3 ms·

Sure. The rules at the place you're trying to sell. Dictating how you sell elsewhere is a clear step beyond that.

endisneigh 3y ago
They are not dictating how they sell elsewhere. They are saying they need to offer the best price on their site. It is easy to detect whether or not they actually are, and sellers are simply being called out. There is no obligation to sell on Amazon, nor a requirement for them to raise prices on other platforms. They could simply offer the lowest price everywhere. The result? Lower prices for Amazon customers. If they raise the price, then that's the seller's fault, not Amazon.
- sb8244 3y ago
  You...understand how you can't have one without the other, right?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- OGWhales 3y ago
  > There is no obligation to sell on Amazon While true, this ignores the important point that Amazon is only able to do this anti-competitive practice due to their market dominance that effectively forces many sellers to sell on Amazon. > nor a requirement for them to raise prices on other platforms. That is what this whole thing is about. Sellers that sell on Amazon aren't allowed to sell for lower prices on other platforms that are cheaper to sell on. If Amazon was able to offer lower prices for its customers by offering sellers a marketplace with lower costs compared to competitors that would be great. Instead, they abuse their market dominance to prevent any competitors from offering lower prices by being more cost efficient for sellers. This is extremely nasty as it effectively prevents any competitors to Amazon from building a market share since consumers will have no price incentive to switch and sellers will not want to switch due to the smaller market share on those competitors' platforms. It could not be more clear that this is anti-competitive behavior achieved through abuse of a dominate market position.
- r053bud 3y ago
  [flagged]

They are not dictating how they sell elsewhere. They are saying they need to offer the best price on their site. It is easy to detect whether or not they actually are, and sellers are simply being called out. There is no obligation to sell on Amazon, nor a requirement for them to raise prices on other platforms. They could simply offer the lowest price everywhere. The result? Lower prices for Amazon customers. If they raise the price, then that's the seller's fault, not Amazon.

sb8244 3y ago
You...understand how you can't have one without the other, right?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
OGWhales 3y ago
> There is no obligation to sell on Amazon While true, this ignores the important point that Amazon is only able to do this anti-competitive practice due to their market dominance that effectively forces many sellers to sell on Amazon. > nor a requirement for them to raise prices on other platforms. That is what this whole thing is about. Sellers that sell on Amazon aren't allowed to sell for lower prices on other platforms that are cheaper to sell on. If Amazon was able to offer lower prices for its customers by offering sellers a marketplace with lower costs compared to competitors that would be great. Instead, they abuse their market dominance to prevent any competitors from offering lower prices by being more cost efficient for sellers. This is extremely nasty as it effectively prevents any competitors to Amazon from building a market share since consumers will have no price incentive to switch and sellers will not want to switch due to the smaller market share on those competitors' platforms. It could not be more clear that this is anti-competitive behavior achieved through abuse of a dominate market position.
r053bud 3y ago
[flagged]