|
QuarkJets posted:That's probably because France (or the EU) has laws enforcing fair promotion practices that the United States doesn't have; that's what you get for browsing amazon.fr. Here's what it looks like from the .com address, browsing on a computer located in Amurrica Your ad blocker is on. That's part of what's creating some of this difference. I got your results when I had it on but closer to nepetaMisekiryoiki's results when I turned it off. This is a whole other bag of worms (coding your own poo poo around ad blockers while leaving other sponsored products out in the cold) but I think that's where at least part of this particular split is coming from.
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:And besides as has been said unless they push everyone out of business and then raise prices on their products it’s not illegal. It’s kinda scummy on some level due to Amazons money and power but until it actually negatively effects the consumer there isn’t a problem. If they do that, they’ll push themselves out of business too, because people go to Amazon to choose from an enormous range of products not one “AmazonsBasics” product.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If they do that, they’ll push themselves out of business too, because people go to Amazon to choose from an enormous range of products not one “AmazonsBasics” product. Speak for yourself, if Amazon can identify one good phone charger cord out of the hundreds listed on their website and sell it to me I'm fine with that
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If they do that, they’ll push themselves out of business too, because people go to Amazon to choose from an enormous range of products not one “AmazonsBasics” product. Actually choosing from a few dozen virtually-identical hits where many are likely knockoffs from third-party sellers is awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:Your ad blocker is on. That's part of what's creating some of this difference. I got your results when I had it on but closer to nepetaMisekiryoiki's results when I turned it off. I think it’s more that ad blocker is blocking cookies and other things that block your history and you get less personalized results. The site I work on personalizes results based on past browsing behavior ie if you looked at a specific cut of jean a lot in the past, all those cuts will be top results if you go to the Jeans category or search for them. Then we have a default order based on an algorithm ie popularity, inventory etc if we don’t know who you are. Amazon probably gets more wild on defaults ie geography and other info it would always know about you. Also way more likely to be logged into their site already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If they do that, they’ll push themselves out of business too, because people go to Amazon to choose from an enormous range of products not one “AmazonsBasics” product. Did you read the article? “About 70 percent of searches on Amazon are for generic products, like “running shoes” or “milk frother,” rather than brands, and Amazon has made buying things so easy that customers often purchase the first thing with Prime shipping they see. If a seller can game Amazon’s algorithm to win a high spot for their brand, they can out-sell household names. But search placement is everything. Greer says there’s a common joke: where’s the best place to bury a dead body? On the 10th page of Amazon’s search results, because no one ever goes there.” People shopping on amazon probably still have some brand loyalty, but way different than in physical retail. I’m amazed at how many amazon defenders there are here. It’s not like the company has a stellar reputation of benevolence, reports of them taking sales data, identifying what sells well, and then ruthlessly overtaking them have been out there time and time before. Some of that is capitalism, but personally the main point of that Verge article is spot on: Amazon IS the marketplace, so it really is not a level playing field at all. That being said, I’m a prime subscriber and order from amazon all the time, so I’m as much of a hypocrite as the next person, and can’t exactly give an answer as to what the solution would be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
A complication is that Amazon (and, yes, other retailers with major market power like Wal-Mart, whether brick and mortar or online) are effectively establishing and controlling markets of their own. This is an issue unto itself, before we get into the fact that they are competitors in these markets, or that their regulation of these markets is poor.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Is it a problem if they aren’t forcing higher prices for consumers though?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:Is it a problem if they aren't forcing higher prices for consumers though? The endgame is to force higher prices for consumers. That's the point of undercutting competitors with a generic version of a product.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
the obvious answer is, right as amazon has figured it all out and undercut every other seller on everything good with their own amazon basics brand, u nationalize amazon and rebrand amazon basics as freedom basics. oh and everyone gets $4000 of amazon credit per month automatically
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
i just saved humanity you're welcome and i already regret doing it a little bit
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:The endgame is to force higher prices for consumers. That's the point of undercutting competitors with a generic version of a product. That is the endgame of every company ever always though. It's not like capitalism just started right now. Any time you have ever bought anything for anything but the maximum imaginable price it's because some company is undercutting to try and get you to buy more from them instead of everyone else. It's not like everyone up till now has been pricing everything out of love and now amazon is gonna muck it all up by competing with other companies for the first time anyone has ever thought of that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That is the endgame of every company ever always though. It's not like capitalism just started right now. Any time you have ever bought anything for anything but the maximum imaginable price it's because some company is undercutting to try and get you to buy more from them instead of everyone else. It's not like everyone up till now has been pricing everything out of love and now amazon is gonna muck it all up by competing with other companies for the first time anyone has ever thought of that. Keep in mind also that, quite recently, Amazon raised their price for Prime by $20 despite less products, especially non-Amazon products, actually benefiting from two-day shipping while also eliminating