Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 114 posts

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#101

Post by wmeredith »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #76
ecommerceguy wrote: post #70

I've got a decent amount of n95 (both 3M and HDX HD Brand) masks that we lucked into more than a significant amount of time ago. We are afraid to list them, at any price, because I'm afraid ebay/amazon will kill our listings at any price. I'm ready to ship them for free, of all costs, I just don't want my amazon "privileges" revoked. who do i give n95 masks too? edit: they are 2024 exp dates

> who do i give n95 masks too? Donate them to your local hospital. Hospitals everywhere are running short on masks and other PPE, and a lot of doctors and nurses are going to die because of it . Italy is already hemorrhaging medical staff trying to stop the virus.

Please do this. I had a few unused leftover N95’s from a furniture refinishing project. I gave them to my neighbor who is a nurse at a local hospital. They’re desperately needed. If “regular” civilians get sick that’s bad, but when nurses and doctors start going down it’s much much worse.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#102

Post by j-c-hewitt »

Symbiote wrote: post #59
j-c-hewitt wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can create hundreds of thousands of listings almost instantly through the API or by uploading a spreadsheet to Amazon. It's not possible for manual review for all of them because of this. That is why they lean so heavily on both automation and armies of cheap contractors.

Suspend/delete accounts (and all listings) for anyone with a single violation. Problem solved.

Considering the amount of fraudulent reports that already go on with Amazon, this would not be tenable. Remember Amazon Marketplace wants to grow as well. It is also important for big brands to have the ability to create lots of new listings at scale. For example, every year or every fashion season, brands release entire slates of new products. It is important for Amazon to function to allow sellers and agents of brands to be able to create lots of new listings at once. Manual review would greatly delay that process and create a lot of unnecessary frustrations.

A lot of things that one might think of such as "well, whitelist the big brands" or "use enhanced reviews on sensitive, regulated categories" is already built in to Amazon's policies, protocols, and automated systems.

If you want a zero fault option, buy direct from brands. I often do that myself.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#103

Post by j-c-hewitt »

beachy wrote: post #86
j-c-hewitt wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can create hundreds of thousands of listings almost instantly through the API or by uploading a spreadsheet to Amazon. It's not possible for manual review for all of them because of this. That is why they lean so heavily on both automation and armies of cheap contractors.

Rate limiting on the API and the spreadsheet rows, except for approved accounts.

They already do this. You will get flagged for unusual activity if it is not already in your history, much like you get flagged by a credit card company for unusual purchasing behavior. While there isn't a formal probationary period various systems do get tripped more easily for new accounts with no history.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#104

Post by toohotatopic »

triceratops wrote: post #100
epr wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one said anything about only "rich people" "deserving" anything. If you draw the conclusion that only "rich people" will have access to something if the price is higher (notice they didn't specify how much) that's fine, but don't go putting words in other people's mouths.

You didn't answer why imposing limits on how many each individual may purchase isn't a reasonable solution. It prevents hoarding and keeps prices normal. Sure, the manufacturer or retailer doesn't profit, but if they were happy to get price $X pre-panic, why are they not happy to get the same price now? Their costs haven't changed (yet).

It just forces the people who corner the market to employ agents who buy the products in smaller batches. It helps a bit but doesn't fundamentally change the dynamics.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#105

Post by toohotatopic »

eru wrote: post #50
crankylinuxuser wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So only rich people deserve items demanded in a panic? The proper control is limit purchase per person per day. Raising prices on things like masks in a viral contagion like this is unconscionable

Give poor people money, if you want to help them. Not queues and black markets.

Then you just drive prices up and put the poorest non-poor people into the same class as the poor.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#106

Post by triceratops »

toohotatopic wrote: post #104
triceratops wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't answer why imposing limits on how many each individual may purchase isn't a reasonable solution. It prevents hoarding and keeps prices normal. Sure, the manufacturer or retailer doesn't profit, but if they were happy to get price $X pre-panic, why are they not happy to get the same price now? Their costs haven't changed (yet).

