5 ms·
An interesting article in itself, but more importantly how have I never heard about these two (in my opinion) damning facts about Amazon? Assuming these are tru
by BoiledCabbage 4y ago
An interesting article in itself, but more importantly how have I never heard about these two (in my opinion) damning facts about Amazon? Assuming these are true, this is astounding.
1. Amazon's search results are essentially a payola schema. How high you rank in search results is mainly based on competition on who bid the most to be ranked first. Each company needing to bid higher to regain lost position and more profit going to amazon. To the point that 45% of sales price going to sellers is now collected by amazon in various fees and payola style bidding.
2. Assuming the above is true, then Amazon is running such an inefficient rent seeking market place and sellers are losing so much money that clearly a competitor would pop up and sellers could both make more money and consumers could get goods for cheaper. A true, win-win. But Amazon blocks that competition by saying you're not allowed to sell goods anywhere else for cheaper than you do on Amazon. Meaning customers can't benefit from swapping to a site that doesn't do all of this rent-seeking, so Amazon can keep rent-seeking.
These are both incredible descriptions of what Amazon is doing. Can someone confirm these? If so, how has anti-trust not already been passed against them?
> That's when Amazon started to harvest the surplus from its business customers and send it to Amazon's shareholders. Today, Marketplace sellers are handing 45%+ of the sale price to Amazon in junk fees. The company's $31b "advertising" program is really a payola scheme that pits sellers against each other, forcing them to bid on the chance to be at the top of your search.
> Searching Amazon doesn't produce a list of the products that most closely match your search, it brings up a list of products whose sellers have paid the most to be at the top of that search. Those fees are built into the cost you pay for the product, and Amazon's "Most Favored Nation" requirement sellers means that they can't sell more cheaply elsewhere, so Amazon has driven prices at every retailer.
- aendruk 4y agoI’ve been de-emphasizing [0] adversarial search results on Amazon for a while and the sheer volume is stunning once visualized. Just this increased awareness (and reflexive disgust) has led me to avoid it more. [0]: User style .s-result-item:has(.s-sponsored-label-text) { opacity: 0.2; }
- cantSpellSober 4y agoMy userstyle to make Amazon less shitty has gotten huge, you might want to borrow some of it: https://pastebin.com/ERMijJgc https://pastebin.com/ERMijJgc (this is only partial!)
- TristanBall 4y agoThis is great, thankyou. I didn't realise this had become a "thing".
- aendruk 4y agoFor that case since all it’s doing is removing things typically I’d use uBO filters instead.
- cantSpellSober 4y agoI've got plenty of those too :) ||ssl-images-amazon.com/images/*650x45_*_en_US*g$image ...for ex., but my Amazon userstyle has a lot more visual changes than just hiding things. For blocking resources from downloading in the first place (ad banners mostly), I use uBO.
- winternett 4y agoAd based payola is running pretty much on every major platform we use now, and SEO is completely defeated by whoever pays the most each day. Trending topic spots on Social Media apps like Twitter and TikTok are wholly compromised by as based schemes like this, if they arent by botting and other manipulative schemes as well. It will infect AI, and cause untold problems on pretty much every aspect of the net, and the worst part is that as platforms are unregulated and non-transparent operationally, there is no way of telling how much what we see is compromised. We have truly lost a ton of academic value to letting monopolies take over the Internet.... I don't think that value can ever be recovered. Even paying for premium access can't undo the issues we'll face in years to come.