3 ms·
Of them having 40% of the market place? The comment is referring to the fact that companies trying to sell goods online are given a choice to either forego 40%
by ViViDboarder 6y ago
Of them having 40% of the market place?
The comment is referring to the fact that companies trying to sell goods online are given a choice to either forego 40% of potential revenues or work with Amazon. This gives Amazon an enormous amount of leverage over suppliers.
- logicchains 6y agoNo, of them forcing anybody off their platform. >The comment is referring to the fact that companies trying to sell goods online are given a choice to either forego 40% of potential revenues or work with Amazon. This gives Amazon an enormous amount of leverage over suppliers. Antitrust law (at least in the US) is conducted on the basis of harm to consumers. If Amazon's negotiating power with suppliers results in better prices/outcomes for consumers, then there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. As a producer, nobody is obligated to buy what you're selling. http://sites.middlebury.edu/econ0450f10/files/2010/08/bastiat.pdf http://sites.middlebury.edu/econ0450f10/files/2010/08/bastia... is a nice argument why laws should try to benefit consumers, not producers.
- cybwraith 6y ago> Antitrust law (at least in the US) is conducted on the basis of harm to consumers. This is far from a consensus view amongst lawmakers and economists.