Amazon Named the "Most Reputable Company" 199
An anonymous reader writes "Amazon has been named the most reputable company in the US this year (up from 21st place last year), according to the sixth annual list of the 150 Most Reputable Companies from advisory firm Reputation Institute (RI), in partnership with Forbes Media. The list is based on RI's US RepTrak Pulse Study, which measures trust, esteem, admiration, and good feelings consumers have towards the largest 150 companies based on revenue in the US. The ratings are analyzed from nearly 33,000 online consumer responses taken in January and February."
They obviously didn't poll any state governments. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:4, Insightful)
At some point, we have to figure out how e-tailers can and should responsibly collect sales taxes. Amazon could be helping that process, instead of fighting it tooth and nail.
One of Amazon's advantages is that they don't require sales taxes, which can often result in the product costing less even with shipping charges. Once they are required to collect sales taxes they'll lose that price advantage and will likely lose sales because of it. It is not in their corporate interest to 'help' in the process.
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Selling us a load of BS (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember when the incident you're talking about with Texas came up. Wasn't it the case that Texas basically invited them to come to TX in the first place with the promise of no sales tax, and then turned around a couple of years later and reversed course?
Even if not, the problem is the fundamental structure of Sales tax - not Amazon's unwillingness to pay it. No company that does business online wants to collect sales tax, and I'll tell you why, as a small business, I am interested in Amazon's case: because if Amazon has to collect tax for not just all 50 states but every county in every state where sales tax is variable (and sometimes even on the local level), you've just driven up the cost of business to the point where it is no longer feasible to start an online business in your garage/bedroom/basement because you need very sophisticated software to handle the collection side and an accounting team to handle the payment side: small business owners like me already have to learn a lot about accounting (which is fine, and even perversely fun sometimes) but if we had to file returns with every state with which we did business? omgwtfbbq.
If you left it up to me, I'd replace sales tax entirely with a Federal sales tax that had a state reimbursement system. I don't mind collecting tax and passing it on to the government for you. I mind having to spend twice my annual gross income calculating and then delivering that tax to every state in the union.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you hit the nail on the head here.
For example, in Chicago th
Re: (Score:2)
California and New York (the two places I've lived) both have sales tax of at least 8.25% in urban and suburban areas. It's been at least 8.5% in the particular cities I've lived in.
Also, both states have some of the highest state income and other taxes around. And both states have budget issues, quite severe ones actually.
Now, I do like the idea of no income tax but a higher sales tax, but I'm not sure it would work out to be feasible. And many of the rich would end up with an effective tax cut - if you're
Re: (Score:2)
Texas definitely has a problem, but arguably it's not quite as much of a fundamental structural issue as CA and NY. I was in NY from 1998-2010 and they definitely have one of the most top-heavy, ungainly governments around.
Texas passes a budget every two years, so I assume that their $27 billion shortfall is therefore over a two-year period, whereas California's $26 billion deficit is one year. Even were that not the case, the real problem in California's case (and NY's) is unfunded pension liabilities. Tex
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Being "reputable" means not always placing your profit interests first and foremost.
Drivel. Companies have a fiduciary duty to make a profit. "reputable" means how you go about trying to make a profit, not whether or not you prioritize making a profit. Then again .... I'm an idiot ......
Re: (Score:2)
Being "reputable" means not always placing your profit interests first and foremost.
While I don't disagree with your sentiment, nothing in the article defines reputable as such. There are plenty of people who think a company who tries to earn more profit is therefore more reputable than a company who fritters profit away for altruistic reasons.
For the record, I hate those type of people.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's none of the state's business to collect taxes on something I bought from another state, which is Amazon's completely valid argument. One could argue that they should be collecting taxes on the state from which the item is shipping since there's the obvious physical presence (this would more closely mimic what happens when I buy an item at retail), but I think sales tax is bullshit to begin with since the state is providing no value to either the buyer or the seller, other than merely existing.
