6 ms·

So create a system that encourages abuse, profit from that abuse at the expense of brands, and then charge those companies to use your proprietary tracking syst

So create a system that encourages abuse, profit from that abuse at the expense of brands, and then charge those companies to use your proprietary tracking system if they want to eliminate it? This is straight out of a racketeering playbook, "It would be a shame if someone counterfeited your products and ruined your brand..." This is Amazon's problem and they should be responsible and accountable for this. This article is low quality and reads like it's straight out of Amazon's PR team, with no actual analysis.

DanTheManPR 7y ago
>This article is low quality and reads like it's straight out of Amazon's PR team, with no actual analysis. http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
papreclip 7y ago
I don't think I fully understand your perspective. Aside from simply offering a marketplace on which people may sell various products, what has Amazon done to encourage abuse?
- harimau777 7y ago
  I don't necessarily know their validity one way or the other, but the points that tend to be made are: - In today's world, Amazon isn't just a marketplace, it is THE marketplace. For many brands, not selling on Amazon isn't a realistic option. - Amazon's marketplace makes it very easy to counterfeit due to co-mingling, the difficulty of holding foreign sellers accountable, and the prevalence of fake reviews. - Amazon has done little if anything to combat counterfeiting.
  - tidepod12 7y ago
    >Amazon has done little if anything to combat counterfeiting. This article is entirely about Amazon doing something to combat counterfeiting...
    - F00bart 7y ago
      Amazon has benefited tremendously from counterfeiting, and has done little to combat it until recently, mostly because the pressure to act has increased and the benefits of stalling have decreased.
    - cgriswald 7y ago
      Yes, finally. And they’re putting the cost on the manufacturers, even though it’s a problem they created. In effect, manufacturers are now paying for commingling and Amazon is reaping the benefits.
      - tidepod12 7y ago
        What a hilarious notion that Amazon "created" the problem of counterfeiting. Counterfeiting has been an issue for centuries, long long before Amazon existed.
        cgriswald 7y ago
        Amazon didn’t create the problem of counterfeiting, but they did create the problems on Amazon. If I purchase something on Amazon and it is counterfeit, I can’t blame or avoid the counterfeiter because Amazon has commingled inventory. Even if I buy from a trusted seller or even Amazon itself, I might get a counterfeit item. My only choice in that case is to not buy from Amazon at all. If I buy anywhere else that allows third party sellers, I might get a counterfeit item, but I’ll know to avoid that seller in the future. And I can develop a meaningful relationship of trust with sellers; seller reviews about counterfeits will have meaning; and I can shop with a lot more confidence.
        harimau777 7y ago
        I think the point is that by creating a system that makes counterfeiting easy and doing nothing to stop it when they knew it was taking place (or now demanding payment to stop it), Amazon is somewhat responsible.
      - xemdetia 7y ago
        Putting the cost on manufacturers and potentially breaking legitimate resellers just feels straight out of the Walmart strongarm playbook. It feels like it should be against some FTC regulation somewhere that a transferrer of a good has the responsibility to not allow this to happen. The only historical equivalent I can think of is the movements of crude oil through pipelines where if you sell one type of oil and get a different oil on the buyers end the pipeline owner doesn't get to wash their hands of the affair and say 'its just oil, buyer beware.' Amazon should be subsidizing 100% of this program if they can't take care of their own mess.
- dragontamer 7y ago
