8 ms·

Imagine Walmart at the height of their retail power, but they also control the infrastructure running a huge portion of the internet, several media properties,

Imagine Walmart at the height of their retail power, but they also control the infrastructure running a huge portion of the internet, several media properties, and are working on creating a new ISP - that's Amazon. We're heading into a world where the likes of Standard Oil will look like a quaint "lifestyle business" compared to the FAANG giants.

k__ 5y ago
Doesn't Biden plan to go big on anti trust laws? Some stuff I read sounded rather bleak for the likes of FAANG.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  Politicians' plans and politicians' accomplishments tend to be vastly different things.
  - dan_quixote 5y ago
    We're starting to get some political alignment on anti-trust against Amazon at least. Though one party seems motivated by worker/consumer right, the other by retaliation for Bezos' ownership of WaPo.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      I fully expect Amazon's lobbying arms to be able to exploit that sort of ideological split.
    - fallingknife 5y ago
      It would be very easy for Bezos to divest WaPo or tilt its coverage more conservative to buy off an anti-trust issue.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - paxys 5y ago
      Considering Bezos is hardly involved with Amazon anymore it’ll be hard to tie WaPo into its antitrust case.
      - dave5104 5y ago
        Do they need to tie WaPo into whatever antitrust may hit Amazon? As long as it's hurting Jeff Bezos, I'm sure some will be happy about it.
- Pokepokalypse 5y ago
  lol. So; how did antitrust work out for Bell? Not too terribly bad, in the long run. (Though there were huge benefits for us consumers. . . )
  - majormajor 5y ago
    The various Standard Oil split results had some nice successes, too. Honestly I'm not sure of the main corporate opposition to anti-trust other than ego and/or laziness. It'll force the resulting business to get even better. If you got your position by being the best, you can still be the best in the new world.
adrr 5y ago
Walmart sells a lot more stuff than Amazon. People over estimate the size of Amazon and total retail sales.
- yaitsyaboi 5y ago
  Amazon has higher retail sales than Walmart?
  - thedogeye 5y ago
    Yes, Amazon does more retail sales than Walmart. Their "revenue" is only 15% on all third party sales, which are now more than half of total sales on the platform. They don't report on total sales on the platform on purpose to avoid drawing attention to the fact that they are bigger than Walmart.
  - dmoy 5y ago
    I think amazon may have higher total sales on its platform, but like 60% of their sales are actually sold by other marketplace sellers, not Amazon. Walmart meanwhile does also have a marketplace, but I think still sells the overwhelming majority of their stuff direct in their physical stores. Remember Walmart has revenue of like 600 billion a year or something crazy.
    - adrr 5y ago
      Shopify for comparison is almost half the size of Amazon Marketplace but on trajectory to match it in the next two years.
    - jjeaff 5y ago
      But that 15% that amazon takes (not counting the extra cut they take for Fulfilled by Amazon items) is larger than Walmart's average markup. So that isn't really an argument against their size.
  - neolog 5y ago
    That question mark is confusing
amelius 5y ago
This is basic infrastructure/utility and should be run by the government (with companies as contractors).
- dominojab 5y ago
  i disagree , government is prone to corruption when it envolves contractors, also a private company has way more interest in running things as efficiently as possible , that being said there should be very nicely tailored rules and regulations in which companies participate or at least make suggestions.
- rpmisms 5y ago
  Yes. It should absolutely become less agile, over-regulated, more expensive, and less convenient.
  - amelius 5y ago
    Don't forget that government institutions invented the internet, then companies messed it up.
    - RobRivera 5y ago
      lmao? 'messed it up'- care to elaborate?
- LimaBearz 5y ago
  I was recently looking at getting starlink. During my research I got a good chuckle at the realization that it’s more cost effective for SpaceX to launch thousands of satellites into space for starlink then it is for someone to dig a goddamn hole to provide adequate service. Even slightly rural places it’s not cost effective for traditional isps to dig a cable so what’s the markets solution? Launch thousands of satellites! I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. The market has failed, requiring external forces to intervene(the government). Whether it be Title 2ing them or allowing municipal competition something needs to happen
