5 ms·
I bring up this point every time something like this comes up and people usually say that somehow Amazon using "Analytics" and better ranking is the difference.
by belval 5y ago
I bring up this point every time something like this comes up and people usually say that somehow Amazon using "Analytics" and better ranking is the difference.
Walmart's Great Value is exactly the same idea and is created and promoted the exact same way both in the their stores and on their website.
I think what astonish me the most is that people are opposed to something that is actually a plus for the customer. Amazon Basics is definitely one of the great thing on Amazon right now. Instead of random cheap garbage I can buy stuff that I know will be "good enough" at a great price.
- madeofpalk 5y agoFirst order effect might be a benefit to consumers, but this kills competition. Those brands and products that amazon copies could eventually die out, and now there's less competition in the market and less forces for better products for customers.
- belval 5y agoDo we have any evidence of this? Walmart still sells non-great value products (started in 1993!) while I get why copying a niche product might cause the original manufacturer to die out and if there are examples of this I am more than willing to change my opinion. If you actually take a look at their offering (https://www.amazon.ca/-/en/stores/page/BFAE3282-E15B-47EE-9027-DE6D2D4DF0ED https://www.amazon.ca/-/en/stores/page/BFAE3282-E15B-47EE-90...), most of these are legitimately "basics", things that existed 50-100 years ago. Wilson won't die out because Amazon sells a volleyball, nor will Duracell because of offbrand AA batteries
- kwertyoowiyop 5y agoThis “everything is fine as long as the price is lower” logic is what’s wrong with our current lax anti-trust laws.
- missedthecue 5y agoWhy is it wrong? The goal of anti-trust laws isn't to protect inefficient businesses. It's to promote competition, and the entire point of having competition is that it lowers prices for consumers.
- madeofpalk 5y ago> It's to promote competition, What happens when everything is free/subsidised by advertising? How do you assess the competitiveness of Facebook when they don't charge anything to use Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, ...
- mellavora 5y agoThis might be a plus for the customer in the short term, but how is it a plus in the long term, when the innovation which creates the new products is snuffed?
- lostmsu 5y agoHow exactly does this practice hurt innovation in products?
- mint2 5y agoDo you think Amazon is going to innovate on niche products? Why would they steal other peoples designs if that were the case. They put the original company in financial straits or out of business and then don’t do any meaningful iteration on the products
- lostmsu 5y agoDo you have any proof of stealing unique designs? I'd expect those to be protected by patents.
- short12 5y agoNot everything nifty is patentable. Not to mention patents dont pretext the little guy and anyone can wholesale clone anything without reprisal
- missedthecue 5y agoAmazon isn't stealing IP and building their own factories. They are cutting out middle men and going straight to the producers themselves. Cutting out the middle man gives the inventors greater income and the consumers lower prices.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jghn 5y agoDo we know that one can avoid counterfeit goods via Amazon's brands? I'd think that one could mix in counterfeit goods the same way one could with any other product.
- micromacrofoot 5y agoAmazon owns a larger % of the online ecommerce market than Walmart owns of either the brick-and-mortar or ecommerce, which I think is a notable distinction... Amazon is approaching half of all ecommerce sales. If Walmart is 10% of brick-and-mortar sales it's hard to argue that store brands are too competitive. 90% of that market is not walmart. When Amazon approaches the majority of all ecommerce sales, it starts to become a bigger problem when they control the marketplace and start to undercut your products. In general I think the fair thing to do is to make the marketplace distinction (even for store brands, which are often white-labeled third-party generics sold under multiple names anyway). You run the marketplace that allows others to sell their products, or you sell your products directly... you shouldn't be able to coordinate both as one business.
- mint2 5y agoIt’s only a plus for the customer in the short term. It kills the companies doing innovation and optimizing the products. Sure it makes the current crop of products cheaper (and lower quality bc Amazon basics often mimic the top product but with cheaper parts) but it puts the innovators out of business. Amazon is too big to care about innovating on small products and too big to do it well if even if they did.
- Imnimo 5y agoIf the companies being copied don't have patents on the products, are they really innovating?
- triactual 5y agoThey are not. They are rent-seeking. If you didn’t convince your customers of your brand value or at leadt get a patent, you probably didn’t innovate and thus a free economy makes you vulnerable to competition from more efficient businesses. Surprise! The consumer benefits and the rent-seeker has to try something else.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- arrosenberg 5y agoWhite Label store brands are anticompetitive. They are a form of the pricing discrimination games that retailers and manufacturers play to allow one set of companies to capture multiple segments of business with the same product. It should be illegal for the same retailer to sell both a name brand product and the equivalent product as a white label.
- imtringued 5y agoThe only way to avoid co-mingling of inventory is to buy Amazon Basics products because they are clearly marked. This gives every non Amazon brand a massive disadvantage because they will be associated with scams.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]