  > what has Amazon done to encourage abuse? Co-mingling of products at the warehouse. When you buy from Amazon, you don't actually know which "seller" is supplying the goods. They all were comingled at the Warehouse. Even "Sold by Amazon" and "Fufilled by Amazon" products are comingled. Leading to: https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225 https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225 Amazon, instead of fixing the comingling problem, has decided to charge the legitimate companies (ex: No Starch Press) for anti-counterfeiting defenses. Amazon is destroying No Starch Press's reputation by shipping shoddy low-quality counterfeit books, but its No Starch Press who has to pay the price to fix the problem.
  - mrandish 7y ago
    Yes, as a heavy user of Amazon and (I think) a pretty savvy consumer of their site, commingling of different seller's offerings under one ASIN number causes big issues for me. Almost as bad is Amazon allowing resellers to combine "similar" products into the same listing. While this makes sense for functionally equivalent products such as color differences, it's now used all the time for products that are substantially different. For example, mixing the ratings of a Micro-USB wall charger with a USB-C Power Delivery-capable wall charger is not only useless but misleading. They look different, work differently and use completely different parts internally. I really wish Amazon would stop this.
- makomk 7y ago
  The big difference between Amazon and other marketplaces is that Amazon have done their best to not make it look or act like a marketplace. Like, if you look at a listing on eBay there's a prominent seller information pane telling you which user you're buying from, their feedback history, etc. On Amazon there's just a single unobtrusive "sold by" line which blends into the rest of the page. Not only that, if you or someone else comes back to the same listing a few hours later the product could be coming from a completely different seller - Amazon decides who they want to direct your purchase to based on secret algorithmic factors.
- jinushaun 7y ago
  Co-mingling inventory. Amazon isn't a marketplace. It's warehouse where the real goods are mixed in with the fake goods and you can't buy directly from a specific seller. The fix is to stop co-mingling and allow users to buy directly from a seller. That would be a true marketplace platform. Sellers shouldn't need to pay Amazon for an add-on anti-counterfeiting service to fix a problem they created.
sdinsn 7y ago
It's strange how you attack specifically Amazon for this, while every e-commerce platform that allows 3rd party sellers has this problem. Amazon is the only one doing something about it; they should be applauded.
- me_me_me 7y ago
  let's not go into whataboutism. Amazon is the biggest player so of course it has to be scrutinized the most.
  - sdinsn 7y ago
    It's not whataboutism to state that Amazon is the only one actually trying to fix things.
    - x0x0 7y ago
      the point is things == the problem they specifically caused
- ProZsolt 7y ago
  Amazon caused the problem by mixing inventory. You are a legit seller who sells product A and there is another seller who sells a counterfeit product A. Even if a customer buys from you it can receive a counterfeit product.
  - nimajneb 7y ago
    I think this happened to me a long time ago on Amazon (2015). I ordered a bicycle tail light. When I got the package it was some cheap bad non brand name product. I'm not sure what Amazon did on the back end, but they refunded me. I just looked at my order history, it appears to be one of the items Amazon sells from multiple vendors, like what you describe.
  - thephyber 7y ago
    I'm having a hard time grokking how Amazon is somehow culpable for the fraud of "another seller" claiming that their wares are "product A" (by self-describing it by the same SKU). If this happened on eBay (user buys/wins auction of "product A" as sold by "another seller", but described the product sold by "a legit seller"), who is culpable? I'm sure the reputation of the "another seller" should take a hit -- the only question is should the marketplace's reputation? Perhaps if the "fulfilled my Amazon" is used, that might make more sense, but I think they just add the "distributor" role to their transaction role.

