15 ms·

I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. Their competitive edge with Prime is that I go to them first because I assume they'll have wha

I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. Their competitive edge with Prime is that I go to them first because I assume they'll have what I want, at a fair price and the highest level of convenience. If they are no longer the "Everything Store" then they won't be where I go to for everything...

cwkoss 11y ago
Totally agree. They are destroying their most valuable component of their brand, for a relatively weak one (Prime Video). I have Prime and prefer Netflix, because Prime Video still doesn't have a great selection.
- atonse 11y ago
  Yeah I agree with this. There are a couple of shows that are only on Prime Instant Video that I use it for. But I'll still watch it on my Apple TV. If Amazon chooses not to build an app, I'll go elsewhere, I won't buy a whole Fire TV just to watch a show. All this for one of the weakest parts of Prime. I've been a Prime member for 3-4 years before I watched my first prime video. I simply don't care for the service.
- danboarder 11y ago
  I also have Prime but wish I could display it on our TV using Chromecast. The only way to do this is to cast a tab (desktop) or cast the entire device display (Android). It would be great if Amazon Prime Video supported Chromecast with a cast button like Hulu, Netflix, Youtube, Vevo, etc...
  - zaphar 11y ago
    My wife was just complaining about this very thing. The solution to Prime's streaming issues isn't to ban the sale of Chromecasts it's to add Chromecast support to prime. This is a very odd choice on their part.
    - untog 11y ago
      Their solution is for you to buy an Amazon Fire Stick and use it instead of your Chromecast.
      - dublinben 11y ago
        >Amazon Fire TV Stick Which unsurprisingly, doesn't support media from the Google Play Store. The only acceptable streaming device is one from a neutral third party (Roku, Tivo, etc.) who will support all providers.
        chinpokomon 11y ago
        But you still can't use the Cast button from your phone to launch on those devices. My Xbox One shows me the option for YouTube videos, but nothing else. There isn't a one-stop option right now.
      - wvenable 11y ago
        It doesn't make any sense. They want to sell me Prime not the Fire Stick. To sell Prime get it on as many devices as possible and adding Chromecast support is easy. Amazon makes some strange decisions.
        vidarh 11y ago
        They want to sell the Fire TV and Fire Stick because it will get you 1) used to talking to their remote, 2) hopefully get you searching and browsing around for all kinds of stuff - their selection is a fascinating mix of really new stuff and older stuff and b-movies, and it's often surprising what's covered by the prime subscription and what you have to pay extra for. By getting you to spend more time in their interface, they can add things. E.g. Prime Music had me spending a lot of time checking out playlists, some of which may very well lead to purchases of albums where only a couple of songs are available for free. It also gets them penetration for whenever they add shopping to these devices, and e.g. lets you talk to Echo and ask it to bring up the top five best new phones on your TV for you to choose fro. Getting Prime on Chromecast would help their penetration of Prime, but it might hinder their overall service penetration by giving some people a reason not to get a Fire Stick. Especially when the Fire Stick/Fire TV and Chromecast are all cheap enough that there's little stopping people from getting both... It may very well backfire for them, but there's all kinds of reasons for them to want to push the Fire TV devices hard.
- yid 11y ago
  > They are destroying their most valuable component of their brand, for a relatively weak one (Prime Video). This is why it almost seems like Amazon's Google+ moment: one underperforming product area somehow manages to convince leadership to change the company's underlying principles in its advantage to the long-term detriment of overall brand perception. Edit: 32 points in 19 mins for this comment. I really hope someone from Amazon is reading.
  - Artistry121 11y ago
    This is a really good point. One difference here is that Amazon can quietly go back on their decision if it doesn't work and they see people aren't viewing the Apple TV, Chromecast and Fire as substitutes- since it is just a few listings. Google integrated everything with Google+ the vestiges are still all around.
    - newjersey 11y ago
      For example, it still isn't possible to create a YouTube channel without Google Plus.
      - reitanqild 11y ago
        Get over it already, single signon is here to stay a n d it is (now) easy to create a bunch of different "pages"-identities that are hard to trace back to your main account. Or am I wrong?
        newjersey 11y ago
        Here is what I am referring to: >> So in the coming months, a Google Account will be all you’ll need to share content, communicate with contacts, create a YouTube channel and more, all across Google. YouTube will be one of the first products to make this change, and you can learn more on their blog. As always, your underlying Google Account won’t be searchable or followable, unlike public Google+ profiles. And for people who already created Google+ profiles but don’t plan to use Google+ itself, we’ll offer better options for managing and removing those public profiles. https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/everything-in-its-right-place.html https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/everything-in-its-ri... This was published on July 27, 2015
- misnome 11y ago
  I have prime, and mainly consume via IOS. It's annoying to search for something only for results to come up as "You can pay for this!". It'd be nice if there was a way to hide all non-prime content (or at least, if it is there - then it should be the default with, say, a "Search again including pay video" option)
- latj 11y ago