iooi 5y ago
Rockefeller's wealth was ~420 billion (inflation adjusted) at its peak. That's significantly more than Bezos and Gates combined. So no, Standard Oil won't look like a lifestyle business compared to FAANG giants. You can make a point without using hyperbole. > also control the infrastructure running a huge portion of the internet AWS has less market share than Microsoft. The Cloud is a pretty competitive space. > are working on creating a new ISP This is great, look what Google Fiber did to fiber availability in the US. More competition is great in this space. I find it ironic that you're complaining about FAANGs in the context of ISPs, who control literal monopolies in several regions.
- ransom1538 5y ago
  "Rockefeller's wealth was ~420 billion (inflation adjusted) at its peak." Dumb question. Why do people use inflation? Like Rockefeller would take the cash and put in a %2.5 account for 100 years? He probably would have put it in an investment at minimum gaining %7-10 account for 100 years - giving him multiple trillions.
  - majormajor 5y ago
    It's because the question isn't "how much money would Rockefeller have now if he'd time traveled while his investments sat there," it's "how much did he have relative to today's wealthy" and the easiest comparison point we have there is to inflation-adjust and compare that to our existing mental feeling for "how rich is Bezos."
  - brtkdotse 5y ago
    Because the point is to give an apples-to-apples comparison of the value represented. It’s not Rockefeller’s fortune and it’s growth that’s interesting but rather how many Big Macs his fortune could buy in 1921 vs how much that many Big Macs would cost in 2021.
    - cma 5y ago
      But they were comparing Amazon to STD oil, not Bezos (diluted in divorce) to Rockefeller. Rockefeller owned a full third, Bezos 11%, Gates 1% (but similar foundation setup to Rockefeller maybe, and at one point was 49% or something, but of a much smaller MS than today).
skissane 5y ago
They are creating an ISP, but how successful is it going to be? The clear leader in satellite Internet constellations is SpaceX Starlink, and Kuiper compares poorly to what Starlink offers. SpaceX is going to have a bigger constellation. SpaceX already has a bigger constellation – over 1600 satellites in orbit, compared to zero launched yet for Kuiper. SpaceX has a huge advantage in having their own launch vehicles (Falcon 9, with Starship under development). Amazon has to rely on third party launch providers, and it isn't willing to choose SpaceX (SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell has said they are happy to launch competitors' constellations, but obviously Amazon doesn't want to fund its main competitor). For now it has chosen ULA, but ULA costs significantly more than SpaceX, and with Starship the gap is going to become even bigger. Amazon's other major option is Blue Origin – which, although owned by Bezos, is not an Amazon company – but while Blue Origin's launch system New Glenn is competitive on paper with SpaceX's (being in between Falcon 9 and Starship in capability), its maiden launch probably isn't until 2023 at the earliest. I think it is likely that Starship will be launching Starlink satellites before New Glenn is launching Kuiper.
- ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
  starlink won't scale and everyone knows it. At most, starlink can replace one tmobile. amz seem to be buying into everything under the sun and trumpling usage agreements (i.e. "reselling" consumer broadband with people joining via dark-patterns despite it being against their ISP terms of service, via amz sidewalk product)... and that can scale up to O.G. Bell levels of monopoly.
  - skissane 5y ago
    If Starlink won't scale, Kuiper won't scale even moreso. FCC has approved 12,000 satellites for SpaceX, and another 30,000 are going through the approval process. Project Kuiper has only applied for a 3,236 satellite constellation. And SpaceX is way ahead on deployment, and is likely to stay ahead. Other than Kuiper, Amazon has shown no signs of becoming a serious player in the consumer ISP space. Sidewalk is not a consumer ISP service in its own right, it needs to piggyback on a third-party consumer ISP service. Amazon is nowhere near becoming anything resembling Bell.
fukmbas 5y ago
Amazon literally starting an ISP to mine all of your data lol

k__ 5y ago

Doesn't Biden plan to go big on anti trust laws? Some stuff I read sounded rather bleak for the likes of FAANG.