DanTheManPR 7y ago

>This article is low quality and reads like it's straight out of Amazon's PR team, with no actual analysis. http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

papreclip 7y ago

I don't think I fully understand your perspective. Aside from simply offering a marketplace on which people may sell various products, what has Amazon done to encourage abuse?

harimau777 7y ago
I don't necessarily know their validity one way or the other, but the points that tend to be made are: - In today's world, Amazon isn't just a marketplace, it is THE marketplace. For many brands, not selling on Amazon isn't a realistic option. - Amazon's marketplace makes it very easy to counterfeit due to co-mingling, the difficulty of holding foreign sellers accountable, and the prevalence of fake reviews. - Amazon has done little if anything to combat counterfeiting.
- tidepod12 7y ago
  >Amazon has done little if anything to combat counterfeiting. This article is entirely about Amazon doing something to combat counterfeiting...
  - F00bart 7y ago
    Amazon has benefited tremendously from counterfeiting, and has done little to combat it until recently, mostly because the pressure to act has increased and the benefits of stalling have decreased.
  - cgriswald 7y ago
    Yes, finally. And they’re putting the cost on the manufacturers, even though it’s a problem they created. In effect, manufacturers are now paying for commingling and Amazon is reaping the benefits.
    - tidepod12 7y ago
      What a hilarious notion that Amazon "created" the problem of counterfeiting. Counterfeiting has been an issue for centuries, long long before Amazon existed.
      - cgriswald 7y ago
        Amazon didn’t create the problem of counterfeiting, but they did create the problems on Amazon. If I purchase something on Amazon and it is counterfeit, I can’t blame or avoid the counterfeiter because Amazon has commingled inventory. Even if I buy from a trusted seller or even Amazon itself, I might get a counterfeit item. My only choice in that case is to not buy from Amazon at all. If I buy anywhere else that allows third party sellers, I might get a counterfeit item, but I’ll know to avoid that seller in the future. And I can develop a meaningful relationship of trust with sellers; seller reviews about counterfeits will have meaning; and I can shop with a lot more confidence.
      - harimau777 7y ago
        I think the point is that by creating a system that makes counterfeiting easy and doing nothing to stop it when they knew it was taking place (or now demanding payment to stop it), Amazon is somewhat responsible.
    - xemdetia 7y ago
      Putting the cost on manufacturers and potentially breaking legitimate resellers just feels straight out of the Walmart strongarm playbook. It feels like it should be against some FTC regulation somewhere that a transferrer of a good has the responsibility to not allow this to happen. The only historical equivalent I can think of is the movements of crude oil through pipelines where if you sell one type of oil and get a different oil on the buyers end the pipeline owner doesn't get to wash their hands of the affair and say 'its just oil, buyer beware.' Amazon should be subsidizing 100% of this program if they can't take care of their own mess.
dragontamer 7y ago
> what has Amazon done to encourage abuse? Co-mingling of products at the warehouse. When you buy from Amazon, you don't actually know which "seller" is supplying the goods. They all were comingled at the Warehouse. Even "Sold by Amazon" and "Fufilled by Amazon" products are comingled. Leading to: https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225 https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225 Amazon, instead of fixing the comingling problem, has decided to charge the legitimate companies (ex: No Starch Press) for anti-counterfeiting defenses. Amazon is destroying No Starch Press's reputation by shipping shoddy low-quality counterfeit books, but its No Starch Press who has to pay the price to fix the problem.
- mrandish 7y ago
  Yes, as a heavy user of Amazon and (I think) a pretty savvy consumer of their site, commingling of different seller's offerings under one ASIN number causes big issues for me. Almost as bad is Amazon allowing resellers to combine "similar" products into the same listing. While this makes sense for functionally equivalent products such as color differences, it's now used all the time for products that are substantially different. For example, mixing the ratings of a Micro-USB wall charger with a USB-C Power Delivery-capable wall charger is not only useless but misleading. They look different, work differently and use completely different parts internally. I really wish Amazon would stop this.
makomk 7y ago
The big difference between Amazon and other marketplaces is that Amazon have done their best to not make it look or act like a marketplace. Like, if you look at a listing on eBay there's a prominent seller information pane telling you which user you're buying from, their feedback history, etc. On Amazon there's just a single unobtrusive "sold by" line which blends into the rest of the page. Not only that, if you or someone else comes back to the same listing a few hours later the product could be coming from a completely different seller - Amazon decides who they want to direct your purchase to based on secret algorithmic factors.
jinushaun 7y ago
Co-mingling inventory. Amazon isn't a marketplace. It's warehouse where the real goods are mixed in with the fake goods and you can't buy directly from a specific seller. The fix is to stop co-mingling and allow users to buy directly from a seller. That would be a true marketplace platform. Sellers shouldn't need to pay Amazon for an add-on anti-counterfeiting service to fix a problem they created.

sdinsn 7y ago

It's strange how you attack specifically Amazon for this, while every e-commerce platform that allows 3rd party sellers has this problem. Amazon is the only one doing something about it; they should be applauded.

me_me_me 7y ago
let's not go into whataboutism. Amazon is the biggest player so of course it has to be scrutinized the most.
- sdinsn 7y ago
  It's not whataboutism to state that Amazon is the only one actually trying to fix things.
  - x0x0 7y ago
    the point is things == the problem they specifically caused
ProZsolt 7y ago
Amazon caused the problem by mixing inventory. You are a legit seller who sells product A and there is another seller who sells a counterfeit product A. Even if a customer buys from you it can receive a counterfeit product.
- nimajneb 7y ago
  I think this happened to me a long time ago on Amazon (2015). I ordered a bicycle tail light. When I got the package it was some cheap bad non brand name product. I'm not sure what Amazon did on the back end, but they refunded me. I just looked at my order history, it appears to be one of the items Amazon sells from multiple vendors, like what you describe.
- thephyber 7y ago
  I'm having a hard time grokking how Amazon is somehow culpable for the fraud of "another seller" claiming that their wares are "product A" (by self-describing it by the same SKU). If this happened on eBay (user buys/wins auction of "product A" as sold by "another seller", but described the product sold by "a legit seller"), who is culpable? I'm sure the reputation of the "another seller" should take a hit -- the only question is should the marketplace's reputation? Perhaps if the "fulfilled my Amazon" is used, that might make more sense, but I think they just add the "distributor" role to their transaction role.