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:4, Interesting)
And it's none of the state's business to collect taxes on something I bought from another state, which is Amazon's completely valid argument. One could argue that they should be collecting taxes on the state from which the item is shipping since there's the obvious physical presence (this would more closely mimic what happens when I buy an item at retail), but I think sales tax is bullshit to begin with since the state is providing no value to either the buyer or the seller, other than merely existing.
Actually, Use Tax [wikipedia.org] is applicable to products purchased out of state when no sales tax was collected (in states that have sales and/or use taxes).
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad the feds can't step in to help simplify sales tax collection methods among the states.
The constitution says that duties shall not be placed on goods because they are headed to or through another state. That's a good thing. It's the way it should be. If they want to collect taxes on those purchases they can collect them from the purchaser. If they can't manage that then they will have to find another way to collect those monies, like getting them from property taxes or from income taxes. Graduated income taxes are the fairest way to effectively tax that kind of economic activity because it's
Re: (Score:2)
States put those statutes on the books. Does not mean they are constitutional, however.
STATES RIIIIGHTS!!!!! Deeeeeerp!
(I'm from Texas, sorry. I couldn't help myself.)
Re: (Score:2)
If your state isn't providing any value to you, then you may have a problem, yes, but instead of not paying taxes, you should probably consider getting what you want out of the government. You do have a right to petition them after all.
where do you live? here in the states that would get you nowhere unless your wealth amounts to millions at a minimum.
Are they not providing enough law and order? Not stopping enough pollution? Perhaps not protecting your rights in some ways??
too much 'law', too much micromanagement of my life. protecting my rights is easy: just repeal the garbage laws which were bought and paid for by the wealthy.
Or are you one of those types that believes you can do it all yourself?
false dilemma. a nanny state does not help someone who cannot do it all himself. it takes his rights away while throwing him a few bones every now and then.. subsistence is not existence in a free nation.
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:4, Insightful)
I've about had it with companies this big looking to get out of paying taxes. We've got a congress that wants to cut a supplemental nutrition program for infants and pregnant women in poverty so Amazon can skip out on taxes, pay lobbyists and provide unfair competition to mom and pop bookstores.
I say fuck 'em. I've got no problem paying taxes and I've got no problem paying the stiff sales tax we've got here in Chicago. They like to use the nice internet the government made for them but they don't want to give anything back. Meanwhile, Borders is closing stores and the little bookstores where I shop can't even make ends meet.
Re:They obviously didn't poll any state government (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, to the extent that the Internet is something "the government made for them", it's a product of the federal government - which does not collect sales tax.
Re: (Score:2)
No. We have seen the "internet" as made by private industry and it's cable television. Remember how it was supposed to be all "interactive" and "democratic" and there would be so much "public access"?
If the "internet" would have come about any way but by the Federal government and other publicly supported institutions (like universities) we wouldn't need keyboards.
Re: (Score:1)
Corporate tax evasion is a serious issue, but Amazon not paying states it doesn't have locations in isn't an egregious violation. If you want to get angry about something, get angry about Exxon entirely dodging federal taxes by going offshore.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right. I withdraw my wrong-headed argument that Amazon should pay sales tax.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're right. Different states do things differently.
I was wrong. State and local taxes should not be collected by Amazon. But I'm afraid that if they aren't, there are going to be more draconian measures to collect them, such as Amazon having to report transactions to taxing bodies.
Thing is, nothing is for free. Over and over again, Americans, including the people who don't want to pay taxes, expect a certain level of government services but don't want to pay for them. The reason we've got this ri
Re: (Score:2)
So if Amazon pay tax to a State they have no phyical presense in, what do Amazon or it's customers get back .... nothing
They are not using any services that have not already been paid for and taxed so what exactly are they paying taxes for?
Re: (Score:3)
A virtual "store" is the transaction between customer and shopper. When that book or CD shows up on my doorstep, me, the book or CD, the guy in brown pants bringing the book or CD up the stairs, his truck, the street, streetlights and police to keep those streets safe are certainly a "physical presence".