ceejayoz 5y ago
Politicians' plans and politicians' accomplishments tend to be vastly different things.
- dan_quixote 5y ago
  We're starting to get some political alignment on anti-trust against Amazon at least. Though one party seems motivated by worker/consumer right, the other by retaliation for Bezos' ownership of WaPo.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    I fully expect Amazon's lobbying arms to be able to exploit that sort of ideological split.
  - fallingknife 5y ago
    It would be very easy for Bezos to divest WaPo or tilt its coverage more conservative to buy off an anti-trust issue.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - paxys 5y ago
    Considering Bezos is hardly involved with Amazon anymore it’ll be hard to tie WaPo into its antitrust case.
    - dave5104 5y ago
      Do they need to tie WaPo into whatever antitrust may hit Amazon? As long as it's hurting Jeff Bezos, I'm sure some will be happy about it.
Pokepokalypse 5y ago
lol. So; how did antitrust work out for Bell? Not too terribly bad, in the long run. (Though there were huge benefits for us consumers. . . )
- majormajor 5y ago
  The various Standard Oil split results had some nice successes, too. Honestly I'm not sure of the main corporate opposition to anti-trust other than ego and/or laziness. It'll force the resulting business to get even better. If you got your position by being the best, you can still be the best in the new world.

adrr 5y ago

Walmart sells a lot more stuff than Amazon. People over estimate the size of Amazon and total retail sales.

yaitsyaboi 5y ago
Amazon has higher retail sales than Walmart?
- thedogeye 5y ago
  Yes, Amazon does more retail sales than Walmart. Their "revenue" is only 15% on all third party sales, which are now more than half of total sales on the platform. They don't report on total sales on the platform on purpose to avoid drawing attention to the fact that they are bigger than Walmart.
- dmoy 5y ago
  I think amazon may have higher total sales on its platform, but like 60% of their sales are actually sold by other marketplace sellers, not Amazon. Walmart meanwhile does also have a marketplace, but I think still sells the overwhelming majority of their stuff direct in their physical stores. Remember Walmart has revenue of like 600 billion a year or something crazy.
  - adrr 5y ago
    Shopify for comparison is almost half the size of Amazon Marketplace but on trajectory to match it in the next two years.
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    But that 15% that amazon takes (not counting the extra cut they take for Fulfilled by Amazon items) is larger than Walmart's average markup. So that isn't really an argument against their size.
- neolog 5y ago
  That question mark is confusing

amelius 5y ago

This is basic infrastructure/utility and should be run by the government (with companies as contractors).

dominojab 5y ago
i disagree , government is prone to corruption when it envolves contractors, also a private company has way more interest in running things as efficiently as possible , that being said there should be very nicely tailored rules and regulations in which companies participate or at least make suggestions.
rpmisms 5y ago
Yes. It should absolutely become less agile, over-regulated, more expensive, and less convenient.
- amelius 5y ago
  Don't forget that government institutions invented the internet, then companies messed it up.
  - RobRivera 5y ago
    lmao? 'messed it up'- care to elaborate?
LimaBearz 5y ago
I was recently looking at getting starlink. During my research I got a good chuckle at the realization that it’s more cost effective for SpaceX to launch thousands of satellites into space for starlink then it is for someone to dig a goddamn hole to provide adequate service. Even slightly rural places it’s not cost effective for traditional isps to dig a cable so what’s the markets solution? Launch thousands of satellites! I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. The market has failed, requiring external forces to intervene(the government). Whether it be Title 2ing them or allowing municipal competition something needs to happen