  I dunno, I wouldnt be surprised if Prime Video and AWS actually make money, unlike the "most valuable component" that does not. Besides, will you really stop using Amazon if it is the "Everything except a few devices store"?
- duaneb 11y ago
  I don't think that Netflix is Prime Video's competition; it's iTunes, Google Play, and DVD sales.
- davidgerard 11y ago
  Prime Video is, like, what does this even have to do with why I signed up for Prime. We use Prime because we order enough stuff in a year that postage would be over £45. They're trying for nonexistent "synergy" to satisfy internal numbers in some way, and nothing a customer wants.
- endymi0n 11y ago
  Absolutely, and if they really try to open up a front against Google, that might be a stupid move, as they risk an "accidental" visibility penalty in their Google SERPs. Usually, Google doesn't play this low, but Amazon has much more at stake. Shameless self-plug: See both your Netlix and Amazon Prime accounts' content at once at our site justwatch.com - filtered to your likings :)
  - chinpokomon 11y ago
    Remember when Google TV used to do that?
- PaulHoule 11y ago
  This reminds me of the stupid stuff Comcast kept doing when they were trying to get approval for the merger with Time Warner Cable. It only hit them after the fact that they could sue Verizon over "skinny bundles" or buy TWC. I see how Amazon loses from this but not how it will win.
- Pyxl101 11y ago
  I use them both as well. What I like about Amazon* Video is that it has new releases. If I don't catch a movie while it's still in the theater, I can watch it the day it comes out online. I still have a Netflix DVD subscription, so I could go that route too, but I always forget. Are there other good ways to watch new releases? Looks like the iTunes store also lets you rent movies. *Edit: I meant Amazon Video here when I said Prime Video. (The difference being that Prime has a set of included videos you can watch for free)
  - mathgeek 11y ago
    Vudu is a pretty solid platform for both renting and buying digitally. It works on pretty much everything these days, but I don't believe there is a native AppleTV app yet.
  - thrownaway2424 11y ago
    Amazon _Prime_ almost never has new releases. Can you point to any recent release that's on Prime right now?
    - Pyxl101 11y ago
      You're right (fixed). I meant to say Amazon Video, not Prime Video. I was thinking of the feature where you can pay to rent or purchase a video, not just the set of movies that are included in Prime without additional cost. I agree that the 'Prime' part does not have a lot of new releases.
      - thrownaway2424 11y ago
        It's not your fault. Amazon's branding is confusing.
- mosdave 11y ago
  not to mention the fact that Prime Instant Video UX is complete shit...
- npsimons 11y ago
  > I have Prime and prefer Netflix, because Prime Video still doesn't have a great selection. In my (limited) experience, the selection between Amazon Prime Video and Netflix is about the same. While this move very much feels like degrading performance of competing office suites on your OS or even refusing to run your windowing system on a competitor's OS (cough Microsoft cough), I can see why they would do it. For one thing, it's kind of the reverse: it's telling Apple and Google to get their shit together and not degrade performance of Prime Video on their devices (last I heard, my Apple loving family still couldn't watch Prime Video). To someone like me, who owns no Apple products and isn't tied to Google either, but is an avid Netflix user, Amazon Video and Netflix fill my needs quite nicely. Of course, take this all with a grain of salt from someone who's logging so many hours climbing and hiking he hasn't seriously watched TV/movies in a while. But the couch potato wife hasn't complained, and she's the one who bought the Amazon Fire TV.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > For one thing, it's kind of the reverse: it's telling Apple and Google to get their shit together and not degrade performance of Prime Video on their devices Chromecast only doesn't support Amazon Video because Amazon hasn't made apps (iOS, Android, or Web) that support the Google Cast SDK, not because Google does something to degrade performance. AFAICT, essentially the same is true of AppleTV -- Amazon Video doesn't work on the platform because Amazon hasn't bothered to make an app for the platform.
    - npsimons 11y ago
      > Chromecast only doesn't support Amazon Video because Amazon hasn't made apps (iOS, Android, or Web) that support the Google Cast SDK, not because Google does something to degrade performance. > AFAICT, essentially the same is true of AppleTV -- Amazon Video doesn't work on the platform because Amazon hasn't bothered to make an app for the platform. Interesting. Do we know definitively that this is the case? I mean, is it possible Amazon did submit apps and they were rejected? Or in the case of Apple they didn't want to give Apple their 30% cut? And this may seem facetious, but are we begging the question of who should be supporting Amazon Video in the first place?
- slowmovintarget 11y ago
  Selection was not the issue for me. I view on PC and streaming to a PC from Amazon Prime was essentially non-functional. Crappy Silverlight, which would buffer eternally and never play, or flash, which still paused to buffer every minute. Netflix just works. It'll even play in in higher resolution (not full HD) without the HDMI cable. Prime just says "no" and gives the low-res stream. There are many things on Amazon's service I'd watch, but the actual viewing experience for me is awful.
  - tracker1 11y ago
    Agreed, trying to go from one season to the next in the same show is painful.. Amazon Prime Video in general has turned me off ever since they started.. I've had a prime account since it first came out and tend to buy a lot of stuff on amazon... more and more, it's a fairly unpleasant experience and I'm now questioning the need for a prime account.
- alelefant 11y ago
  I think it's funny that you proved exactly what the poster above you was saying. You don't like Prime simply because of selection.