It just forces the people who corner the market to employ agents who buy the products in smaller batches. It helps a bit but doesn't fundamentally change the dynamics.

It does though. If you employ agents, you have to pay them, which increases your costs. If you're buying for yourself, you only pay for the cost of the item. So this would do exactly what everyone is recommending per economic theory - raise costs for scalpers, keep them sane for everyone else. Purchase limits provide an easy selection mechanism between scalpers and others.

Also, in a situation like this, how many people would choose to be an agent for someone else, versus buying for themselves?

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#107

Post by toohotatopic »

triceratops wrote: post #106
toohotatopic wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just forces the people who corner the market to employ agents who buy the products in smaller batches. It helps a bit but doesn't fundamentally change the dynamics.

It does though. If you employ agents, you have to pay them, which increases your costs. If you're buying for yourself, you only pay for the cost of the item. So this would do exactly what everyone is recommending per economic theory - raise costs for scalpers, keep them sane for everyone else. Purchase limits provide an easy selection mechanism between scalpers and others. Also, in a situation like this, how many peo…

All the waiters who are out of their jobs and urgently need money.

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#108

Post by triceratops »

toohotatopic wrote: post #107
triceratops wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does though. If you employ agents, you have to pay them, which increases your costs. If you're buying for yourself, you only pay for the cost of the item. So this would do exactly what everyone is recommending per economic theory - raise costs for scalpers, keep them sane for everyone else. Purchase limits provide an easy selection mechanism between scalpers and others. Also, in a situation like this, how many peo…

All the waiters who are out of their jobs and urgently need money.

Cool. So costs go up only for scalpers and the unemployed get some cash? Sounds like a win-win to me :-)

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#109

Post by pandaman »

triceratops wrote: post #100
epr wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one said anything about only "rich people" "deserving" anything. If you draw the conclusion that only "rich people" will have access to something if the price is higher (notice they didn't specify how much) that's fine, but don't go putting words in other people's mouths.

You didn't answer why imposing limits on how many each individual may purchase isn't a reasonable solution. It prevents hoarding and keeps prices normal. Sure, the manufacturer or retailer doesn't profit, but if they were happy to get price $X pre-panic, why are they not happy to get the same price now? Their costs haven't changed (yet).

They were happy to get $X price before the panic because they could produce Y units at that price and there was demand for only Y units. If price is not increased there is no reason to believe they could make more units at the same price. In fact, there is strong reason to believe, that they have already lowered the price to such a level where only making Y units is possible. So, if the demand rises above Y then there are just two possible outcomes: a) price raises to produce more units and satisfy the new demand b) price remain the same and all additional demand remains unsatisfied.

For additional reading: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

Re: Amazon sellers ‘hijack’ listings to sell face masks despite new rules

#110

Post by epr »

wtallis wrote: post #98
epr wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In emergencies like this, there isn't enough supply available anywhere to meet demand In the presence of price gouging laws perhaps, but not in general. I of course acknowledge the overhead cost of retrofitting existing manufacturing setups to produce masks, but that doesn't mean they can't still turn a profit, especially if they are not prevented from selling internationally by well intended but misguided laws.

> In the presence of price gouging laws perhaps, but not in general. I of course acknowledge the overhead cost of retrofitting existing manufacturing setups to produce masks, Price gouging laws do not change the underlying facts of how long it takes to spin up new production lines. In an emergency , suppliers cannot respond quickly enough, by definition. The problem to be solved is how best to allocate existing stock…

> Price gouging laws do not change the underlying facts of how long it takes to spin up new production lines.

Of course they don't. What they do accomplish is preventing prices from rising quickly enough to justify new production lines. It really comes down to if manufacturers think they can make enough to cover the costs of changing production lines to the emergency good, then turning them back, and then some. This is compared to how much they make doing what they have always done. Price gouging laws lower the profits they would make.

Post reply on HN