iooi 5y ago

Rockefeller's wealth was ~420 billion (inflation adjusted) at its peak. That's significantly more than Bezos and Gates combined. So no, Standard Oil won't look like a lifestyle business compared to FAANG giants. You can make a point without using hyperbole. > also control the infrastructure running a huge portion of the internet AWS has less market share than Microsoft. The Cloud is a pretty competitive space. > are working on creating a new ISP This is great, look what Google Fiber did to fiber availability in the US. More competition is great in this space. I find it ironic that you're complaining about FAANGs in the context of ISPs, who control literal monopolies in several regions.

ransom1538 5y ago
"Rockefeller's wealth was ~420 billion (inflation adjusted) at its peak." Dumb question. Why do people use inflation? Like Rockefeller would take the cash and put in a %2.5 account for 100 years? He probably would have put it in an investment at minimum gaining %7-10 account for 100 years - giving him multiple trillions.
- majormajor 5y ago
  It's because the question isn't "how much money would Rockefeller have now if he'd time traveled while his investments sat there," it's "how much did he have relative to today's wealthy" and the easiest comparison point we have there is to inflation-adjust and compare that to our existing mental feeling for "how rich is Bezos."
- brtkdotse 5y ago
  Because the point is to give an apples-to-apples comparison of the value represented. It’s not Rockefeller’s fortune and it’s growth that’s interesting but rather how many Big Macs his fortune could buy in 1921 vs how much that many Big Macs would cost in 2021.
  - cma 5y ago
    But they were comparing Amazon to STD oil, not Bezos (diluted in divorce) to Rockefeller. Rockefeller owned a full third, Bezos 11%, Gates 1% (but similar foundation setup to Rockefeller maybe, and at one point was 49% or something, but of a much smaller MS than today).

skissane 5y ago

They are creating an ISP, but how successful is it going to be? The clear leader in satellite Internet constellations is SpaceX Starlink, and Kuiper compares poorly to what Starlink offers. SpaceX is going to have a bigger constellation. SpaceX already has a bigger constellation – over 1600 satellites in orbit, compared to zero launched yet for Kuiper. SpaceX has a huge advantage in having their own launch vehicles (Falcon 9, with Starship under development). Amazon has to rely on third party launch providers, and it isn't willing to choose SpaceX (SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell has said they are happy to launch competitors' constellations, but obviously Amazon doesn't want to fund its main competitor). For now it has chosen ULA, but ULA costs significantly more than SpaceX, and with Starship the gap is going to become even bigger. Amazon's other major option is Blue Origin – which, although owned by Bezos, is not an Amazon company – but while Blue Origin's launch system New Glenn is competitive on paper with SpaceX's (being in between Falcon 9 and Starship in capability), its maiden launch probably isn't until 2023 at the earliest. I think it is likely that Starship will be launching Starlink satellites before New Glenn is launching Kuiper.

ajklsdhfniuwehf 5y ago
starlink won't scale and everyone knows it. At most, starlink can replace one tmobile. amz seem to be buying into everything under the sun and trumpling usage agreements (i.e. "reselling" consumer broadband with people joining via dark-patterns despite it being against their ISP terms of service, via amz sidewalk product)... and that can scale up to O.G. Bell levels of monopoly.
- skissane 5y ago
  If Starlink won't scale, Kuiper won't scale even moreso. FCC has approved 12,000 satellites for SpaceX, and another 30,000 are going through the approval process. Project Kuiper has only applied for a 3,236 satellite constellation. And SpaceX is way ahead on deployment, and is likely to stay ahead. Other than Kuiper, Amazon has shown no signs of becoming a serious player in the consumer ISP space. Sidewalk is not a consumer ISP service in its own right, it needs to piggyback on a third-party consumer ISP service. Amazon is nowhere near becoming anything resembling Bell.

fukmbas 5y ago

Amazon literally starting an ISP to mine all of your data lol