5 ms·

Can you really not distinguish Amazon, it’s market position, and their acts from brick and mortar retailers that carry private label items? Even if you can’t d

Can you really not distinguish Amazon, it’s market position, and their acts from brick and mortar retailers that carry private label items? Even if you can’t distinguish Amazon’s conduct and a grocery store selling private label cereals side by side, the article really isn’t about that anyway but the fact that Amazon went before congress and was asked about prioritizing their private label products in search results over other sellers and Amazon representative lied under oath by denying they do that. I’m not aware of Target going before Congress and lying under oath about selling private label products, one would think if Amazon’s conduct was on the up and up they wouldn’t lie under oath to cover it up.

devin 5y ago
Let’s try it and see.
fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago
Isn’t it still the case that Walmart and similar brick and mortar stores have significantly higher revenue than Amazon’s e-commerce revenue? If anything, it’s worse for traditional stores because they have limited shelf space and so store brands can prevent name brands from even being available.
- tw04 5y ago
  No, no it isn’t the case. Walmart is the only one with more revenue, but they don’t have AWS margins to prop up everything else. I think we’d all be better off if we didn’t have a 2-horse race for 90% of our purchases… Target (#3)had $93b in revenue in FY2020. Amazon e-commerce had $120b. https://corporate.target.com/annual-reports/2020 https://corporate.target.com/annual-reports/2020 https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1218313/amazon-revenue-development-ecommercedb https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1218313/amazon-revenue-de...
  - didibus 5y ago
    I'd agree if we had a 2-horse race, but I don't see it, there are a ton of competing retail stores both online and offline. And especially online, it's not like you're limited geographically where say your only store that has what you want is a big Walmart, you have access to hundreds of online retailer to choose from.
  - sjg007 5y ago
    Target needs to do same day delivery and then they will win hands down. It does not take an MBA to figure this out and I don't know why they have not done it yet.
    - JanisL 5y ago
      Its because same day delivery takes a rather large investment in logistics systems that they may not have ready to go.
      - sjg007 5y ago
        This is easy. Offer a target membership for $100 a year. Pay employees who live nearby to deliver. Easy.
        dralley 5y ago
        Here are the results of my google search for "target same day delivery" https://www.target.com/c/same-day-delivery/-/N-bswkz?tab=howdeliveryworks https://www.target.com/c/same-day-delivery/-/N-bswkz?tab=how... It appears they are already doing exactly this.
        ctvo 5y ago
        If you add a few more “easy” to it it may hide you have no idea what it takes logistically or have ever built something of similar scope / complexity.
    - kidsat 5y ago
      They already do this and it's called Shipt. There's a delivery charge (about $9.99) or yearly membership available.
- techdragon 5y ago
  But did they lie to congress… it’s not about prioritising their own brands because yes everyone does it, it’s about lying to Congress.
  - fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago
    Sure, I don’t disagree about this part of the charge: I just don’t think there’s much difference between any other commerce-oriented business and Amazon on the question of prioritizing store brands.
    - cudgy 5y ago
      Customers can actually see all the products at a physical store shelf to make comparisons albeit they may be placed at different heights on the shelves. Amazon essentially hides other competitors on the screen since they get the “buy box” and competition can only be seen by clicking to another screen; vast majority of users do not click to other screens.
whoisjuan 5y ago
My comment is not about their lying. That's a different problem and not what my comment is about. > Can you really not distinguish Amazon, it’s market position, and their acts from brick and mortar retailers that carry private label items? Who do you think had the dominant market position before Amazon was a thing? Again, this play is older than Amazon itself. My argument was just a rhetorical statement reflecting on the government's ineffectiveness and contradictory behavior when defining what harms customers or competition. It's only now they care, because it's only now that they seem to see the political benefits from pursuing what's a rampant decades-long behavior. Believe me, my comment is not trying to defend Amazon, is simply trying to showcase how politicians are opportunistic demagogues.
- tchalla 5y ago
  There seems to be no winning with the government actions : Act early and they’re accused of stifling “innovation”, act late and they’re accused of “ineffective ness”.
  - whoisjuan 5y ago
    Except that in this case they are about 30 to 40 years late.
  - xyzzyz 5y ago
    Yes, the government regulatory actions are typically net negative.
    - asdff 5y ago
      I don't know, I like being able to see the mountains from Pasadena today. That wasn't possible in the 1980s.
      - nosianu 5y ago
        But nobody is paying for better air! (Yet)
    - 5y ago
vmception 5y ago
Can the law distinguish
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  The law is the law it doesn’t distinguish anything, but facts can easily be distinguished and when you apply 2 different sets of facts to the law, don’t expect the same outcome. It’s why Amazon never makes the argument about private label brands in grocery stores/brick and mortar retailers. If it were that easy, they wouldn’t be testifying before Congress much less lying under oath about prioritizing their own products, they would have just said “of course we use data to copy the best selling 3rd party products on our site and then prioritize our own products to win the market just like everyone else.”
who_me_qmark 5y ago
“Do it on a computer” may work for patent attorneys but it’s bs. Just because Amazon is on a screen doesn’t actually make it different than brick and mortar.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  That’s funny because that’s not far from what Amazon argued for 24 years while they didn’t charge and pay sales tax between 1994-2017. They think they are special when it benefits them and think they are the same when it benefits them.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    You mean collect sales taxes on consumer behalf, obviously Amazon wouldn’t pay sales tax on anything they didn’t buy. Before 2017, consumers were supposed to pay sales taxes themselves on purchases in any state where Amazon didn’t have a presence (they of course had to collect sales tax in any state they had warehouses in). But that would be like a Washingtonian having to pay sales taxes on purchases they made in Oregon, they mostly didn’t bother. The whole states couldn’t mandate internet retailers to collect sales taxes in states they didn’t operate in was setup by the federal government (who regulate interstate commerce) and didn’t apply to just Amazon. The taxes were still owed by consumers, but the burden of collection not being ar the retail level meant that they were mostly not paying.
    - throwawaycities 5y ago
      What do you think businesses do after they “collect sales tax” they pay it to the government. What brick and mortar doesn’t charge sales tax and leaves it to the consumer to pay to the government directly? You are making the very same bs argument Amazon made in multiple courts and lost, of course Amazon has to collect the sales tax, businesses get sales tax numbers from governments a consumer can’t exactly pay sales tax directly to governments, despite what Amazon tried to argue that’s not how sales tax works, all sales tax is reported/collected/paid based on a business sales tax account.

