US antitrust case against Amazon to move forward

Post by johnnyanmac » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 1:24 AM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #140

johnnyanmac wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the algorithms make the difference here. You can't really make a cereal box stand out on a physical shelf in any unique way (or you can, but it'll be a cost expense. Ruining the point of undercutting). IME with online storefronts for traditional brick and mortar their own brands never seem to come on top. Meanwhle I will almost always get an AmazonBasics if it exists as a first result.

> Meanwhle I will almost always get an AmazonBasics if it exists as a first result. 99.9% of buyers prefer this over having to wade through innumerate random brands and try to discern quality.

Post by lotsofpulp » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 1:31 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #141

lotsofpulp wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhle I will almost always get an AmazonBasics if it exists as a first result. 99.9% of buyers prefer this over having to wade through innumerate random brands and try to discern quality.

Consumers like a lot of short term factors that turn against them in the long term. That seems to be the theme of the 21st century. I'd rather these perverse incentives not exist and simply have a more educated consumer base learn to search "Amazon basics X" instead of maximizing conviniece to enable monopolies. We've clearly been shown that we can't handle the latter

Post by adam_arthur » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 1:50 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #112

adam_arthur wrote: post #24

Competition is the core tenant that makes capitalism beneficial to broader society. Consolidation over the past few decades has limited the capacity for firms to compete in many sectors. So I appreciate the sentiment of what the FTC is trying to do, but they really come across as amateurs bringing far too many lawsuits and often with weak legal reasoning/argumentation. In many of the cases they've brought there exist…

I mean, I'm not a lawyer so I won't really judge what's a good or bad argument. My impression is that forcing open standards is a much harder argument than an antitrust one. Open standards can come at a later step. And if you haven't kept up this year, Chevron being overturned is showing that the SCOTUS is more than happy to reduce FTC interference.

Post by godelski » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 2:00 AM UTC

braiamp wrote: post #23

Workaccount2 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's in violation of the sacred law of the attention economy: Never link outside your garden.

For some weird reason, outlinks are to be avoided, because it's seen as "leaving your site". In a store front, I can see that making sense. In a site to provide information... not so much.

  > For some weird reason, outlinks are to be avoided

Post by tiltowait » Tue, Oct 08, 2024, 2:24 AM UTC

Loughla wrote: post #130

the_gorilla wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's part of an antitrust case, but I am tired of seeing every item being sold from 200 chinese companies with randomly generated names and fake/bought reviews. Walmart has started to do something similar with their online store. I'll use their words. > It's easy to sell online with Walmart.com. Partner with the largest multi-channel retailer and put your products in front of millions of Walmart shopper…

>I generally try to buy from companies directly This is the secret today. Find the product you want, buy straight from that company. Anymore the storefronts are all uniform and shipping (which used to be Amazon's advantage) is the same. The days of massive online retailers dominating is over at my house. I just wish more people would figure that out.