- bwohlergo 11y ago
  i couldnt find an andoird app for their service last weekend. terminated my testmonth after 3 hours because of this and went back to netflix
subway 11y ago
Within 3 minutes of reading this, I canceled my Amazon Prime account. The fact they require sideloading APKs for streaming video on Android devices, and even then only support SD quality was annoying. This just tells me they have no intention whatsoever of improving the situation. I guess I'll use Google Express now.
- Artistry121 11y ago
  Yes - they had an excellent brand for quantity of product and quality of service. Their whole competition with Google and lack of support of its products has been undermining that. It seems a particularly bad move given the quick delivery space has many competitors now and Wal-mart, Target, Jet.com... have began competing with online orders. Reputation will be extremely important.
  - bduerst 11y ago
    The lack of chromecast support was why I never jumped on Prime video. I get that you want more people to use your fire stick, but as a source of entertainment competing with Netflix and HBO, you want to be more accessible, not less.
- david_shaw 11y ago
  Just out of curiosity, was streaming video your primary use case for Prime? I'm a huge fan of Amazon Prime (for purchasing goods with free two-day shipping), but I've never used the Prime streaming services at all.
  - subway 11y ago
    No, I've primarily used Amazon for purchasing physical items when I need them yesterday. That said, I'm no stranger to Amazon's streaming product -- prior to the release of the Chromecast, Amazon was my primary source for purchased video content via PS3 (Currently I have 38 movies and ~8 seasons of television episodes in the account). This also meant I'd frequently use Amazon Prime video to avoid having to switch over to the Netflix app. I'm far less concerned with the availability of the streaming product itself, and more upset about the corporate mindset this behavior demonstrates.
on_ 11y ago
> I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. I hope this is correct but I am unsure. People will probably not realize this is the case, and it is unlikely to affect _too_many_ people_ so the brand goodwill won't be that damaged. This is the same thing google does with search results, maybe not so much with competitors (maybe they do, I don't know) but they do penalize things they don't like. I remember the rapgenius penalty and to be clear I am not suggesting that this is the same thing as in the article, but to your point, I hope users get angry about this but I am unsure to what extent it will hurt them.
- Artistry121 11y ago
  That could be. It may depend on how much focus Google and Apple place on marketing this products. If I notice a few things I want aren't on Amazon in a row I would stop looking there first. And if I start searching google or wal-mart.com first instead of Amazon they lose those sales. I don't think most people will care about this as a negative PR event - but the fact it can't be found may contribute to them not being the first search.
- thisisnotatest 11y ago
  Google doesn't penalize competitors in search rankings!
IgorPartola 11y ago
I have found them to be constantly more expensive on tools vs Home Depot and Lowes. I used to think that Amazon would pretty much aways give me the best price (+/- random sites that may or may not be shady), but when it comes to any type of tools that has not been the case. I have also found Costco to be often times cheaper for household supplies such as paper towel, etc. Amazon's main benefit is convenience, but their price advantage seems to be slipping.
- sageabilly 11y ago
  Amazon has never been able to keep up with physical store prices on loss leaders- items that stores frequently mark down below inventory costs to get people in the door in the hopes they will also buy enough marked up merchandise to make up for the loss. I did compare Bounty paper towels and Charmin Ultra about a month ago between Costco and Amazon and found that the dollar savings I got at Costco didn't make up for having to drive 20 minutes to get there (and battle all the soccer moms for a parking space). This might not be the case everywhere and for everyone, of course, but for me I am usually willing to pay a little more for next day delivery to my door in exchange for shopping in my pajamas.
  - _delirium 11y ago
    Even on just middle-of-the-road household goods, ignoring weekly sales, Amazon doesn't seem very competitive with brick-and-mortar stores for staple goods, or at least those I buy. I occasionally run down a list of stuff I typically buy at Walmart (shampoo, detergent, OTC drugs, sponges, that kind of thing) to see if any of it has gotten competitive on Amazon, and it usually ends up being way more, not just 5% more or something but more like 50%+.
    - burkemw3 11y ago
      Prime Pantry is extremely competitive for me (in New York City) compared to brick-and-mortar stores. I agree that before Prime Pantry, however, that Amazon was more expensive or I had to buy way to many items (e.g. 10 bottles of shampoo).
dynofuz 11y ago
> If they are no longer the "Everything Store" then they won't be where I go to for everything... I'm working on it: http://percht.com http://percht.com , its still under heavy development and im not done crawling everything, but its coming. yeah you cant order on percht either, but i have to start somewhere... There's cool stuff behind the scenes including react / nlp / and neural nets in case anyone would like to collaborate.
- umanwizard 11y ago
  Amazon has something like this, but only targeted to India: http://www.junglee.com http://www.junglee.com Edit: Disclosure: I worked on Junglee for two years, but don't anymore.
ElComradio 11y ago
I bet they have studied and considered this angle extensively before announcing this decision.
- grandalf 11y ago
  Probably true, however I wish the innovation/research went into making Prime Video a better product. I have had it (as part of Prime) for years but only watched one or two videos on it b/c of inferior selection, UX, and quality.