devin 5y ago

Let’s try it and see.

fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago

Isn’t it still the case that Walmart and similar brick and mortar stores have significantly higher revenue than Amazon’s e-commerce revenue? If anything, it’s worse for traditional stores because they have limited shelf space and so store brands can prevent name brands from even being available.

tw04 5y ago
No, no it isn’t the case. Walmart is the only one with more revenue, but they don’t have AWS margins to prop up everything else. I think we’d all be better off if we didn’t have a 2-horse race for 90% of our purchases… Target (#3)had $93b in revenue in FY2020. Amazon e-commerce had $120b. https://corporate.target.com/annual-reports/2020 https://corporate.target.com/annual-reports/2020 https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1218313/amazon-revenue-development-ecommercedb https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1218313/amazon-revenue-de...
- didibus 5y ago
  I'd agree if we had a 2-horse race, but I don't see it, there are a ton of competing retail stores both online and offline. And especially online, it's not like you're limited geographically where say your only store that has what you want is a big Walmart, you have access to hundreds of online retailer to choose from.
- sjg007 5y ago
  Target needs to do same day delivery and then they will win hands down. It does not take an MBA to figure this out and I don't know why they have not done it yet.
  - JanisL 5y ago
    Its because same day delivery takes a rather large investment in logistics systems that they may not have ready to go.
    - sjg007 5y ago
      This is easy. Offer a target membership for $100 a year. Pay employees who live nearby to deliver. Easy.
      - dralley 5y ago
        Here are the results of my google search for "target same day delivery" https://www.target.com/c/same-day-delivery/-/N-bswkz?tab=howdeliveryworks https://www.target.com/c/same-day-delivery/-/N-bswkz?tab=how... It appears they are already doing exactly this.
      - ctvo 5y ago
        If you add a few more “easy” to it it may hide you have no idea what it takes logistically or have ever built something of similar scope / complexity.
  - kidsat 5y ago
    They already do this and it's called Shipt. There's a delivery charge (about $9.99) or yearly membership available.
techdragon 5y ago
But did they lie to congress… it’s not about prioritising their own brands because yes everyone does it, it’s about lying to Congress.
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y ago
  Sure, I don’t disagree about this part of the charge: I just don’t think there’s much difference between any other commerce-oriented business and Amazon on the question of prioritizing store brands.
  - cudgy 5y ago
    Customers can actually see all the products at a physical store shelf to make comparisons albeit they may be placed at different heights on the shelves. Amazon essentially hides other competitors on the screen since they get the “buy box” and competition can only be seen by clicking to another screen; vast majority of users do not click to other screens.

