6 ms·
Amazon isn't a search company, so I think it's a little different case. Also, if I call a Ford dealer and ask them for their best deals, why would I expect the
by RegBarclay 7y ago
Amazon isn't a search company, so I think it's a little different case.
Also, if I call a Ford dealer and ask them for their best deals, why would I expect them to tell me about Toyotas?
- ProAm 7y agoAmazon is a platform that sells any/all/counterfeit products, Ford dealer sells Fords.
- cik 7y agoFord dealers sell used cars of all types. My local Ford dealer is where I bought my first Integra (an Acura).
- ProAm 7y agoIt depends on the dealer, but for multi-brand sellers you can expect them to push whatever has the most profit margin for them, in the case of a Ford dealer that sells multiple brands (new, Im not talking used) I'd expect them to push Ford for the margin, just like Amazon is going to push their brand. But Amazon is a market-place (whereas I cannot go to this Ford dealership and list my own car for sale) and this is anti-competitive .
- basch 7y agoGrocery stores shouldnt be able to give store brands better placement? Costco shouldnt be able to incentivize Kirkland over a competitor? It makes total sense to go to Amazon to buy Echo, eero, Ring, Blink products, why wouldnt I buy them from their manufacturer?
- ProAm 7y agoNo they shouldnt, that is anti-competitive. Grocery store shelf placement is paid for my brands. If Kirkland pays for better placement they get better placement. Not just because they are the inhouse brand.
- basch 7y agoWhen did stores start having to treat all the products they sell equally?
- ProAm 7y agoThey never have, but grocery stores also do not prevent you from selling your product for cheaper elsewhere.
- jersey 7y agoDoes Amazon prevent you from selling on other platforms if you sell on Amazon?
- uoaei 7y agoHave you ever heard the term "monopoly"? They do by soft power -- leveraging their position in the market to make the alternatives completely unprofitable, thus literally preventing you from selling on other platforms.
- basch 7y agothe word monopoly gets mistakenly used in place of anti-competitive all the time. Are you describing predatory pricing? Where they sell at a loss to put competition out of business or to grow faster? Or are you trying to say its not profitable to sell on ebay or shopify instead of amazon? Amazon using its scale to clone products and sell them with low margins, in an effort to prevent competition from springing up is anti-competitive, but its not them being a monopoly.
- uoaei 7y agoI'm using the word more in a literal sense than a legal one. All I mean is the e-commerce space is becoming increasingly "monopolar" due to Amazon's activities.
- travmatt 7y agoAre you asking whether promotion of an in-house brand is anti-competitive behavior that should be subject to antitrust laws? That’s really not a question that’s been decided by society already, certainly not something that should just be assumed to be a positive trend.
- basch 7y agoThe trend is quickly becoming stores that sell almost exclusively store brand, augmented by other companies products to fill their cracks. Target, Walmart, and Costco would prefer to be Ikea than ebay. In many ways, I like it. I want target products, I go to target. I trust them to stand behind the quality of their product. Same goes for Kirkland. I dont go to Amazon to buy Kirland, anymore than I go to Best Buy to buy an Echo. Great Value I expect to be cheap but safe and not counterfit. Sure Wal-Mart might not be the most ethical business partner, and might be putting companies out of business, but I expect their store brand products to be what they say on the label. The stores pushing their brand helps with the paradox of choice, comparison shopping, recommendations and reivews, and blame when something goes wrong. I expect them to do the work of selecting the best product and standing behind it. Its department store scale boutiques, store brand product curation (basically white label rebranding, maybe custom runs off the factory lines) is a feature, not a bug. Amazon is doing a very similar thing by buying brands. Hopefully someday there is more to Alexa than voice, and there is a single something that allows you to see basic status and config of all your amazon products and services, whether they be Echo, Fire, Ring, Eero, Twitch etc.
- tzs 7y ago> I dont go to Amazon to buy Kirland, anymore than I go to Best Buy to buy an Echo I actually do go to Amazon to buy Kirkland. The nearest Costco is far enough away and not sufficiently cheaper than the Walmart supercenter a mile from my place to justify a Costco membership. Best Buy is actually a good place to buy Amazon devices if you have a nearby Best Buy. They price match so the price is generally the same (and better if it happens to be a time when Best Buy is having a sale and Amazon is not), and you get the thing right away. Oh, and Best Buy takes Apple Pay and cash.
- vokep 7y agoYes if they have some that are their best deals.
- RegBarclay 7y agoPerhaps on the used car lot.
- bduerst 7y agoFord isn't a platform for selling cars. If Ford was a company that made it's revenue sold Chevy, Dodge, Volkswagen, Bentley, etc. and it's own cars, then they would be analogous to Amazon.
- travmatt 7y agoCar manufacturers are legally barred from owning dealerships, it’s the individual dealership groups who decide what to sell. Car manufacturers selling directly to the public decreased competition as the manufacturers didn’t have any incentive to undercut their own prices between dealerships selling their own products.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- warent 7y agoReally? I thought Tesla owned all its dealerships and employed the dealers. Am I confused?
- neonate 7y agoAmazon is a search-for-something-to-buy company. I think the analogy holds.
- notatoad 7y agoAmazon is not the only search-for-something-to-buy-company. Amazon and Google can't both have a monopoly over the same market. There's a lot of stuff that's allowed when you're a normal company and forbidden when you have a monopoly. Some courts declared google a monopoly, and that's why they are restricted in what they can display on their search pages. (not trying to pass judgement here as to what either company should be allowed to do, just saying that's why it is the way it is.)