6 ms·

But that's the thing, it's a little bit questionable for Amazon to be a competitor. They started out as a partner that offered a retail platform for Rain Desig

But that's the thing, it's a little bit questionable for Amazon to be a competitor. They started out as a partner that offered a retail platform for Rain Design, only to turn around and come up with a cheaper product. Even though it's perfectly legal, there's still an expectation of trust, which they've violated. Would you sell products on a platform knowing that if you were too successful the people operating the platform would turn around and come out with a cheaper product? I wouldn't.

chrisgd 11y ago
It is questionable because no one has been able to do it before. Free markets yada yada. . . I would sell a product until I couldn't sell any more regardless of the risk. If only copyrights on media properties were this fluid.
- mintone 11y ago
  Absolutely not true. Supermarket own-brand has been around for years and years, along with department store own-brands. The original brand sells based on brand reputation and (perceived) quality of product. This is exactly the same.
  - deelowe 11y ago
    No only that, walmart will use their purchasing power to force manufacturers to make products specifically for them. Examples of this include things like specific SKUs that are smaller so that walmart can sell similar products at a lower price (e.g. 12oz versus 16oz).
  - Spooky23 11y ago
    That's not a great comparison, because of the way house brands are marketed -- basically store brands are marketed to the left of the name brand and cost a few margin points less. One of the reasons for store brands to exist is to incentivize manufacturers to buy the other product supermarkets sell -- premium shelf space. Amazon is a big catalog, and they play all sorts of games with how and why they prioritize listings.
  - chrisgd 11y ago
    I meant that it is questionable to the parent because Amazon has never done it before.
paulgb 11y ago
Grocery chains have had store brands since before the internet, so this conflict of interest is not novel.
- arien 11y ago
  Lots of those are manufactured by the same companies that make the branded ones. So they can still get their cut.
  - wernercd 11y ago
    What's to stop the "same companies" from working with Amazon to do the same? Amazon Hair Conditioner (made by Pantene"
    - arien 11y ago
      Perhaps that is already happening, with a select few manufacturers. But consider that many marketplace sellers are third parties (e.g. an electronics shop). Or other manufacturers with different costs (many factors affect this... location, workforce..). What happens with these? I do wonder if Amazon are making any kind of profit on these items. With their long term strategy they can very well afford to make a loss just to undercut the competition and put their products out there, make a name.
      - bitL 11y ago
        They can do cost/benefit analysis. They don't have to pay themselves 15% of the price including shipping in fees, they have good relationships with cheap overseas manufacturers (in China you pay literally pennies for plastic stuff in large quantities) utilizing economy of scales, they know the exact demand/sales of their competitor/"partner", probability they can convert competitor's sales into their own sales, control the visibility on their platform etc. I am sure they make larger profit than what they would get by taking a cut from a 3rd party seller. Or they are irrational, which I don't believe.
  - blakeyrat 11y ago
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
piyush_soni 11y ago
I would, as long as selling my products with their platform still gives me more profit than not selling with it.
logfromblammo 11y ago
My business strategy would probably change to proving the market for my product before selling my business to the people operating the platform for slightly less than it would cost for them to set up a competitor product. That would likely be profitable, but only as long as you can keep picking winners with your rolled-over cash.
kristianc 11y ago
Most people seem perfectly happy to use AWS.
fulldecent 11y ago
This happens constantly on the iOS platform. Popular apps are replaced by built in iOS features.

chrisgd 11y ago

It is questionable because no one has been able to do it before. Free markets yada yada. . . I would sell a product until I couldn't sell any more regardless of the risk. If only copyrights on media properties were this fluid.

mintone 11y ago
Absolutely not true. Supermarket own-brand has been around for years and years, along with department store own-brands. The original brand sells based on brand reputation and (perceived) quality of product. This is exactly the same.
- deelowe 11y ago
  No only that, walmart will use their purchasing power to force manufacturers to make products specifically for them. Examples of this include things like specific SKUs that are smaller so that walmart can sell similar products at a lower price (e.g. 12oz versus 16oz).
- Spooky23 11y ago
  That's not a great comparison, because of the way house brands are marketed -- basically store brands are marketed to the left of the name brand and cost a few margin points less. One of the reasons for store brands to exist is to incentivize manufacturers to buy the other product supermarkets sell -- premium shelf space. Amazon is a big catalog, and they play all sorts of games with how and why they prioritize listings.
- chrisgd 11y ago
  I meant that it is questionable to the parent because Amazon has never done it before.

paulgb 11y ago

Grocery chains have had store brands since before the internet, so this conflict of interest is not novel.

arien 11y ago
Lots of those are manufactured by the same companies that make the branded ones. So they can still get their cut.
- wernercd 11y ago
  What's to stop the "same companies" from working with Amazon to do the same? Amazon Hair Conditioner (made by Pantene"
  - arien 11y ago
    Perhaps that is already happening, with a select few manufacturers. But consider that many marketplace sellers are third parties (e.g. an electronics shop). Or other manufacturers with different costs (many factors affect this... location, workforce..). What happens with these? I do wonder if Amazon are making any kind of profit on these items. With their long term strategy they can very well afford to make a loss just to undercut the competition and put their products out there, make a name.
    - bitL 11y ago
      They can do cost/benefit analysis. They don't have to pay themselves 15% of the price including shipping in fees, they have good relationships with cheap overseas manufacturers (in China you pay literally pennies for plastic stuff in large quantities) utilizing economy of scales, they know the exact demand/sales of their competitor/"partner", probability they can convert competitor's sales into their own sales, control the visibility on their platform etc. I am sure they make larger profit than what they would get by taking a cut from a 3rd party seller. Or they are irrational, which I don't believe.
- blakeyrat 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

piyush_soni 11y ago

I would, as long as selling my products with their platform still gives me more profit than not selling with it.

logfromblammo 11y ago

My business strategy would probably change to proving the market for my product before selling my business to the people operating the platform for slightly less than it would cost for them to set up a competitor product. That would likely be profitable, but only as long as you can keep picking winners with your rolled-over cash.

kristianc 11y ago

Most people seem perfectly happy to use AWS.

fulldecent 11y ago

This happens constantly on the iOS platform. Popular apps are replaced by built in iOS features.