4 ms·

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination Price discrimination has a clear definition. It’s not ill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination Price discrimination has a clear definition. It’s not illegal in the US (when consumers are the victims anyway) but it has a clear meaning and you’re blurring the lines for I’m not sure what reason. Your example of a video game doing regional pricing is a perfect example of textbook price discrimination. Pricing a good or service at a level that inherently excludes those unwilling or unable to pay is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excludability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excludability

hansvm 2y ago
Alright, let's take a look at that first link as if it's gospel. AWS charging excessively for inter-AZ networking is: 1. a microeconomic pricing strategy 2. where largely similar goods (AWS with or without substantial inter-AZ bandwidth) 3. are sold at different prices (excessive inter-AZ networking fees) to different buyers 4. based on perceived market segments (most customers don't need (or don't know they need till they're locked in) much inter-AZ bandwidth, but larger, richer corporations likely do) I'm not trying to blur the lines. On top of any juggling of our favorite sources of definitions, that particular pricing strategy has all the qualitative hallmarks of price discrimination. Everyone still buys AWS, most customers are unaffected by the lack of bulk inter-AZ bandwidth, and AWS can successfully charge much more to those who can afford to pay.
thayne 2y ago
> Price discrimination ("differential pricing",[1][2] "equity pricing", "preferential pricing",[3] "dual pricing",[4] "tiered pricing",[5] and "surveillance pricing"[6]) is a microeconomic pricing strategy where identical or largely similar goods or services are sold at different prices by the same provider to different buyers based on which market segment they are perceived to be part of. That sounds exactly like what is happening here. Intra-zone and inter-zone network traffic are two very similar services. One is free and one costs 1¢ per GB. And customers who need inter-az traffic are probably in a different market segment. Now, it is more expensive for AWS to build the infrastructure for inter-zone networking, so it isn't exclusively price discrimination, but assuming that getting more money from wealthier clients was a motivation, it seems to match the definition to me. Re: excludability, yes it is excludable since there is a price, but that doesn't have much to do with how the price is much higher than the cost to AWS for providing the service.
- hipadev23 2y ago
  Those are different products priced the same to all users. I genuinely don’t understand how this is even a debate. Is AWS price gouging? Absolutely. But that’s not what price discrimination is.
  - thayne 2y ago
    The definition above says "largely similar" not "exactly the same".
    - hipadev23 2y ago
      Interconnects within same datacenter are very different from regional backbones spanning 5-60 miles.

hansvm 2y ago

Alright, let's take a look at that first link as if it's gospel. AWS charging excessively for inter-AZ networking is: 1. a microeconomic pricing strategy 2. where largely similar goods (AWS with or without substantial inter-AZ bandwidth) 3. are sold at different prices (excessive inter-AZ networking fees) to different buyers 4. based on perceived market segments (most customers don't need (or don't know they need till they're locked in) much inter-AZ bandwidth, but larger, richer corporations likely do) I'm not trying to blur the lines. On top of any juggling of our favorite sources of definitions, that particular pricing strategy has all the qualitative hallmarks of price discrimination. Everyone still buys AWS, most customers are unaffected by the lack of bulk inter-AZ bandwidth, and AWS can successfully charge much more to those who can afford to pay.

thayne 2y ago

> Price discrimination ("differential pricing",[1][2] "equity pricing", "preferential pricing",[3] "dual pricing",[4] "tiered pricing",[5] and "surveillance pricing"[6]) is a microeconomic pricing strategy where identical or largely similar goods or services are sold at different prices by the same provider to different buyers based on which market segment they are perceived to be part of. That sounds exactly like what is happening here. Intra-zone and inter-zone network traffic are two very similar services. One is free and one costs 1¢ per GB. And customers who need inter-az traffic are probably in a different market segment. Now, it is more expensive for AWS to build the infrastructure for inter-zone networking, so it isn't exclusively price discrimination, but assuming that getting more money from wealthier clients was a motivation, it seems to match the definition to me. Re: excludability, yes it is excludable since there is a price, but that doesn't have much to do with how the price is much higher than the cost to AWS for providing the service.

hipadev23 2y ago
Those are different products priced the same to all users. I genuinely don’t understand how this is even a debate. Is AWS price gouging? Absolutely. But that’s not what price discrimination is.
- thayne 2y ago
  The definition above says "largely similar" not "exactly the same".
  - hipadev23 2y ago
    Interconnects within same datacenter are very different from regional backbones spanning 5-60 miles.