3 ms·
> Don't paint amazon subscribers as victims here. The point of the lawsuit and detailed in the analysis is that ALL online purchases end up being influenced (c
by caseysoftware 5y ago
> Don't paint amazon subscribers as victims here.
The point of the lawsuit and detailed in the analysis is that ALL online purchases end up being influenced (controlled?) as a result. This creates prices that are 30-45% higher across all retailers for a given item.
That would include Amazon Prime subscribers and random internet guy buying the same thing from a different site.
If Amazon controls their own storefronts, that's one thing. When they can exert control over competitors' storefronts - or worse, all competitors' storefronts - that's a different matter.
- forgithubs 5y agoI was a eRetailer and I often lowered my prices accordingly to be more competitive than what was proposed by Amazon. I ended making the sale because someone did not buy at Amazon. Nobody forced me to raise prices at all. Amazon had no control at all on my prices. The market price is what is offered and what the customer is willing to pay. If it's too expensive, nobody buys there. I think we both get the point, except we think in different terms about the solution. I'd rather let the market works, have a transition towards competition which will eventually come down the line (5 to 10 years) than have big government try to solve the problem by making everything worse off.