their substantial discount on new video games sold on physical media. There are probably other things that have become worse that I don't know about, but the games thing was the deal-breaker for me. The point is that Amazon is now offering an inferior service at higher cost, which they would only do if they felt that it would be more profitable for them. Their goal is not to supply the best service, it's to make more money. So, they clearly decided that, even if it costs them subscribers, it would still be more profitable for them to increase the price and reduce the value of this popular service. Companies only exist to extract profit, full stop. The goal of every company is to become a monopoly and raise their prices as high as possible without lowering profits; it's great for the monopoliser and miserable for everyone else. The fact that people are either unable or unwilling to accept this reality is genuinely disturbing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That is the endgame of every company ever always though. It's not like capitalism just started right now. Any time you have ever bought anything for anything but the maximum imaginable price it's because some company is undercutting to try and get you to buy more from them instead of everyone else. It's not like everyone up till now has been pricing everything out of love and now amazon is gonna muck it all up by competing with other companies for the first time anyone has ever thought of that. Yes, thank you for explaining things that everyone in the thread already understands. Now that we've established that baseline, what's the difference between the average retail producer and Amazon?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:Keep in mind also that, quite recently, Amazon raised their price for Prime by $20 despite less products, especially non-Amazon products, actually benefiting from two-day shipping while also eliminating their substantial discount on new video games sold on physical media. There are probably other things that have become worse that I don't know about, but the games thing was the deal-breaker for me. Your example of prime is poor because prime comes with a suite of features that have wildly different value to individuals, and without knowing the costs of the various services extrapolating reasons for behavior becomes difficult. To you they reduced the value, but to my wife who does not play games or order small things she gets more seasons of Ms Maisel and some other reading benefits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
Everyone understands the end game would be higher prices, but that end game is highly unlikely or the world is so hosed you wont give a poo poo about the price of a mouse. Everyone said the same thing about Walmart when they were the number one boogie man. Maybe if Amazon started buying up all the OEM factories I would be concerned about this more I suppose. Not really going to feel for the middleman sellers getting pushed out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Your example of prime is poor because prime comes with a suite of features that have wildly different value to individuals, and without knowing the costs of the various services extrapolating reasons for behavior becomes difficult. To you they reduced the value, but to my wife who does not play games or order small things she gets more seasons of Ms Maisel and some other reading benefits. Their music service isn't bad either, I've actually been surprised by a few of the deep cuts I've heard on there. And I can honestly say I've gotten more use out of my Echo than I thought I would when it was given to me a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Your example of prime is poor because prime comes with a suite of features that have wildly different value to individuals, and without knowing the costs of the various services extrapolating reasons for behavior becomes difficult. To you they reduced the value, but to my wife who does not play games or order small things she gets more seasons of Ms Maisel and some other reading benefits. I would say that your response is poor because everything has different value to individuals, from use value to purely sentimental/nostalgic value to the relative value of $20 to various people. To someone poor, $20 is a big deal; to some rich prick, it's a trifle. If Amazon has added features to Prime that I don't know about that's another story, but to the best of my knowledge they have increased the cost of their service while further restricting the scope of its prime (no pun intended) selling point and removed a benefit that I and a fair few others used to enjoy and felt helped justify the price. If it still works for your wife's lifestyle because they didn't trim the benefits that she enjoys then that's grand for her, but she's still paying 20% more for effectively the same service while many other people are asked to pay 20% more per annum while also getting less out of the bargain. If you can't see why some people would resent and criticise that, I don't know what to tell you. It's entirely justified for people to be cross about paying more for less, especially in regards to a ludicrously large and profitable company who barely pays any taxes, works its employees half to death for no wages in stifling warehouses and expects major cities to pay them, or near as drat it, to build facilities in their municipalities so that they can make even less of a contribution to the social good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Yes, thank you for explaining things that everyone in the thread already understands. Now that we've established that baseline, what's the difference between the average retail producer and Amazon? Is there one? none of the amazon basics things seem like anything that is likely to have zero competition any time soon. Is there really a risk that amazon is going to capture the entire pillowcase or USB hub or yoga mat market then have monopoly powers? Just being one of many competitors putting things out at a low price isn't anything. Unless there is some actual concern about a future where they have driven out every other brand of towels or something and no one else can sell towels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Is there one? none of the amazon basics things seem like anything that is likely to have zero competition any time soon. Is there really a risk that amazon is going to capture the entire pillowcase or USB hub or yoga mat market then have monopoly powers? Just being one of many competitors putting things out at a low price isn't anything. Unless there is some actual concern about a future where they have driven out every other brand of towels or something and no one else can sell towels. Are you positing that Amazon doesn't have any advantages over those other producers?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
