way, this seems bad and I can't see how it would help with trust.
Lina Khan could have acted on this information. Too bad she's being ousted. We needed her.
I had one of the largest retailers to reach out to my company with an interesting problem. Given a weight and ingredients of packaged food they wanted to predict the content of each ingredient so that they could calculate the suppliers COGS so that they could use it as negotiating leverage against the suppliers...
That's diabolically clever. At scale, you can squeeze your merchants for every last penny. Should the DOJ be hearing about stuff like this?