3 ms·

There is a problem if you are the de facto intermediary and using that to squash competition in other markets.

nobleach 9y ago
But are they using any tactics other than being cheaper and faster to ship? Their decision not to carry a Chromecast is sad, but, I was also unable to purchase one at radioshack.com. No one would accuse Radio Shack (do they even really exist anymore?) of attempting to use their weight against Google. My point being, it's just a simple business practice not to sell something competes with you in your own store. Apple doesn't sell Dell products either.
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  >tactics other than being cheaper and faster to ship? Amazon regularly undercuts people to drive them out of the market - this is known as predatory pricing and it isn't new. It is an abuse of dominant position. But most Western anti-competition efforts have measured abuse of dominant position in terms of consumer facing price gouging. Operating under those assumptions, predatory pricing looks GOOD because it lowers consumer pricing, despite the fact that it liquidates market players, removes competition, and creates the accurate perception that you will use your bankroll as a barrier to entry of other market participants. Once that occurs and you have control of the market's pricing and a dominant position on the logistics, your market already has price discovery problems, even before any further abuse of dominant positions occur. Best of all, this creates a 'new normal' which you can then use as evidence that things are fine in discussions with the competition bureaus you're dealing with.
  - kr39oe82 9y ago
    Sounds like predatory behavior is the problem, since that’s been Walmart’s jam for decades But let’s kick Amazon The reality is they all need a kick in the stomach (figuratively speaking) to remind them the general public underlies their wealth But it benefits the rich competition to use their media platforms for hang Amazon and Google. Every time I see these stories it smacks of a Madoff type story: they knew he was a crook, but then he swindled rich people

But are they using any tactics other than being cheaper and faster to ship? Their decision not to carry a Chromecast is sad, but, I was also unable to purchase one at radioshack.com. No one would accuse Radio Shack (do they even really exist anymore?) of attempting to use their weight against Google. My point being, it's just a simple business practice not to sell something competes with you in your own store. Apple doesn't sell Dell products either.

ABCLAW 9y ago
>tactics other than being cheaper and faster to ship? Amazon regularly undercuts people to drive them out of the market - this is known as predatory pricing and it isn't new. It is an abuse of dominant position. But most Western anti-competition efforts have measured abuse of dominant position in terms of consumer facing price gouging. Operating under those assumptions, predatory pricing looks GOOD because it lowers consumer pricing, despite the fact that it liquidates market players, removes competition, and creates the accurate perception that you will use your bankroll as a barrier to entry of other market participants. Once that occurs and you have control of the market's pricing and a dominant position on the logistics, your market already has price discovery problems, even before any further abuse of dominant positions occur. Best of all, this creates a 'new normal' which you can then use as evidence that things are fine in discussions with the competition bureaus you're dealing with.
- kr39oe82 9y ago
  Sounds like predatory behavior is the problem, since that’s been Walmart’s jam for decades But let’s kick Amazon The reality is they all need a kick in the stomach (figuratively speaking) to remind them the general public underlies their wealth But it benefits the rich competition to use their media platforms for hang Amazon and Google. Every time I see these stories it smacks of a Madoff type story: they knew he was a crook, but then he swindled rich people