[themacguffinman]

Ok, a lot of people see them as the default retailer, but they still have a choice where to shop. They can and do still shop elsewhere. A default perception does not remove their choice. Still not a single example where consumers actually lack a choice.

Essay dumping is not conversation. Although it is also your prerogative to avoid conversation as well.

[Apocryphon]

https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2021-05-25...

> If Amazon detected lower prices on other sites, it would bury their products in Amazon search results, where they got most of their sales. Some of the merchants were eager to grow their sales on other sites, but Amazon’s policies prevented them from offering lower prices elsewhere to draw shoppers away.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-05/amazon-is...

> Amazon constantly scans rivals’ prices to see if they’re lower. When it discovers a product is cheaper on, say, Walmart.com, Amazon alerts the company selling the item and then makes the product harder to find and buy on its own marketplace -- effectively penalizing the merchant. In many cases, the merchant opts to raise the price on the rival site rather than risk losing sales on Amazon.

> Merchants have long complained that Amazon wields outsize influence over their businesses. Besides paying higher fees, many now have to buy advertising to stand out on the increasingly cluttered site. Some report giving Amazon 40% or more of each transaction, up from 20% a few years ago.

> Some merchants are keen to increase their sales on Walmart, which charges less to sell products on its marketplace. But sellers say the price alerts are forcing them to maintain allegiance to Amazon and making it harder to diversify their businesses. Walmart routinely fields requests from merchants to raise prices on its marketplace because they worry a lower price on Walmart will jeopardize their sales on Amazon, says a Walmart manager, who requested anonymity to speak freely about an internal matter.

[themacguffinman]

That's a stretch, Amazon's policies are entirely optional, you don't have to sell on Amazon. It was the seller's self-interested choice to prioritize Amazon placement because consumers love Amazon.

The fact is that consumers continually choose to entrust Amazon the power to pick on their behalf, making it their consumer choice. If sellers leave, consumers often choose Amazon over the seller. Amazon can only "bury" merchants in their search results because consumers continue to be satisfied with what Amazon finds for them. If consumers found Amazon's search results lacking, they can find the missing sellers on other websites. Practically every consumer knows how to buy things online outside of Amazon, a lot of them do it all the time.

Personally, I choose to buy many better and cheaper things outside Amazon. I do not choose Amazon to find any of my stuff. That choice has always been extremely easily available to any consumer, but they don't choose it. Consumers aren't being denied a choice, they have chosen: they chose Amazon's higher fee marketplace.

[Apocryphon]

Be that as it may, it's best to table this conversation until there is more clarity from the DOJ. Without empirical findings, this is just value judgment after value judgment. Let the courts decide. Since that article from last year, Congress has even sought an additional probe for Amazon allegedly obstructing investigations.

https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/9/22968927/congress-justice-...