whoisjuan 5y ago

My comment is not about their lying. That's a different problem and not what my comment is about. > Can you really not distinguish Amazon, it’s market position, and their acts from brick and mortar retailers that carry private label items? Who do you think had the dominant market position before Amazon was a thing? Again, this play is older than Amazon itself. My argument was just a rhetorical statement reflecting on the government's ineffectiveness and contradictory behavior when defining what harms customers or competition. It's only now they care, because it's only now that they seem to see the political benefits from pursuing what's a rampant decades-long behavior. Believe me, my comment is not trying to defend Amazon, is simply trying to showcase how politicians are opportunistic demagogues.

tchalla 5y ago
There seems to be no winning with the government actions : Act early and they’re accused of stifling “innovation”, act late and they’re accused of “ineffective ness”.
- whoisjuan 5y ago
  Except that in this case they are about 30 to 40 years late.
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  Yes, the government regulatory actions are typically net negative.
  - asdff 5y ago
    I don't know, I like being able to see the mountains from Pasadena today. That wasn't possible in the 1980s.
    - nosianu 5y ago
      But nobody is paying for better air! (Yet)
  - 5y ago

vmception 5y ago

Can the law distinguish

throwawaycities 5y ago
The law is the law it doesn’t distinguish anything, but facts can easily be distinguished and when you apply 2 different sets of facts to the law, don’t expect the same outcome. It’s why Amazon never makes the argument about private label brands in grocery stores/brick and mortar retailers. If it were that easy, they wouldn’t be testifying before Congress much less lying under oath about prioritizing their own products, they would have just said “of course we use data to copy the best selling 3rd party products on our site and then prioritize our own products to win the market just like everyone else.”

who_me_qmark 5y ago

“Do it on a computer” may work for patent attorneys but it’s bs. Just because Amazon is on a screen doesn’t actually make it different than brick and mortar.

throwawaycities 5y ago
That’s funny because that’s not far from what Amazon argued for 24 years while they didn’t charge and pay sales tax between 1994-2017. They think they are special when it benefits them and think they are the same when it benefits them.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  You mean collect sales taxes on consumer behalf, obviously Amazon wouldn’t pay sales tax on anything they didn’t buy. Before 2017, consumers were supposed to pay sales taxes themselves on purchases in any state where Amazon didn’t have a presence (they of course had to collect sales tax in any state they had warehouses in). But that would be like a Washingtonian having to pay sales taxes on purchases they made in Oregon, they mostly didn’t bother. The whole states couldn’t mandate internet retailers to collect sales taxes in states they didn’t operate in was setup by the federal government (who regulate interstate commerce) and didn’t apply to just Amazon. The taxes were still owed by consumers, but the burden of collection not being ar the retail level meant that they were mostly not paying.
  - throwawaycities 5y ago
    What do you think businesses do after they “collect sales tax” they pay it to the government. What brick and mortar doesn’t charge sales tax and leaves it to the consumer to pay to the government directly? You are making the very same bs argument Amazon made in multiple courts and lost, of course Amazon has to collect the sales tax, businesses get sales tax numbers from governments a consumer can’t exactly pay sales tax directly to governments, despite what Amazon tried to argue that’s not how sales tax works, all sales tax is reported/collected/paid based on a business sales tax account.