fweespeech 11y ago
> If they are no longer the "Everything Store" then they won't be where I go to for everything... They aren't the "Everything Store" and never were. It was a marketing slogan. They boot products from Amazon.com all the time.
hrayr 11y ago
I had a long held belief that Amazon is a principled and trust worthy company... sadly that vision is crumbling before my eyes.
- bsder 11y ago
  Um, no offense, why? They crushed all the technical bookstores because they didn't have to pay sales tax. Their customer service beyond cheap refunds is abysmal. They understand how hard it is to distinguish between stuff that is only serviced through them, but choose not to fix it. And Bezos is famous for being both an asshole and micromanager. One-stop? Sure. Efficient? Maybe. Trustworthy? Pardon me for laughing.
  - CamperBob2 11y ago
    Um, no offense, why? They crushed all the technical bookstores because they didn't have to pay sales tax. Um, no, they crushed all the technical bookstores because they could always get you the book you wanted very quickly and at a good price, unlike any other bookstore on the planet. Every one of those bookstores could have done the same thing in the Internet age, but the thing is, they didn't. I do miss bookstores like Computer Literacy but that's pure nostalgia -- I'd never want to go back. I couldn't give a crap about sales tax one way or the other. Their customer service beyond cheap refunds is abysmal. What other kind of customer service is there, for a retailer? When something goes wrong with an Amazon order, I don't have pay for it. End of story. They understand how hard it is to distinguish between stuff that is only serviced through them, but choose not to fix it. That much is true... their UX is a dog's breakfast, and always has been. Best thing you can say about it is that it could be worse. And Bezos is famous for being both an asshole and micromanager. Well, I don't report to him, so... good. Retail is not a good business for dilettante CEOs. One-stop? Sure. Efficient? Maybe. Trustworthy? Pardon me for laughing. They've seldom put a foot wrong where I'm concerned. This does sound like a pretty dumb move, though. What's good for the customer is good for Amazon, and this isn't good for the customer.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
hosh 11y ago
I agree, this is a bad move for Amazon. I also go to them because they probably have what I want, and they have reliable shipping. So if they start cutting things out, what's going to be next?
muddi900 11y ago
Amazon also has items listed by sellers for cheaper than Prime but they are buried in the buy box. That might be changing. I can't say more than that.
- gorkemyurt 11y ago
  If you add the shipping costs, those offers are usually more than what prime offers
  - muddi900 11y ago
    Everyone adds shipping cost; shipping is never free. Anyway, Even in Seller-only items, the buybox is always awarded to the cheapest "price+shipping" listings, but I have seen seller items pushed down for the sake of Amazon or FBA products even if they are cheaper on the whole.
rodgerd 11y ago
> I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. Who cares if it's in their interests? Given the power they wield, the more relevant question is whether it's in the interest of the broader market.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Donzo 11y ago
It's probably retaliatory due to Apple and Google leveraging their platforms against Amazon's video distribution. It makes sense that they would, in turn, leverage their physical distribution platform against Apple and Google's physical streaming products. Amazon probably feels as though they were hit first in this fight.
- andybak 11y ago
  > It's probably retaliatory due to Apple and Google leveraging their platforms against Amazon's video distribution. In what way? No idea about Apple but as other commentators have said - is there anything stopping them supporting Amazon Video on Android/Chromecast?
smrtinsert 11y ago
100% agree. It seems so obvious. Not sure how they didn't think that one through.
walshemj 11y ago
and I bet a few EU anti trust cases Amazon hasn't made a huge amount of friends and there's more than a few European publishers that would love to see Amazon get into trouble.
amorphid 11y ago
It's kind of like a grocery store eliminating the name brand items that compete with the store brand. In this case, the store brand (aka Amazon Instant Video), isn't that interesting to me. I might be willing to consider Amazon Instant Video if they made it available on Chromecast. I'm not sure I'd use it even if they gave me an Amazon branded streaming device. I like the simplicity of my Chromecast, and it serves me well.
gorkemyurt 11y ago
You should be selling electronic content to be the everything store! That's the whole point. If apple and google tries to stop amazon from selling tv shows or movies, of course amazon is going to fight back
sokoloff 11y ago
Exactly. I've ordered from Amazon more than 700 times in the last 5 years. I usually start my product search on Amazon, and if they have what I need and the price seems reasonable, I often won't even check NewEgg, Ebay, Google shopping, etc. Intentionally reduce your selection for customer-hostile reasons like this and I probably move some of my product search traffic to start with Google shopping, which is bound to cost them more than what they make from the incremental video rental I might make. It's not like I'm not going to have multiple Apple TVs in my house anyway...
dannyrosen 11y ago
It's very clear there's been frustration from their brand around customers using their Prime Instant Video product. I've been targeted with ads, marketing emails and even direct mail to use the service. It's clear they want more eyeballs on the thing they're giving to prime members for free. In the end, all it would take to get me fully on board is a native XMBC plugin.
ek750 11y ago
Agreed. I cancelled my prime membership today due to this unsavory behavior.