Amazon's prices already suck rear end, they haven't been the cheapest for a while now and everytime I want to buy something I often find that Target or Best Buy have it cheaper anyways.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Are you positing that Amazon doesn't have any advantages over those other producers? Not the kind of advantage where they are going to be able to corner the market on pens or muffin tins and wield monopoly powers to force people into only buying those things at higher prices. All the amazon basic stuff is extremely giant markets of deep competition and I'm sure their strength will let them make a footprint in a bunch of them, but some fear that any company is going to get a monopoly on something as generic as umbrellas or forks by just having a store brand is pretty goofy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Not the kind of advantage where they are going to be able to corner the market on pens or muffin tins and wield monopoly powers to force people into only buying those things at higher prices. All the amazon basic stuff is extremely giant markets of deep competition and I'm sure their strength will let them make a footprint in a bunch of them, but some fear that any company is going to get a monopoly on something as generic as umbrellas or forks by just having a store brand is pretty goofy. A company doesn't have to be a monopoly to engage in behavior that's harmful to the consumer. Walmart doesn't have a monopoly on anything that they sell, but despite that their tendency to price out local businesses and then consolidate to a further-away location while also raising prices undeniably hurts consumers. Stifling competition is still bad, even if it's not the worst outcome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
My main problem with the AmazonBasics stuff is not just that they're selling a house brand but that they also charge for placing on their search via sponsored listings. Not only do they take a cut of anything sold on Amazon, they can buy their way to the top of the listing and force any competitors to buy a sponsored spot just to get the same kinds of sales they used to get before Amazon stepped in or just exit the niche entirely. They're trying to both play this game of "neutral platform" while taking money from vendors on both sides. Also you cannot underestimate the power of the search ranking, something like 80% of all sales will come from whatever product happens to be the top search result. If you think showing up #8 or whatever on the search is the same as being side-by-side with the house brand in a brick and mortar store you are delusional.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
I guess just looking at the list of things that amazonbasic exists for is all super generic commodity stuff where it seems like they could get a strong presence by being amazon but not really in a way they can lock anyone else from selling towels or something in the larger global market. Like even if literally no other towels were sold on amazon except amazon basic towels they just still don't seem like they have any sort of stranglehold over the towel industry. It seems like a basic enough product that if they really cranked up the price that there would always be somewhere else to get other towels. Like I guess they could someday do their own R&D and create non-simple unique products that were better than everyone else's and no one could compete or whatever, but that doesn't seem like the idea here. This seems like store branding on generic stuff. Which seems inherently impossible to capture the market on, since the same simpleness that let you enter the market so easily lets someone else compete if you try and squeeze things. And if amazon becomes the world government and you can only buy everything from amazon it doesn't seem like it'd really matter much if it was them or some other company making whisks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I would say that your response is poor because everything has different value to individuals, from use value to purely sentimental/nostalgic value to the relative value of $20 to various people. To someone poor, $20 is a big deal; to some rich prick, it's a trifle. If Amazon has added features to Prime that I don't know about that's another story, but to the best of my knowledge they have increased the cost of their service while further restricting the scope of its prime (no pun intended) selling point and removed a benefit that I and a fair few others used to enjoy and felt helped justify the price. Adding a bunch of other issues about Amazon doesn't make your example of Prime any better. My wife may be paying an extra $20/year but from her perspective Prime is providing more value than 20/year in new shows/books/other services. For you that may not be the case, although maybe you should investigate those services and their personal-to-you value. Ultimately, pointing at an opaque blob of services with multiple value tracks and saying that one value track going down while the cost increases is an example of "profit at all costs" is a poor example because to another person it just looks like resource reallocation to please a different set of desired customers, and which is probably going to happen in any economic system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
Also never pay full price or full price minus 15% for video games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
I'm the customer that's pleased by paying 20% more for the same services as before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:Is it a problem if they aren’t forcing higher prices for consumers though? Yes, because the potential to do so by essentially creating and controlling their own market is the problem. Whether or not they are currently taking advantage of that position or even intend to do so is almost completely irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I guess just looking at the list of things that amazonbasic exists for is all super generic commodity stuff where it seems like they could get a strong presence by being amazon but not really in a way they can lock anyone else from selling towels or something in the larger global market. Like even if literally no other towels were sold on amazon except amazon basic towels they just still don't seem like they have any sort of stranglehold over the towel industry. It seems like a basic enough product that if they really cranked up the price that there would always be somewhere else to get other towels. Amazon doesn't need a strangehold on the towel industry to reduce competition in the towel market. Having even a 20% market share in something as generic as towels is a huge marketplace advantage, giving them the power to almost dictate terms with suppliers and drive some of their competitors out of business entirely. While that doesn't destroy all competition, it still