4 ms·

Very similar to the music industry, where technology has made producing music so easy the market is growing by tens of millions of new songs every year. The sl

Very similar to the music industry, where technology has made producing music so easy the market is growing by tens of millions of new songs every year. The slices of pie are getting very thin indeed. Especially when there are only a few pie delivery services to choose from and they take their slice first.

deepsun 3y ago
In efficient market every business must have razor-thin margins, otherwise competitors squeeze into it. Good fat margins are a result of an ineffective market.
- hnlmorg 3y ago
  So Amazon making good fat margins on every small business that sells on Amazon is demonstration of an ineffective market. And hence why the FTC are stepping in.
  - deepsun 3y ago
    Comparing to Apple, Amazon margins are thin.
    - hnlmorg 3y ago
      You’re basically comparing despots though.
  - hellojesus 3y ago
    What? Amazon is offering lower prices to consumers, which is why they're winning business. If other competitors could get their costs as low or lower than Amazon's, then they could enjoy those margins themselves.
    - hnlmorg 3y ago
      I cannot speak for every location, but Amazon isn’t the cheapest in the UK. I would say it is about average. Where Amazon wins is the range of stock and its next day deliveries. Which means most people default to Amazon because it’s quicker and easier than shopping around. But you can definitely get cheaper if you were to shop around. Also by Amazon owning the whole pipeline, from stock to delivery, they can squeeze costs down and thus improve their margins. For example, I guarantee you that other online retailers are paying more to ship their products than Amazon are.
      - hellojesus 3y ago
        I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days. Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created. Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider.
        hnlmorg 3y ago
        > I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days. Why say you agree when you only go on to disagree with me? I've bought plenty of things cheaper on other sites. Delivery included. There have been things that were cheaper on Amazon as well. This is why I said it's about average. But there are so many variables at play here (location, items you're looking to purchase, etc) that it might just be easier to agree to disagree. > Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created. Those vertically integrated pipelines come with significant cost savings though. That's why they do it. And because it saves them $$$, it then also increases their margins. > Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider. Those two arguments aren't mutually inclusive. Other companies might be offering cheaper prices but making a loss in the hope that loyalty will win customers in the long run. Or other corners might get cut that could ultimately lead to that businesses demise, such as not hiring skilled staff, not following health and safety or other local laws, etc. And even if none of the aforementioned is true, it still doesn't mean that Amazon aren't being anti-competitive. Also "anti-competitive behaviour" applies to how they block other businesses from competing. You cannot be "anti-competitive to the consumer"

deepsun 3y ago

In efficient market every business must have razor-thin margins, otherwise competitors squeeze into it. Good fat margins are a result of an ineffective market.

hnlmorg 3y ago
So Amazon making good fat margins on every small business that sells on Amazon is demonstration of an ineffective market. And hence why the FTC are stepping in.
- deepsun 3y ago
  Comparing to Apple, Amazon margins are thin.
  - hnlmorg 3y ago
    You’re basically comparing despots though.
- hellojesus 3y ago
  What? Amazon is offering lower prices to consumers, which is why they're winning business. If other competitors could get their costs as low or lower than Amazon's, then they could enjoy those margins themselves.
  - hnlmorg 3y ago
    I cannot speak for every location, but Amazon isn’t the cheapest in the UK. I would say it is about average. Where Amazon wins is the range of stock and its next day deliveries. Which means most people default to Amazon because it’s quicker and easier than shopping around. But you can definitely get cheaper if you were to shop around. Also by Amazon owning the whole pipeline, from stock to delivery, they can squeeze costs down and thus improve their margins. For example, I guarantee you that other online retailers are paying more to ship their products than Amazon are.
    - hellojesus 3y ago
      I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days. Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created. Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider.
      - hnlmorg 3y ago
        > I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days. Why say you agree when you only go on to disagree with me? I've bought plenty of things cheaper on other sites. Delivery included. There have been things that were cheaper on Amazon as well. This is why I said it's about average. But there are so many variables at play here (location, items you're looking to purchase, etc) that it might just be easier to agree to disagree. > Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created. Those vertically integrated pipelines come with significant cost savings though. That's why they do it. And because it saves them $$$, it then also increases their margins. > Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider. Those two arguments aren't mutually inclusive. Other companies might be offering cheaper prices but making a loss in the hope that loyalty will win customers in the long run. Or other corners might get cut that could ultimately lead to that businesses demise, such as not hiring skilled staff, not following health and safety or other local laws, etc. And even if none of the aforementioned is true, it still doesn't mean that Amazon aren't being anti-competitive. Also "anti-competitive behaviour" applies to how they block other businesses from competing. You cannot be "anti-competitive to the consumer"