3 ms·
The argument is that Amazon controls 30% currently, so 70% is "fair game". It's a pretty weak argument considering that Amazon has the infrastructure muscle ou
by tsurantino 14y ago
The argument is that Amazon controls 30% currently, so 70% is "fair game".
It's a pretty weak argument considering that Amazon has the infrastructure muscle out someone like Bufferbox, if there is no distinct competitive advantage for the startup.
- bmoggach 14y agoAmazon lockers offer a solution for Amazon only products. This is an open platform all carriers to use, in addition to the other 70% of eCommerce sales in Canada.
- rykov 14y agoFor a long time Amazon fulfilled only their own products (and some large partners) from their warehouses. Now, it's offered to everyone as Fulfillment by Amazon service. No doubt Amazon will offer the locker service, if the market is there.
- bmoggach 14y agoYou're right. Their marketplace model has been built out. Amazon's use of the locker system is an incredible opportunity and as exceptional validation of the technology. And of course, the open platform to all carriers.
- sojong 14y agoI think it depends on the agreements Bufferbox can get with the buildings. I'm not familiar with these types of agreements (eg Redbox kiosks, vending machines may be similar), but I can imagine that non-competes with multi-year terms are a possibility. Especially if Bufferbox itself will pay for the initial costs. If that is the case, then Bufferbox is in a more defensible position.