> Simple logic leads to the latter explanation being more likely. Simple logic would be to conclude that a US company with >$400 billion in revenue looking to

> Simple logic leads to the latter explanation being more likely. Simple logic would be to conclude that a US company with >$400 billion in revenue looking to take-over an EU market is going to make long-term investments that aren't profitable in the first years and generate losses on $40 billion of revenue in this new market. There's nothing strange about that. The article doesn't even mention your logic, nor provides any evidence for it, not even a specific allegation by expert opinion. That's why I think it's poor reporting. (I should not have said terrible reporting). I'd be happy to receive arguments against Amazon's faults because I'm not an investor, not a consumer, not a fanboy, and concerned about the larger issues. But I want to see the facts.