cwkoss 11y ago

Totally agree. They are destroying their most valuable component of their brand, for a relatively weak one (Prime Video). I have Prime and prefer Netflix, because Prime Video still doesn't have a great selection.

atonse 11y ago
Yeah I agree with this. There are a couple of shows that are only on Prime Instant Video that I use it for. But I'll still watch it on my Apple TV. If Amazon chooses not to build an app, I'll go elsewhere, I won't buy a whole Fire TV just to watch a show. All this for one of the weakest parts of Prime. I've been a Prime member for 3-4 years before I watched my first prime video. I simply don't care for the service.
danboarder 11y ago
I also have Prime but wish I could display it on our TV using Chromecast. The only way to do this is to cast a tab (desktop) or cast the entire device display (Android). It would be great if Amazon Prime Video supported Chromecast with a cast button like Hulu, Netflix, Youtube, Vevo, etc...
- zaphar 11y ago
  My wife was just complaining about this very thing. The solution to Prime's streaming issues isn't to ban the sale of Chromecasts it's to add Chromecast support to prime. This is a very odd choice on their part.
  - untog 11y ago
    Their solution is for you to buy an Amazon Fire Stick and use it instead of your Chromecast.
    - dublinben 11y ago
      >Amazon Fire TV Stick Which unsurprisingly, doesn't support media from the Google Play Store. The only acceptable streaming device is one from a neutral third party (Roku, Tivo, etc.) who will support all providers.
      - chinpokomon 11y ago
        But you still can't use the Cast button from your phone to launch on those devices. My Xbox One shows me the option for YouTube videos, but nothing else. There isn't a one-stop option right now.
    - wvenable 11y ago
      It doesn't make any sense. They want to sell me Prime not the Fire Stick. To sell Prime get it on as many devices as possible and adding Chromecast support is easy. Amazon makes some strange decisions.
      - vidarh 11y ago
        They want to sell the Fire TV and Fire Stick because it will get you 1) used to talking to their remote, 2) hopefully get you searching and browsing around for all kinds of stuff - their selection is a fascinating mix of really new stuff and older stuff and b-movies, and it's often surprising what's covered by the prime subscription and what you have to pay extra for. By getting you to spend more time in their interface, they can add things. E.g. Prime Music had me spending a lot of time checking out playlists, some of which may very well lead to purchases of albums where only a couple of songs are available for free. It also gets them penetration for whenever they add shopping to these devices, and e.g. lets you talk to Echo and ask it to bring up the top five best new phones on your TV for you to choose fro. Getting Prime on Chromecast would help their penetration of Prime, but it might hinder their overall service penetration by giving some people a reason not to get a Fire Stick. Especially when the Fire Stick/Fire TV and Chromecast are all cheap enough that there's little stopping people from getting both... It may very well backfire for them, but there's all kinds of reasons for them to want to push the Fire TV devices hard.
yid 11y ago
> They are destroying their most valuable component of their brand, for a relatively weak one (Prime Video). This is why it almost seems like Amazon's Google+ moment: one underperforming product area somehow manages to convince leadership to change the company's underlying principles in its advantage to the long-term detriment of overall brand perception. Edit: 32 points in 19 mins for this comment. I really hope someone from Amazon is reading.
- Artistry121 11y ago
  This is a really good point. One difference here is that Amazon can quietly go back on their decision if it doesn't work and they see people aren't viewing the Apple TV, Chromecast and Fire as substitutes- since it is just a few listings. Google integrated everything with Google+ the vestiges are still all around.
  - newjersey 11y ago
    For example, it still isn't possible to create a YouTube channel without Google Plus.
    - reitanqild 11y ago
      Get over it already, single signon is here to stay a n d it is (now) easy to create a bunch of different "pages"-identities that are hard to trace back to your main account. Or am I wrong?
      - newjersey 11y ago
        Here is what I am referring to: >> So in the coming months, a Google Account will be all you’ll need to share content, communicate with contacts, create a YouTube channel and more, all across Google. YouTube will be one of the first products to make this change, and you can learn more on their blog. As always, your underlying Google Account won’t be searchable or followable, unlike public Google+ profiles. And for people who already created Google+ profiles but don’t plan to use Google+ itself, we’ll offer better options for managing and removing those public profiles. https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/everything-in-its-right-place.html https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/everything-in-its-ri... This was published on July 27, 2015
misnome 11y ago
I have prime, and mainly consume via IOS. It's annoying to search for something only for results to come up as "You can pay for this!". It'd be nice if there was a way to hide all non-prime content (or at least, if it is there - then it should be the default with, say, a "Search again including pay video" option)
latj 11y ago
I dunno, I wouldnt be surprised if Prime Video and AWS actually make money, unlike the "most valuable component" that does not. Besides, will you really stop using Amazon if it is the "Everything except a few devices store"?
duaneb 11y ago
I don't think that Netflix is Prime Video's competition; it's iTunes, Google Play, and DVD sales.
