5 ms·
Amazon's retail arm isn't the grounds of anti-trust action. Their ownership of AWS, Twitch, MGM, Gaming studios, windfarms, lenders are problems. If they want
by mywittyname 3y ago
Amazon's retail arm isn't the grounds of anti-trust action.
Their ownership of AWS, Twitch, MGM, Gaming studios, windfarms, lenders are problems. If they want to be an retail giant, that's fine, but they shouldn't be producing and selling games & movies as well. They need to pick a lane and spin off unrelated entities that only exist because of Amazon's dominance in retail.
Their expansion into all of these market segments make sense in isolation. Amazon builds a better service internally, then begins to offer it for sale to others. But at some point, they've crossed over into abusing their monopoly in one area to expand into another.
- pessimizer 3y agoi.e. break it into IT infrastructure, logistics, marketplace, and manufacturing. I'd also break out payments. Amazon can stay just as it is, but it needs to be multiple companies negotiating the best deals with each other.
- likpok 3y agoA big complaint I've seen in the past is AmazonBasics, where amazon copies successful products and sells them for slightly cheaper. This is identical to brands like Great Value (walmart), Up&Up (target), Nice (walgreens) and Safeway Select. Similarly, I have seen a lot of complaints that amazon charges for ad space in the search, and you therefore need to pay to get out of page two. This, again, is widely practiced in retail. The cereal aisle doesn't look like it does because the store manager is making it up, general mills and post rent the space and decide how to arrange their sections. New retail products need to explicitly or implicitly pay for placement: either with cash or with free / discounted product.