[crumpets]

>No, because at this point the barrier to entry is substantial.

Not really. Unless the product has a powerful network effect, people can easily enter. If that weren't the case, starbucks would have run every coffee shop out of business by now.

[unreal37]

OK, well then go open book store. Online or brick and mortar.

There's no money in it, because Amazon has such as HUGE advantage in mindshare, pricing and delivery that you can't compete.

Does a book store have a network effect? No. But it's hard to sell something for more than the dominant competitor without a compelling reason.

[phlakaton]

My mother-in-law did just that and is doing fine, thank you very much. May not be the world-beating "money in it" as you define it, but for the small business she's running it's viable.

[vintermann]

Ask her what she thinks of Amazon and how she views the future.

[phlakaton]

Would it shock you to know these topics have already come up in the family, and have since day one? Or that she herself is an Amazon customer?

Somehow, she still finds a way to sell books and make some money, as well as highlight local authors and sell trail guides. The Barnes & Noble down the road, to be frank, seems to be her bigger headache.

[Wowfunhappy]

Starbucks has caused a lot of coffee shops to close. Boutique coffee shops have a significant advantage however—people like variety in their café's. This exists in some industries more than others.

[baddox]

> Starbucks has caused a lot of coffee shops to close.

Sure, but normal legitimate competition causes worse-performing competitors to close, so some distinction should be made between this supposed "predatory pricing until competitors shut down" strategy and the normal "cause competitors to shut down by simply being better than them" strategy.

[Wowfunhappy]

...to my knowledge, Starbucks has never engaged in predatory pricing to begin with, so at this point I'm legitimately not sure what we're discussing here.

If the question is, given a willingness to blatantly violate anti-trust law, and lose immense amounts of short-term for long-term gains, could Starbucks drive out all competition? And... I actually don't think they could, because (A) coffee shop patrons like variety and (B) I'm not clear that Starbucks could necessarily outlast e.g. Dunkin' Donuts.

Starbucks is just a poor example. Walmart would be a much better example.

[baddox]

Has Walmart ever been charged for predatory pricing? There have been plenty of accusations and lawsuits, but from what I've seen, they amount to accusations of having a few "loss leader" products. I can't find any evidence that either 1) loss leader pricing strategies are clearly illegal or 2) that Walmart actually prices things at a loss rather than simply cheaper than the cheapest price a competitor can offer.