davidgerard 11y ago
Prime Video is, like, what does this even have to do with why I signed up for Prime. We use Prime because we order enough stuff in a year that postage would be over £45. They're trying for nonexistent "synergy" to satisfy internal numbers in some way, and nothing a customer wants.
endymi0n 11y ago
Absolutely, and if they really try to open up a front against Google, that might be a stupid move, as they risk an "accidental" visibility penalty in their Google SERPs. Usually, Google doesn't play this low, but Amazon has much more at stake. Shameless self-plug: See both your Netlix and Amazon Prime accounts' content at once at our site justwatch.com - filtered to your likings :)
- chinpokomon 11y ago
  Remember when Google TV used to do that?
PaulHoule 11y ago
This reminds me of the stupid stuff Comcast kept doing when they were trying to get approval for the merger with Time Warner Cable. It only hit them after the fact that they could sue Verizon over "skinny bundles" or buy TWC. I see how Amazon loses from this but not how it will win.
Pyxl101 11y ago
I use them both as well. What I like about Amazon* Video is that it has new releases. If I don't catch a movie while it's still in the theater, I can watch it the day it comes out online. I still have a Netflix DVD subscription, so I could go that route too, but I always forget. Are there other good ways to watch new releases? Looks like the iTunes store also lets you rent movies. *Edit: I meant Amazon Video here when I said Prime Video. (The difference being that Prime has a set of included videos you can watch for free)
- mathgeek 11y ago
  Vudu is a pretty solid platform for both renting and buying digitally. It works on pretty much everything these days, but I don't believe there is a native AppleTV app yet.
- thrownaway2424 11y ago
  Amazon _Prime_ almost never has new releases. Can you point to any recent release that's on Prime right now?
  - Pyxl101 11y ago
    You're right (fixed). I meant to say Amazon Video, not Prime Video. I was thinking of the feature where you can pay to rent or purchase a video, not just the set of movies that are included in Prime without additional cost. I agree that the 'Prime' part does not have a lot of new releases.
    - thrownaway2424 11y ago
      It's not your fault. Amazon's branding is confusing.
mosdave 11y ago
not to mention the fact that Prime Instant Video UX is complete shit...
npsimons 11y ago
> I have Prime and prefer Netflix, because Prime Video still doesn't have a great selection. In my (limited) experience, the selection between Amazon Prime Video and Netflix is about the same. While this move very much feels like degrading performance of competing office suites on your OS or even refusing to run your windowing system on a competitor's OS (cough Microsoft cough), I can see why they would do it. For one thing, it's kind of the reverse: it's telling Apple and Google to get their shit together and not degrade performance of Prime Video on their devices (last I heard, my Apple loving family still couldn't watch Prime Video). To someone like me, who owns no Apple products and isn't tied to Google either, but is an avid Netflix user, Amazon Video and Netflix fill my needs quite nicely. Of course, take this all with a grain of salt from someone who's logging so many hours climbing and hiking he hasn't seriously watched TV/movies in a while. But the couch potato wife hasn't complained, and she's the one who bought the Amazon Fire TV.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > For one thing, it's kind of the reverse: it's telling Apple and Google to get their shit together and not degrade performance of Prime Video on their devices Chromecast only doesn't support Amazon Video because Amazon hasn't made apps (iOS, Android, or Web) that support the Google Cast SDK, not because Google does something to degrade performance. AFAICT, essentially the same is true of AppleTV -- Amazon Video doesn't work on the platform because Amazon hasn't bothered to make an app for the platform.
  - npsimons 11y ago
    > Chromecast only doesn't support Amazon Video because Amazon hasn't made apps (iOS, Android, or Web) that support the Google Cast SDK, not because Google does something to degrade performance. > AFAICT, essentially the same is true of AppleTV -- Amazon Video doesn't work on the platform because Amazon hasn't bothered to make an app for the platform. Interesting. Do we know definitively that this is the case? I mean, is it possible Amazon did submit apps and they were rejected? Or in the case of Apple they didn't want to give Apple their 30% cut? And this may seem facetious, but are we begging the question of who should be supporting Amazon Video in the first place?
slowmovintarget 11y ago
Selection was not the issue for me. I view on PC and streaming to a PC from Amazon Prime was essentially non-functional. Crappy Silverlight, which would buffer eternally and never play, or flash, which still paused to buffer every minute. Netflix just works. It'll even play in in higher resolution (not full HD) without the HDMI cable. Prime just says "no" and gives the low-res stream. There are many things on Amazon's service I'd watch, but the actual viewing experience for me is awful.
- tracker1 11y ago
  Agreed, trying to go from one season to the next in the same show is painful.. Amazon Prime Video in general has turned me off ever since they started.. I've had a prime account since it first came out and tend to buy a lot of stuff on amazon... more and more, it's a fairly unpleasant experience and I'm now questioning the need for a prime account.
alelefant 11y ago
I think it's funny that you proved exactly what the poster above you was saying. You don't like Prime simply because of selection.
bwohlergo 11y ago
i couldnt find an andoird app for their service last weekend. terminated my testmonth after 3 hours because of this and went back to netflix

