[runawaybottle]

Competing on price never pays off imho. You’ll race to the bottom. Amazon already has a massive monopoly on retail, and they wouldn’t dare mess with the prices.

My experience:

I once tried to corner the market on WoW gems by buying out the undercutters and setting my desired price. My money wasn’t long enough.

I really don’t think anyone’s money is long enough :p

[dylan604]

Cornering the real world silver market is a tough thing to do as well. Just ask the Hunt brothers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday

[lotsofpulp]

> Amazon already has a massive monopoly on retail, and they wouldn’t dare mess with the prices.

By which definition? It’s trivial to switch to a different website to order from, and Target/Walmart/Bestbuy/etc have significant market share.

[scarface74]

1. Amazon already has your payment information. I was on my phone looking to order something. The first link that came up was Walmart. I went and searched on Amazon because I could just press “Order Now” and not have to create a new account and dig up my credit card.

2. I’m already paying for Amazon Prime. Why not get full use out of it for shipping?

3. Amazon marketplace has network effects. Third party sellers use it because the buyers are there.

4. I wanted to rent a movie on my Roku TV. Again, Amazon already has my payment information and I’m already signed in to Prime Video.

5. I get 3% discounts on my Amazon card when ordering from Amazon.

I’ve been downvoted to oblivion plenty of times about being against the government interfering in $BigTech whether it be Google, Amazon, or Apple so I’m definitely not proposing they should be broken up because of a “monopoly”.

[lotsofpulp]

A monopoly would indicate there exists a lack of options for buyers or control of prices from a very large seller.

As it stands now, Amazon is a glorified Alibaba that sided with buyers in disputes.

You can find the same things on Amazon on Alibaba, Newegg, bestbuy, Walmart, iTunes, Google Play, the Amazon sellers own websites, etc. the buyer is in no way required or affected negatively by not interacting with Amazon.

So I’m struggling to see the point of labeling Amazon a monopoly when it doesn’t convey any useful information.

[milesskorpen]

They're not competing on price — they're competing on logistics, primarily. They're losing money to offer consumers an experience they can't get on any other platform. Way more defensible than price competition.

[monocasa]

I think they're viewing it instead as continuing to reinvest profits until they're a cyberpunk level corporate power. It's not that they're cutting prices, it's that they're using the excess to buy companies like Whole Foods and vertically integrate them rather than paying out to shareholders, or building a bigger war chest in an index fund.

[c1b]

Yes this example is very pertinent to Amazons profit strategy thank you for sharing.

[runawaybottle]

Waiting for some Eve fans to share their economic exploits.