Do you believe that a lack of "physical presence" should exempt a corporation from all
Re: (Score:2)
I've about had it with companies this big looking to get out of paying taxes. We've got a congress that wants to cut a supplemental nutrition program for infants and pregnant women in poverty so Amazon can skip out on taxes, pay lobbyists and provide unfair competition to mom and pop bookstores.
or how about those women take responsibility for themselves and get abortions if they can't afford to have those kids? isn't that what they wanted the right to choose for? that way less tax needs to be paid because of irresponsible behavior.
I say fuck 'em. I've got no problem paying taxes and I've got no problem paying the stiff sales tax we've got here in Chicago. They like to use the nice internet the government made for them but they don't want to give anything back. Meanwhile, Borders is closing stores and the little bookstores where I shop can't even make ends meet.
I guess you aren't counted among those who DO have a problem paying it..literally. you know...like those poor helpless women you mentioned?
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon has free porn?
Ah, you almost had a little logical implosion there. I applaud you for leaving it in. It shows honesty.
Perhaps "sales tax" is not the best way to get Amazon to pay their share of the bill for participating in our society, which has made them so very successful.
Re: (Score:1)
The question at issue isn't what is in Amazon's corporate interest. It's whether Amazon merits the "most reputable company" designation that has been given it, in light of the fact that its business model basically involves evading state sales tax, which any company that sells out of a physical location is required to collect. That is a controversial business model, at a minimum.
Pursuing shareholder value and behaving reputably are obviously different things.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a state where Amazon has a presence so I still have to pay sales tax (8.85%), and generally Amazon's prices are still lower than the brick-and-mortar stores. I always group my orders into $25+ bundles for free shipping, though.
Re: (Score:3)
I've never ever ever never ever taken the lack of sales tax into account when buying stuff from Amazon or not. It's about the availability, the price, and the ease of shopping.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an advantage, but I still buy everything on Amazon and Amazon collects sales tax here.
Especially with prime. It's cheaper and more convenient than driving or walking to a store.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Yeah, how dare they don't just bow down to all these lame cash grabs by various state governments! They should know it's their duty to make up for all the shortfalls of politicians who can't learn to cut their own spending habits! Maybe we should send their execs to gitmo to make them learn how a truly patriotic company should work!
There is honor among thieves (Score:2)
Amazon does a very good job of looking after their customers' interests. Even when those interests include letting other people pay for police, fire suppression and education.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
That's why it's such a PITA to collect sales tax. It's a big enough headache to keep track of one states tax laws, and tax boundaries (which rarely correspond with ZIP codes).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A state cannot require a retailer in another state to collect taxes for it. Period. Nothing has changed that would affect this.
Every bit of this idea is nothing but the same sh*t, different day. There is nothing to be seen here. Move along.
Re: (Score:1)
Unless, of course, the retailer has a presence in that other state. Which Amazon does, have affiliates all over the place.
That's besides the point, though. Quite aside from their tax strategy, given that Amazon is a bunch of patent-abusing censoring bastards [unreasonable.org], no sane and informed person can call them "reputable".
Re: (Score:2)
"Unless, of course, the retailer has a presence in that other state."
Well, true. But then they're not "in another state". They're in that state.
Washington State has tried -- and maybe succeeded, I am not sure -- to collect taxes from Microsoft's corporate sales branch, which is incorporated in Nevada, on the basis that Microsoft's actual main offices are in Washington State. I am not really sure of the outcome of that, but the State might have a valid argument.
Re: (Score:2)
how about the Worst Company in America polls? (Score:2)
You want polls? Here's a bunch: the Worst Company in America [consumerist.com] tournament. Amazon isn't in it.
I've had decent service from Amazon. They could be the most beloved of all the large companies. Which maybe is saying they're the nicest turd in the latrine. That a Worst Company contest exists is merely emphasizing what we all know, which is that large corporations have far too much power. As the saying goes, power corrupts. We do have problems getting these 900 pound gorillas to behave responsibly, and no
Re: (Score:2)
At some point, we have to figure out how e-tailers can and should responsibly collect sales taxes. Amazon could be helping that process, instead of fighting it tooth and nail.