subway 11y ago

Within 3 minutes of reading this, I canceled my Amazon Prime account. The fact they require sideloading APKs for streaming video on Android devices, and even then only support SD quality was annoying. This just tells me they have no intention whatsoever of improving the situation. I guess I'll use Google Express now.

Artistry121 11y ago
Yes - they had an excellent brand for quantity of product and quality of service. Their whole competition with Google and lack of support of its products has been undermining that. It seems a particularly bad move given the quick delivery space has many competitors now and Wal-mart, Target, Jet.com... have began competing with online orders. Reputation will be extremely important.
- bduerst 11y ago
  The lack of chromecast support was why I never jumped on Prime video. I get that you want more people to use your fire stick, but as a source of entertainment competing with Netflix and HBO, you want to be more accessible, not less.
david_shaw 11y ago
Just out of curiosity, was streaming video your primary use case for Prime? I'm a huge fan of Amazon Prime (for purchasing goods with free two-day shipping), but I've never used the Prime streaming services at all.
- subway 11y ago
  No, I've primarily used Amazon for purchasing physical items when I need them yesterday. That said, I'm no stranger to Amazon's streaming product -- prior to the release of the Chromecast, Amazon was my primary source for purchased video content via PS3 (Currently I have 38 movies and ~8 seasons of television episodes in the account). This also meant I'd frequently use Amazon Prime video to avoid having to switch over to the Netflix app. I'm far less concerned with the availability of the streaming product itself, and more upset about the corporate mindset this behavior demonstrates.

on_ 11y ago

> I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. I hope this is correct but I am unsure. People will probably not realize this is the case, and it is unlikely to affect _too_many_ people_ so the brand goodwill won't be that damaged. This is the same thing google does with search results, maybe not so much with competitors (maybe they do, I don't know) but they do penalize things they don't like. I remember the rapgenius penalty and to be clear I am not suggesting that this is the same thing as in the article, but to your point, I hope users get angry about this but I am unsure to what extent it will hurt them.

Artistry121 11y ago
That could be. It may depend on how much focus Google and Apple place on marketing this products. If I notice a few things I want aren't on Amazon in a row I would stop looking there first. And if I start searching google or wal-mart.com first instead of Amazon they lose those sales. I don't think most people will care about this as a negative PR event - but the fact it can't be found may contribute to them not being the first search.
thisisnotatest 11y ago
Google doesn't penalize competitors in search rankings!

IgorPartola 11y ago

I have found them to be constantly more expensive on tools vs Home Depot and Lowes. I used to think that Amazon would pretty much aways give me the best price (+/- random sites that may or may not be shady), but when it comes to any type of tools that has not been the case. I have also found Costco to be often times cheaper for household supplies such as paper towel, etc. Amazon's main benefit is convenience, but their price advantage seems to be slipping.

sageabilly 11y ago
Amazon has never been able to keep up with physical store prices on loss leaders- items that stores frequently mark down below inventory costs to get people in the door in the hopes they will also buy enough marked up merchandise to make up for the loss. I did compare Bounty paper towels and Charmin Ultra about a month ago between Costco and Amazon and found that the dollar savings I got at Costco didn't make up for having to drive 20 minutes to get there (and battle all the soccer moms for a parking space). This might not be the case everywhere and for everyone, of course, but for me I am usually willing to pay a little more for next day delivery to my door in exchange for shopping in my pajamas.
- _delirium 11y ago
  Even on just middle-of-the-road household goods, ignoring weekly sales, Amazon doesn't seem very competitive with brick-and-mortar stores for staple goods, or at least those I buy. I occasionally run down a list of stuff I typically buy at Walmart (shampoo, detergent, OTC drugs, sponges, that kind of thing) to see if any of it has gotten competitive on Amazon, and it usually ends up being way more, not just 5% more or something but more like 50%+.
  - burkemw3 11y ago
    Prime Pantry is extremely competitive for me (in New York City) compared to brick-and-mortar stores. I agree that before Prime Pantry, however, that Amazon was more expensive or I had to buy way to many items (e.g. 10 bottles of shampoo).

dynofuz 11y ago

> If they are no longer the "Everything Store" then they won't be where I go to for everything... I'm working on it: http://percht.com http://percht.com , its still under heavy development and im not done crawling everything, but its coming. yeah you cant order on percht either, but i have to start somewhere... There's cool stuff behind the scenes including react / nlp / and neural nets in case anyone would like to collaborate.

umanwizard 11y ago
Amazon has something like this, but only targeted to India: http://www.junglee.com http://www.junglee.com Edit: Disclosure: I worked on Junglee for two years, but don't anymore.