results in a less competitive marketplace that is more beneficial to Amazon and less beneficial to the consumer. This is a bad outcome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Yes, because the potential to do so by essentially creating and controlling their own market is the problem. Whether or not they are currently taking advantage of that position or even intend to do so is almost completely irrelevant. I guess this is where we disagree, cause I don't see why I should care about that. They aren't currently charging high prices by way of cornering the market on cheap towels/batteries/optical mice/etc... Yes, I may buy an AmazonBasics brand mouse when I could get something equivalent for a few bucks cheaper from a brick and mortar store/a different online store/a different seller on amazon, but the amazon brand one is going to work okay, be closeish to optimal in price, is easy to find, and I'm lazy. I think there's close to zero chance that they're going to be the only place I could buy any of things in the foreseeable future, and if they started charging way more than other people or their house brand started being crappy, I'd buy from somewhere else, so there isn't really a way they could leverage their position to gouge me on price. Being a one-stop-shop gets them sales they wouldn't get otherwise, but there's only so much convenience premium I'm willing to pay, and nothing about that is new (see: dept stores, big-box stores, ...)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Amazon doesn't need a strangehold on the towel industry to reduce competition in the towel market. Having even a 20% market share in something as generic as towels is a huge marketplace advantage, giving them the power to almost dictate terms with suppliers and drive some of their competitors out of business entirely. While that doesn't destroy all competition, it still results in a less competitive marketplace that is more beneficial to Amazon and less beneficial to the consumer. This is a bad outcome. Why should I worry about any of this? If they deliver cheaper prices or better products and drive out worse towel companies why is that anything than good for me? Is the concern it will stop towel innovation or something? If they deliver worse products or higher prices I again can't imagine a world where amazon actually has the power to force a monopoly where I have to buy their bad expensive towels instead of any other towels. So far amazon towels aren't even the only kind of towels you can buy on amazon, let alone the only kind you can buy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Why should I worry about any of this? If they deliver cheaper prices or better products and drive out worse towel companies why is that anything than good for me? Is the concern it will stop towel innovation or something? If they deliver worse products or higher prices I again can't imagine a world where amazon actually has the power to force a monopoly where I have to buy their bad expensive towels instead of any other towels. So far amazon towels aren't even the only kind of towels you can buy on amazon, let alone the only kind you can buy. Competition is what provides abundant choices and low prices. That's why you should care. "Who cares if everyone else is slowly driven out of business so long as prices are low right now" is surely not what you mean to say, but it's what you're saying
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Competition is what provides abundant choices and low prices. That's why you should care. "Who cares if everyone else is slowly driven out of business so long as prices are low right now" is surely not what you mean to say, but it's what you're saying How Ayn Rand novel of you. Competition mostly just lines marketing budget pockets for very basic item like Amazon makes. There will always be dozens of independent company out of China et al willing to hash out towels for pennies for a middleman to take over to other of countries. It's a commodity. Do you hold fear of Amazon forbidding green towel in the future? Or no one be able to walk into any other store to get equal towel? Why should a large cart of towel brands exist now, how do they help?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
nepetaMisekiryoiki posted:How Ayn Rand novel of you. I'm complaining about the abuses of capitalism, not celebrating them, you illiterate dumbfuck. Do you even know who that is? nepetaMisekiryoiki posted:Do you hold fear of Amazon forbidding green towel in the future? Or no one be able to walk into any other store to get equal towel? Why should a large cart of towel brands exist now, how do they help? No. The issue is practices that are anti-consumer in general, no one is talking about total monopolies and the fact that you and others need to keep returning to that dead horse tells me that you either don't have a good argument or you don't even comprehend what the concerns are QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 07:08 on Dec 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 07:04
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:I'm complaining about the abuses of capitalism, not celebrating them, you illiterate dumbfuck. Do you even know who that is? And along that line, I think sponsored search results are a far bigger problem than Basics will ever be, at least as long as so many people are buying the first thing in the list. All that money funnels to Amazon for no good purpose. And that's despite it not being anti-competitive of them!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
Didn't someone link an article explaining what the concrete long-term consequences of markets turning into monopolies and duopolies are just a few pages ago? The washing machine one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 10:04
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:I guess this is where we disagree, cause I don't see why I should care about that. Famous last words.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 10:29
|
|
|
Amazon is like 5% of global retail, I'm trying to imagine a dystopian corporate controlled future where 5% of all towel sales go to a single company. The horror. Amazon basics is of 0 threat to anyone. Like I said above find me a single example of Amazon creating a store brand of a unique product pushing the yeoman inventor or manufacturer out of business. Selling generic towels helps the consumer as they don't have to sort through 9k listings filled with fake reviews. I trust Amazon. KingFisher fucked around with this message at 11:25 on Dec 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 11:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
KingFisher posted:Amazon is like 5% of global retail You seem to think that that's not an astonishing number; Walmart's share of global retail is only 2%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2018 11:37
|
|