4 ms·
There's obviously a misunderstanding with my statement. I am not talking about what should or shouldn't be happening, or what is morally right, or what the idea
by herpderperator 5y ago
There's obviously a misunderstanding with my statement. I am not talking about what should or shouldn't be happening, or what is morally right, or what the ideal experience is. I'm warning people that unfortunately Amazon does not operate the way many people think. Of course I do agree that Amazon should be the sole seller and that if you buy something from Amazon you should expect to receive it from Amazon.
I am simply stating facts as to how the website operates today. Right now, it's possible to order an item on the Amazon.com website that does not come from Amazon.com at all. It can be "shipped and sold" by a complete third party. Most items are shipped by Amazon, but it's not difficult to find items that are just listed on Amazon but the entire sale/shipping process is done by the third party.
The parent comment:
> If you buy on the Amazon.com website it’s on Amazon to deliver your order and provide a good shipping experience.
is simply false, because that's not how Amazon operates today. It is literally wrong because it does not apply to all items on Amazon. That statement is only true if something is fulfilled by Amazon, which includes items "Shipped and sold by Amazon.com" and "Sold by <some_third_party>, fulfilled by Amazon". Fulfilled by Amazon means it's located at one of its many warehouses and Amazon ships it in their Amazon boxes.
If I misinterpreted the comment, then my mistake.
- kmonsen 5y agoWe agree when it sends like we disagree, and I guess both could have worded it clearer. I state what I as a consumer expect when shopping. You state what is actually happening today. I think we both agree with both points.
- CRConrad 5y agoI've always thought "it's on <<X>> to..." means "it's X's moral responsibility", not "what X is currently doing".