7 ms·

Don't give money to amazon that is better spent on an amazingly efficient postal service. Amazon is subsidized by imaginary money until they put all their compe

Don't give money to amazon that is better spent on an amazingly efficient postal service. Amazon is subsidized by imaginary money until they put all their competition out of business(including USPS).

Fwirt 9mo ago
My honest question is: If you pull shenanigans like this, isn't it actually making Amazon burn through said imaginary money, thus hastening its demise? The cost of delivering a potato has to be on the order of at least a couple dollars.
- relaxing 9mo ago
  Amazon will close your account before you can impact their bottom line.
  - crumpled 9mo ago
    I think they let you (not YOU necessarily, but the proverbial you.) get away with stuff because they know your habits and you probably make more money for them than you realize. I can almost guarantee that everyone mentioned in that blog post is a habitual Amazon user. They're all renewing Prime each year at full price and making a ton of regular purchases. The family has even turned on the FOMO by making Prime a family social network with social pressure to stay. I see it as a self-own, personally. Edit: I'm taking part of this to the root of the thread
- roncesvalles 9mo ago
  I don't think Amazon is losing money. It's really just that efficient. E.g. an Amazon van rolls through my street multiple times a day. What is the marginal cost of them stopping at my house and dropping off a potato?
  - PaulDavisThe1st 9mo ago
    At your house it might be fractions of a cent. At my house, it's a 140 mile round trip between the fulfillment center ("are you feeling fulfilled yet?") and the drop off location. OTOH, there's likely more of "you" than there are of "me" ...
    - ajdlinux 9mo ago
      Assuming it's the US we're talking about, the federal minimum wage is $7.25, which means that if every worker involved is paid at the minimum wage, you incur a cent of labour costs every 4.97 person-seconds. AFAICT, most Amazon workers are paid substantially higher than the federal minimum wage. And that's just labour costs. While Amazon is efficient, "fractions of a cent" is probably the wrong order of magnitude for even the most efficient order.
      - hekkle 9mo ago
        That's not even mentioning their additional overheads, like the cost of fuel for their idling van as they drop off your potato.
    - saaaaaam 9mo ago
      You might be 140 miles round trip to the nearest fulfilment centre, but you're almost certainly closer to your nearest neighbours who regularly buy stuff from Amazon, so the van is probably coming pretty close to you any way.
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
dec0dedab0de 9mo ago
I hate USPS, and will not be doing anything to benefit them until they offer a way to limit my deliveries to once a month, and opt out of anything that has "or current resident" At the very least they should charge more for bulk mail, not give out discounts.
- SoftTalker 9mo ago
  Unfortunately bulk mail is the only thing paying the bills. That and being a last mile delivery service for Amazon.
  - School-Cotton 9mo ago
    Which is a totally valid reason to hate USPS. The USPS is a government-run spam delivery service that there is no way to opt out of. Those of us who do banking and other administrative tasks online would be better off if the government shut it down completely, or better yet subsidized it slightly so it doesn't have to deliver spam to survive. But as it is, I don't see any good reason to have any more respect for USPS than I do for any other spammer.
    - dec0dedab0de 9mo ago
      Yes, exactly. I wish the post office were subsidized and acted in the interests of the public. But it is not, and does not.
    - lkbm 9mo ago
      Doesn't seem like USPS is the spammer. They're Gmail. People send spam and USPS/Gmail delivers it.
      - School-Cotton 9mo ago
        No, it’s completely different. Gmail actively tries to prevent spam. If they catch you sending it, you will be banned, and they let individual users block whoever they want. A huge part of their product is automated spam filtering. On the other hand, spam delivery is the business model of USPS. They actively and intentionally market and sell their services to spammers, and not surprisingly, give normal users no way to opt out.
vidarh 9mo ago
Can you explain? Amazon is wildly profitable, and while AWS is far higher margin than their retail businesses, everything I can find suggests their retail segment also has a healthy operating margin.
- bandrami 9mo ago
  If you put all of the money Amazon as a whole has taken since it was founded in 1994 in a stack on the left, and all of the money Amazon as a whole has spent since then in a stack on the right, the stack on the left is slightly larger, but this has only been true for a couple of years now. It's the difference in 1990s billionaires and 2020s billionaires. Bill Gates was so rich because he owned a lot of Microsoft shares and received profits from those shares as dividends. Jeff Bezos is so rich because he owns a lot of Amazon shares and people keep being willing to pay more and more for those shares so his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend).
  - School-Cotton 9mo ago
    Can you share numbers? What are Amazon’s margins?
    - vidarh 9mo ago
      Across the board they're about 11%, I believe, though retail seems to be about 5% despite being the bulk of revenue. AWS has far higher margins.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - ornornor 9mo ago
    > his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend). But that’s exactly the loophole: you can borrow for very cheap against this notional equity without incurring a cent in taxes (since divodends are never paid out)

Don't give money to amazon that is better spent on an amazingly efficient postal service. Amazon is subsidized by imaginary money until they put all their competition out of business(including USPS).

