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

FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 116 posts

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#101

Post by AnthonyMouse »

totallywrong wrote: post #95
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Free market research with the data from your paying sellers, to then enter a market with a product you know will sell, in a position of dominance. But these are the things that are pro-competitive. So now they make batteries. They're not putting Energizer out of business, they can still sell through Walmart or local convenience stores etc., and some customers still buy Energizer batteries on Amazon, but now custome…

You described a perfect market scenario, where all players start on common ground and compete between them. Now imagine you have access to all the data from your competitors. Sales numbers, A/B testing on images and descriptions, keywords, etc. It might be good for customers, but it sure isn't ethical and I personally see it as being monopolistic in a way, as in "I'm copying you with your data and you know it, but ca…

You don't have all the data from your competitors. You only have the data from your own system. And every retailer has the data from their own system. And the data has diminishing returns with scale. And some of the retailers will sell it to anyone who pays.

Moreover, what should businesses use to determine whether to enter a market or how to price their offerings? A dart board doesn't make for an efficient market. It sounds like you're objecting to someone other than the incumbents having access to the threshold amount of data needed to know whether it's worth entering their market.

If the existing competitors were already charging thin margins in a highly competitive market then Amazon could look at the data all they want but their conclusion would be that it makes no sense to enter that market. When that isn't the case, the "victims" of this practice are some other abusive conglomerates with sour grapes.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#102

Post by wefarrell »

capital_guy wrote: post #23

I am amazed to see people defending AMZN in these threads. They are so obviously monopolistic with such a plethora of problems with the way the treat consumers, workers, businesses, and the planet. More power to the FTC -- just wish they had taken these actions sooner.

Amazon has been able to get away with a lot because for a long time their customer experience was fantastic. You could buy pretty much anything knowing it was the lowest price, get it in a day or two, and return it for pretty much any reason.

Over time the experience degraded because they encouraged cheaply copying popular products, and then they even did it themselves and competed with their sellers. And of course their anticompetitive practices have made things much worse for those sellers.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#103

Post by kuchenbecker »

CPLX wrote: post #8
likpok wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's the cynical take, the current FTC chair seriously believes that the FTC should be doing more antitrust enforcement and the paper that got her noticed specifically called out Amazon (IIRC the amazon/diapers.com conflict). She runs into challenges because she has a somewhat novel theory of antitrust. This causes conflict between the long-standing staffers (who both want to win cases and seem to disli…

Her theory of antitrust goes back 100+ years. It’s that there should be robust competition and when firms get too large and powerful they should be broken up. The alternate theory is the novel one. That theory basically sums up to “no we shouldn’t” and also “after a few years in public service I am happy to announce I have taken a role at a large monopolistic company and can now afford a summer home.” For more info r…

The current standard is "consumer harm" with lower prices considered per-se evidence to the contrary. The issue here is monopsony rather than monopoly because Amazon is fantastic for consumers but Terrible for sellers because there is effectively a single online market to sell in owned by Amazon.

My worry would be a feedback loop giving Amazon increasing dominance due to this effect, and would like to see both vertical integration and Monopsony more heavily scrutinized, but this lawsuit seems to target a feature with an objective benefit to consumers given Amazon's amazing shipping and return policy.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#104

Post by mr_toad »

dragonwriter wrote: post #82
0xParlay wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can they save me from Comcast first? I’d be curious how that backlog refinement meeting goes. > See that filter that orders priority by realized value? Remove it and order by campaign contributions

> Can they save me from Comcast first? Talk to the FCC, probably.

The Friends of Comcast Club?

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#105

Post by robertlagrant »

hyperbovine wrote: post #56
totallywrong wrote: post #54

How about fake reviews? That's a whole industry deceiving people with Amazon's blessing. I can't even fathom the economic impact of the practice over the years. And another one: Amazon Basics. Free market research with the data from your paying sellers, to then enter a market with a product you know will sell, in a position of dominance. Much like they do with open source in AWS. They should get hit with billions, bu…

Curious that a competitor has not sprung up to address this problem head-on...

There are multiple online shops, usually addressing a bit of the market each. People use them IME.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#106

Post by RoyalHenOil »

_gabe_ wrote: post #92
bitterspeak wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being good at something does not make you a monopoly. They are not actively blocking other online retail platforms. This is not a statement to defend Amazon but the fact that I prefer Amazon for its features (like same day delivery) is just plain capitalism. The customers have a choice to buy from a retailer they prefer and the important thing is that I still have an option to choose where I make my purchases.

This exactly. I tried buying from other online retailers recently to support other businesses directly, and their websites are replete with what I would consider dark patterns. Things like listing 2-day shipping and then burying the fact that you'll get the item 2 days from when it ships but it will take them a month to process it. Seriously, this is a thing. At least with Amazon I know I'm actually getting it in 2 d…

Amazon also has dark patterns. I have accidentally signed up for Amazon Prime twice in the last year due to the way they practically force it under your cursor while you are checking out.

I do not want Amazon Prime because in my area (in southeastern Australia), it fails to meet its delivery promises about 95+% of the time, and when that happens, Amazon cancels the order on you half the time and sends it off to some distant pick-up point the other half. Regular Amazon just sends things by post, which is so much more reliable and convenient.

I strongly prefer using smaller online retailers. I have not found it very difficult to find ones that offer better and more honest service (not to mention lower prices) than Amazon. As far as I'm concerned, Amazon is for Kindle books, and occasionally the odd item I can't find anywhere else.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#107

Post by m463 »

totallywrong wrote: post #54

How about fake reviews? That's a whole industry deceiving people with Amazon's blessing. I can't even fathom the economic impact of the practice over the years. And another one: Amazon Basics. Free market research with the data from your paying sellers, to then enter a market with a product you know will sell, in a position of dominance. Much like they do with open source in AWS. They should get hit with billions, bu…

Fake reviews are a real mess in the amazon ecosystem.

I was trying to find an airfryer cookbook for one specific model, and they all seem to be auto-generated (chatgpt?) with nothing that is model-specifc.

And all the reviews appear to be auto-genereated as well. sigh.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#108

Post by robertlagrant »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #93
robertlagrant wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does that mean? Does Microsoft have that with Windows? Intel with x86? Apple with phones? What is the scale of those words?

It means it's up to the courts to decide on a case by case basis.

That sounds...arbitrary and subject to politicisation.

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#109

Post by ThatPlayer »

robertlagrant wrote: post #108
ThatPlayer wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means it's up to the courts to decide on a case by case basis.

That sounds...arbitrary and subject to politicisation.

What method wouldn't be? Putting it to a committee would have similar problems. Writing it into a law would be too static.

Especially because the first part of determining marketshare and market power is determining the market. New markets happen all the time, with old markets dying out. Twenty years ago, smartphones wouldn't have been a market. Fifteen years ago: streaming services.

Like going back to your "Intel with x86", what is the market? x86_64 CPUs? Sure they have monopoly power. All CPUs? Now they don't have as much because they're competing with ARM too. Mobile phone CPUs? I don't think there's been a new Intel phone since the Asus Zenfone 2 (2015).

Re: FTC reportedly plans major antitrust lawsuit against Amazon

#110

Post by robertlagrant »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #109
robertlagrant wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds...arbitrary and subject to politicisation.

What method wouldn't be? Putting it to a committee would have similar problems. Writing it into a law would be too static. Especially because the first part of determining marketshare and market power is determining the market. New markets happen all the time, with old markets dying out. Twenty years ago, smartphones wouldn't have been a market. Fifteen years ago: streaming services. Like going back to your "Intel wi…

The method of letting the markets decide would work, I think.
Post reply on HN