ElComradio 11y ago

I bet they have studied and considered this angle extensively before announcing this decision.

grandalf 11y ago
Probably true, however I wish the innovation/research went into making Prime Video a better product. I have had it (as part of Prime) for years but only watched one or two videos on it b/c of inferior selection, UX, and quality.

fweespeech 11y ago

> If they are no longer the "Everything Store" then they won't be where I go to for everything... They aren't the "Everything Store" and never were. It was a marketing slogan. They boot products from Amazon.com all the time.

hrayr 11y ago

I had a long held belief that Amazon is a principled and trust worthy company... sadly that vision is crumbling before my eyes.

bsder 11y ago
Um, no offense, why? They crushed all the technical bookstores because they didn't have to pay sales tax. Their customer service beyond cheap refunds is abysmal. They understand how hard it is to distinguish between stuff that is only serviced through them, but choose not to fix it. And Bezos is famous for being both an asshole and micromanager. One-stop? Sure. Efficient? Maybe. Trustworthy? Pardon me for laughing.
- CamperBob2 11y ago
  Um, no offense, why? They crushed all the technical bookstores because they didn't have to pay sales tax. Um, no, they crushed all the technical bookstores because they could always get you the book you wanted very quickly and at a good price, unlike any other bookstore on the planet. Every one of those bookstores could have done the same thing in the Internet age, but the thing is, they didn't. I do miss bookstores like Computer Literacy but that's pure nostalgia -- I'd never want to go back. I couldn't give a crap about sales tax one way or the other. Their customer service beyond cheap refunds is abysmal. What other kind of customer service is there, for a retailer? When something goes wrong with an Amazon order, I don't have pay for it. End of story. They understand how hard it is to distinguish between stuff that is only serviced through them, but choose not to fix it. That much is true... their UX is a dog's breakfast, and always has been. Best thing you can say about it is that it could be worse. And Bezos is famous for being both an asshole and micromanager. Well, I don't report to him, so... good. Retail is not a good business for dilettante CEOs. One-stop? Sure. Efficient? Maybe. Trustworthy? Pardon me for laughing. They've seldom put a foot wrong where I'm concerned. This does sound like a pretty dumb move, though. What's good for the customer is good for Amazon, and this isn't good for the customer.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

hosh 11y ago

I agree, this is a bad move for Amazon. I also go to them because they probably have what I want, and they have reliable shipping. So if they start cutting things out, what's going to be next?

muddi900 11y ago

Amazon also has items listed by sellers for cheaper than Prime but they are buried in the buy box. That might be changing. I can't say more than that.

gorkemyurt 11y ago
If you add the shipping costs, those offers are usually more than what prime offers
- muddi900 11y ago
  Everyone adds shipping cost; shipping is never free. Anyway, Even in Seller-only items, the buybox is always awarded to the cheapest "price+shipping" listings, but I have seen seller items pushed down for the sake of Amazon or FBA products even if they are cheaper on the whole.

rodgerd 11y ago

> I don't think this move is in Amazon's best interests long term. Who cares if it's in their interests? Given the power they wield, the more relevant question is whether it's in the interest of the broader market.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

Donzo 11y ago

It's probably retaliatory due to Apple and Google leveraging their platforms against Amazon's video distribution. It makes sense that they would, in turn, leverage their physical distribution platform against Apple and Google's physical streaming products. Amazon probably feels as though they were hit first in this fight.

andybak 11y ago
> It's probably retaliatory due to Apple and Google leveraging their platforms against Amazon's video distribution. In what way? No idea about Apple but as other commentators have said - is there anything stopping them supporting Amazon Video on Android/Chromecast?

smrtinsert 11y ago

100% agree. It seems so obvious. Not sure how they didn't think that one through.

walshemj 11y ago

and I bet a few EU anti trust cases Amazon hasn't made a huge amount of friends and there's more than a few European publishers that would love to see Amazon get into trouble.

amorphid 11y ago

It's kind of like a grocery store eliminating the name brand items that compete with the store brand. In this case, the store brand (aka Amazon Instant Video), isn't that interesting to me. I might be willing to consider Amazon Instant Video if they made it available on Chromecast. I'm not sure I'd use it even if they gave me an Amazon branded streaming device. I like the simplicity of my Chromecast, and it serves me well.

gorkemyurt 11y ago

You should be selling electronic content to be the everything store! That's the whole point. If apple and google tries to stop amazon from selling tv shows or movies, of course amazon is going to fight back

sokoloff 11y ago

Exactly. I've ordered from Amazon more than 700 times in the last 5 years. I usually start my product search on Amazon, and if they have what I need and the price seems reasonable, I often won't even check NewEgg, Ebay, Google shopping, etc. Intentionally reduce your selection for customer-hostile reasons like this and I probably move some of my product search traffic to start with Google shopping, which is bound to cost them more than what they make from the incremental video rental I might make. It's not like I'm not going to have multiple Apple TVs in my house anyway...

dannyrosen 11y ago

It's very clear there's been frustration from their brand around customers using their Prime Instant Video product. I've been targeted with ads, marketing emails and even direct mail to use the service. It's clear they want more eyeballs on the thing they're giving to prime members for free. In the end, all it would take to get me fully on board is a native XMBC plugin.

ek750 11y ago

Agreed. I cancelled my prime membership today due to this unsavory behavior.