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

Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

aboutamazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 581 posts

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#281

Post by fooqux »

iso1631 wrote: post #239
jonathankoren wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t so much think it doesn’t have an impact, as much nothing on the list has any PR pizzazz. $316.62 to a grade school? Lame. $100,000 novelty check to a board member’s favorite charity that happens to be run by his son? Now that’s pizzazz with a capital P!

Amazon in my country has an image problem. Sure people use it, but people hate it for "killing the high street" and other such nonsense. Facebook adverts picking random local charities and showing how much they've raised is far better, run them on amazon's front page too. The local hospice I choose has raised £3k via amazon smile. That's far better PR than them giving £1m novelty cheques to some remote city based cha…

>That's far better PR than them giving £1m novelty cheques to some remote city based charity.

How is it better PR if hardly anybody knows about it?

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#282

Post by fooqux »

m463 wrote: post #201
gnicholas wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would often forget to type "smile" when searching for stuff, but then I'd just add to cart, close the window, and go to my cart via smile. That seemed to work. But I think we can all see this for what it is — belt tightening. Will they increase other philanthropic activities to the tune of what they were previously giving away via Smile? I would be very, very surprised if so.

> belt tightening I suspect this is the time when the charities need smile donations the most.

Wrong belt.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#285

Post by IgorPartola »

babyshake wrote: post #276
dbg31415 wrote: post #275

It's weird that corporations have philanthropic arms, isn't it?

It's mostly just tax avoidance, right?

The way I understand it is that Amazon offers an affiliate fee to affiliates. When you don’t go through an affiliate they get to keep the small percentage. Smile was basically Amazon’s own affiliate program that paid out to NGOs. It did reduce their tax liability but it’s not like it’s free money. Assuming a corporate rate of 15%, when Amazon pays a charity $100, they save $15 on taxes. That mean they spent $85, so not exactly tax avoidance unless the charity they donate to is also owned by Amazon or some such.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#287

Post by Retric »

rcme wrote: post #271
gdelfino01 wrote: post #270

This may have a bigger impact than they think. Is Amazon good for the world? For some, the answer is no but still buy at Amazon as any sins are compensated by the the small donation to a NGO of choice.

I don't think the sins of Amazon are any worse than most other major U.S. retailers.

There warehouses are significantly worse than average in terms of injuries per hour. They also frequently sell fraudulent items directly harming consumers.

I can’t think of a metric where they aren’t worse than the average retailer.

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#288

Post by skinnymuch »

throwayyy479087 wrote: post #280
rcme wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the sins of Amazon are any worse than most other major U.S. retailers.

They're absolutely not - but the people that attack Amazon don't care about that. Amazon to many represents Capitalism, and so acts as a catchall for criticisms of Capitalism. Ironically, small family shops use WAY more child labor, unpaid labor etc as a percentage than Amazon. They also produce more plastic per item, take only cash to evade taxes, etc.

Oh no small family shops are evading taxes…good thing corporations don’t that…

Re: Amazon Closing AmazonSmile

#289

Post by antiterra »

This seems incredibly poorly done from a PR perspective and there's no way to make this headline read well for them. Why not create and announce they're moving to something like "Amazon GiveBack" that gives some sliders to users to vote on the allocation?

Sure, people could still call them out on how it's a reduction of what they're donating, but there's a much higher chance the headline reads well for them.

As it is, the underlying symbolic implication is that Amazon is getting rid of its smile and instead.. frowning?

Post reply on HN