Fwirt 9mo ago

My honest question is: If you pull shenanigans like this, isn't it actually making Amazon burn through said imaginary money, thus hastening its demise? The cost of delivering a potato has to be on the order of at least a couple dollars.

relaxing 9mo ago
Amazon will close your account before you can impact their bottom line.
- crumpled 9mo ago
  I think they let you (not YOU necessarily, but the proverbial you.) get away with stuff because they know your habits and you probably make more money for them than you realize. I can almost guarantee that everyone mentioned in that blog post is a habitual Amazon user. They're all renewing Prime each year at full price and making a ton of regular purchases. The family has even turned on the FOMO by making Prime a family social network with social pressure to stay. I see it as a self-own, personally. Edit: I'm taking part of this to the root of the thread
roncesvalles 9mo ago
I don't think Amazon is losing money. It's really just that efficient. E.g. an Amazon van rolls through my street multiple times a day. What is the marginal cost of them stopping at my house and dropping off a potato?
- PaulDavisThe1st 9mo ago
  At your house it might be fractions of a cent. At my house, it's a 140 mile round trip between the fulfillment center ("are you feeling fulfilled yet?") and the drop off location. OTOH, there's likely more of "you" than there are of "me" ...
  - ajdlinux 9mo ago
    Assuming it's the US we're talking about, the federal minimum wage is $7.25, which means that if every worker involved is paid at the minimum wage, you incur a cent of labour costs every 4.97 person-seconds. AFAICT, most Amazon workers are paid substantially higher than the federal minimum wage. And that's just labour costs. While Amazon is efficient, "fractions of a cent" is probably the wrong order of magnitude for even the most efficient order.
    - hekkle 9mo ago
      That's not even mentioning their additional overheads, like the cost of fuel for their idling van as they drop off your potato.
  - saaaaaam 9mo ago
    You might be 140 miles round trip to the nearest fulfilment centre, but you're almost certainly closer to your nearest neighbours who regularly buy stuff from Amazon, so the van is probably coming pretty close to you any way.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]

dec0dedab0de 9mo ago

I hate USPS, and will not be doing anything to benefit them until they offer a way to limit my deliveries to once a month, and opt out of anything that has "or current resident" At the very least they should charge more for bulk mail, not give out discounts.

SoftTalker 9mo ago
Unfortunately bulk mail is the only thing paying the bills. That and being a last mile delivery service for Amazon.
- School-Cotton 9mo ago
  Which is a totally valid reason to hate USPS. The USPS is a government-run spam delivery service that there is no way to opt out of. Those of us who do banking and other administrative tasks online would be better off if the government shut it down completely, or better yet subsidized it slightly so it doesn't have to deliver spam to survive. But as it is, I don't see any good reason to have any more respect for USPS than I do for any other spammer.
  - dec0dedab0de 9mo ago
    Yes, exactly. I wish the post office were subsidized and acted in the interests of the public. But it is not, and does not.
  - lkbm 9mo ago
    Doesn't seem like USPS is the spammer. They're Gmail. People send spam and USPS/Gmail delivers it.
    - School-Cotton 9mo ago
      No, it’s completely different. Gmail actively tries to prevent spam. If they catch you sending it, you will be banned, and they let individual users block whoever they want. A huge part of their product is automated spam filtering. On the other hand, spam delivery is the business model of USPS. They actively and intentionally market and sell their services to spammers, and not surprisingly, give normal users no way to opt out.

vidarh 9mo ago

Can you explain? Amazon is wildly profitable, and while AWS is far higher margin than their retail businesses, everything I can find suggests their retail segment also has a healthy operating margin.

bandrami 9mo ago
If you put all of the money Amazon as a whole has taken since it was founded in 1994 in a stack on the left, and all of the money Amazon as a whole has spent since then in a stack on the right, the stack on the left is slightly larger, but this has only been true for a couple of years now. It's the difference in 1990s billionaires and 2020s billionaires. Bill Gates was so rich because he owned a lot of Microsoft shares and received profits from those shares as dividends. Jeff Bezos is so rich because he owns a lot of Amazon shares and people keep being willing to pay more and more for those shares so his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend).
- School-Cotton 9mo ago
  Can you share numbers? What are Amazon’s margins?
  - vidarh 9mo ago
    Across the board they're about 11%, I believe, though retail seems to be about 5% despite being the bulk of revenue. AWS has far higher margins.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- ornornor 9mo ago
  > his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend). But that’s exactly the loophole: you can borrow for very cheap against this notional equity without incurring a cent in taxes (since divodends are never paid out)