3 ms·

This sounds bad, but is honestly anyone surprised? Client/customer concentration is something that every business needs to be watching as a matter of critical

This sounds bad, but is honestly anyone surprised? Client/customer concentration is something that every business needs to be watching as a matter of critical importance. The big boys will always play rough and negotiate things on their terms when they can get away with it - be it the Government, Apple, Walmart or Amazon. I have sympathy for the companies that are about to be put under immense stress, but it should also be something that every business has already planned for.

whatshisface 7y ago
>is honestly anyone surprised? I'm surprised. I thought that when the entire store was run by computers the marginal cost of adding another supplier would be zilch, and the long tail would prosper.
- URSpider94 7y ago
  The long tail DOES prosper. Nothing is stopping small vendors from selling their products on the Amazon marketplace. If true, it’s just suggesting that Amazon will no longer place purchase orders and hold inventory on its books. Even with automation of on-boarding, scaling the selection still requires scaling inventory costs if it’s merchandised by Amazon itself.
save_ferris 7y ago
No, it's not surprising. The lack of surprise that a company's greed is boundless shouldn't be the standard to which we hold them accountable for their behavior. It's kinda hard to see how Amazon won't eventually collide with antitrust forces at some point. The rise of tech giants like Amazon has largely coincided with their development of entire markets that they control. There's so much money to be made establishing the market and taking small transaction fees as opposed to just bringing a product to an existing market. Not only did Amazon make money by creating the go-to online marketplace, they captured tremendous amounts of data on what people were and weren't buying. This allowed them to spin off cheaper versions of competing products, undercutting the businesses that they were already making money from. They dominate the sales channels, and now they're going after the vendors directly, starting with the small, low-hanging fruit.
- seem_2211 7y ago
  Right - this isn't new, basically everything you've said also applies to Walmart but twenty years ago.
  - save_ferris 7y ago
    I actually see those two as fairly different. Walmart perfected large-scale logistics and built a network of one-stop-shops across America, taking out small mom-and-pop shops along the way. Amazon set out to be the go-to online shopping platform largely by encouraging small mom-and-pop shops to sell through Amazon. Once the platform was big enough, it started making more sense for Amazon to cannibalize vendors instead of just continuing to let the market grow. Sure, both companies are large behemoths that do their part to decimate local economies and avoid paying taxes, but their strategies were pretty different, IMO.
- magduf 7y ago
  >It's kinda hard to see how Amazon won't eventually collide with antitrust forces at some point. Where did you get this idea? I don't see how Amazon, or anyone else for that matter, could ever run afoul of "antitrust forces" in the US, because there's simply no such thing in America any more. America hasn't enforced antitrust law in ages. They might have problems in other countries, but the US is by far their largest market, and they have absolutely nothing to worry about here.
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > America hasn't enforced antitrust law in ages A lot of American antitrust enforcement is private. Witness, for instance, the recent Apple Inc. v. Pepper [1]. (We need more public enforcement. But claiming we have no antitrust enforcement is false.) [1] https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/apple-v-pepper/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/apple-v-pepper/

whatshisface 7y ago

>is honestly anyone surprised? I'm surprised. I thought that when the entire store was run by computers the marginal cost of adding another supplier would be zilch, and the long tail would prosper.

URSpider94 7y ago
The long tail DOES prosper. Nothing is stopping small vendors from selling their products on the Amazon marketplace. If true, it’s just suggesting that Amazon will no longer place purchase orders and hold inventory on its books. Even with automation of on-boarding, scaling the selection still requires scaling inventory costs if it’s merchandised by Amazon itself.

save_ferris 7y ago

No, it's not surprising. The lack of surprise that a company's greed is boundless shouldn't be the standard to which we hold them accountable for their behavior. It's kinda hard to see how Amazon won't eventually collide with antitrust forces at some point. The rise of tech giants like Amazon has largely coincided with their development of entire markets that they control. There's so much money to be made establishing the market and taking small transaction fees as opposed to just bringing a product to an existing market. Not only did Amazon make money by creating the go-to online marketplace, they captured tremendous amounts of data on what people were and weren't buying. This allowed them to spin off cheaper versions of competing products, undercutting the businesses that they were already making money from. They dominate the sales channels, and now they're going after the vendors directly, starting with the small, low-hanging fruit.

seem_2211 7y ago
Right - this isn't new, basically everything you've said also applies to Walmart but twenty years ago.
- save_ferris 7y ago
  I actually see those two as fairly different. Walmart perfected large-scale logistics and built a network of one-stop-shops across America, taking out small mom-and-pop shops along the way. Amazon set out to be the go-to online shopping platform largely by encouraging small mom-and-pop shops to sell through Amazon. Once the platform was big enough, it started making more sense for Amazon to cannibalize vendors instead of just continuing to let the market grow. Sure, both companies are large behemoths that do their part to decimate local economies and avoid paying taxes, but their strategies were pretty different, IMO.
magduf 7y ago
>It's kinda hard to see how Amazon won't eventually collide with antitrust forces at some point. Where did you get this idea? I don't see how Amazon, or anyone else for that matter, could ever run afoul of "antitrust forces" in the US, because there's simply no such thing in America any more. America hasn't enforced antitrust law in ages. They might have problems in other countries, but the US is by far their largest market, and they have absolutely nothing to worry about here.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > America hasn't enforced antitrust law in ages A lot of American antitrust enforcement is private. Witness, for instance, the recent Apple Inc. v. Pepper [1]. (We need more public enforcement. But claiming we have no antitrust enforcement is false.) [1] https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/apple-v-pepper/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/apple-v-pepper/