Amazon scooped up data from its own sellers to launch competing products

Post by bofadeez » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 2:24 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #690

bofadeez wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they raise prices then they invite an instant flood of competition and lose their monopoly. They have no power to raise prices and restrict competition. Their only competitive advantage is pricing. Amazon's only profitable products are AWS and its stock. The benefit of losing $2 billion a quarter doing retail is debatable. Would you prefer a world without amazon's subsidies given that they have no power to exploit…

Your theory is that Amazon is spending $2 billion a quarter even though it gets them no long-term advantage? If you're right, then capitalism is hopelessly bad at optimization and we should scrap it. But what I think is more likely here is that Amazon's execs understands the economics of their business way better than a zero-karma free-market fundamentalist whose pseudonym is a genitalia joke.

Post by bofadeez » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 2:42 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #690

bofadeez wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they raise prices then they invite an instant flood of competition and lose their monopoly. They have no power to raise prices and restrict competition. Their only competitive advantage is pricing. Amazon's only profitable products are AWS and its stock. The benefit of losing $2 billion a quarter doing retail is debatable. Would you prefer a world without amazon's subsidies given that they have no power to exploit…

Your theory is that Amazon is spending $2 billion a quarter even though it gets them no long-term advantage? If you're right, then capitalism is hopelessly bad at optimization and we should scrap it. But what I think is more likely here is that Amazon's execs understands the economics of their business way better than a zero-karma free-market fundamentalist whose pseudonym is a genitalia joke.

Post by wpietri » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

bofadeez wrote: post #721

wpietri wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your theory is that Amazon is spending $2 billion a quarter even though it gets them no long-term advantage? If you're right, then capitalism is hopelessly bad at optimization and we should scrap it. But what I think is more likely here is that Amazon's execs understands the economics of their business way better than a zero-karma free-market fundamentalist whose pseudonym is a genitalia joke.

They get a long-term advantage in that their stock continues to rise. The stock is the product. And AWS enjoys having a household brand attached to it. And don't be mad that someone with a genitalia username is making a point your brain is incapable of making a cogent argument against, in spite of it eliciting a strong enough emotion for you to leave a comment.

Post by ooobit2 » Sun, May 03, 2020, 6:35 AM UTC

sharmi wrote: post #712

ooobit2 wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. One distinction I want to argue is placement: Amazon always places the Amazon Choice options at the top of the search and product listings. They also always include them in the "Popular, Editor's Picks, Highest Rated, etc." box that appears in the middle of most pages on the site. This would be like you walking into Safeway for a bag of sugar, and as soon as you turn down the aisle, there's an employee telling…

Another issue. At Safeway, Heinz ketchup is the real deal. No duplicates. Amazon, on the other hand, has allowed duplicates, cheap reproductions and false reviews to proliferate. Now the only way you are assured a product is what it says is if it is an amazon brand.