Not everyone agrees that Amazon has a responsibility to volunteer to pay taxes they don't legally have to:
Re: (Score:2)
or maybe we need a taxation system that isn't insane to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
At some point, we have to figure out how e-tailers can and should responsibly collect sales taxes.
Weren't such things were already figured out back in the days of mail-order catalogs?
Still not enough (Score:5, Insightful)
...to make me regret closing my account in protest at the treatment of Wikileaks.
Fuck Amazon.
Re: (Score:1)
Wikileaks went down for a couple of hours and are still releasing excellent information (Ecuador lately).
If anything they got the Streisand effect (not that Wikileaks needs that).
Amazon is a good retailer, especially with DRM free MP3 songs for $1. And good if not great prices on other things (always check SlickDeals first though...).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know who decides what constitutes "most reputable", but they sure as hell aren't any of my friends, a large percentage of whom thoroughly dislike Amazon over its treatment of WikiLeaks. That disqualified them for any "reputable" list I might keep.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to buy an awful lot from Amazon, in fact it was the principal place I did all my shopping, but also stopped since their treatment of Wikileaks. For books I now buy here: http://www.abebooks.co.uk/. For electronics this is good: http://www.mymemory.co.uk/.
I also now find myself with more cash after I closed my Paypal for the same reason, I used to buy tons of junk from ebay.
Phillip.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to buy an awful lot from Amazon, in fact it was the principal place I did all my shopping, but also stopped since their treatment of Wikileaks. For books I now buy here: http://www.abebooks.co.uk/ [abebooks.co.uk]. For electronics this is good: http://www.mymemory.co.uk/ [mymemory.co.uk].
I also now find myself with more cash after I closed my Paypal for the same reason, I used to buy tons of junk from ebay.
Phillip.
..... AbeBooks is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amazon. You're like those people that "boycotted" BP by going to the Arco station across the street.
Re:Still not enough (Score:5, Insightful)
What rules were those? According to the article those rules were:
This is clearly targeted at copyright infringers. Any content written by a US government employee in the course of their job is public domain.
Wikileaks has not release 250,000 cables. Today, after four months of redacting and releasing documents Wikileaks has released a grand total of 6,321 documents.
You have got to be pretty gullible to believe government pressure had nothing to do with Amazon's decision.
Re: (Score:3)
Any content written by a US government employee in the course of their job is public domain.
Not just false, but extremely, incredibly, amazingly false.
While US government information [wikipedia.org] is not assigned copyright protection per se, that does not make it public domain in terms of rights for distribution. The US government has the rights by law to restrict dissemination of government information [wikisource.org] based on its classification of the sensitivity of that information. There are extensive and rigorous legal and operational protections for classified information in the United States [wikipedia.org] as well as in most other cou [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Not just false, but extremely, incredibly, amazingly false.
maybe it should be..
Re: (Score:2)
That only restricts what government employees can do with the information. Once it is released to the public it is in the public domain. There is a reason the New York Times can republish the leaked cables without the editor, reporter, and everyone else involved being thrown in jail.
Re: (Score:1)
What laws did they break, Mr. Propaganda Man? Who you shillin for anyway? Heh, 'red cross'...You know Pablo Escobar built hospitals too?
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless of whether you love or hate wikileaks, a book store and service provider which censors content based on random telephone calls from US senators is neither trustworthy nor reputable. This lovely award Amazon just won smells very fishy and seems to be either a PR gimmick or a thank you from some political organization. You know, I could pay people to give me all kinds or first prizes and gold medals ...
Wish we could mod articles (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Amazon: A Job Well Done (Score:4, Interesting)
What is your definition of reputable? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon actually does a substantial amount of retailing on their own in addition to acting as the middle man for 3rd party distributors. They own huge distribution centers for their own merchandise, I can't comment on what percentage of stuff on their site is sold by them vs. by 3rd parties though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if I was to make a simple 2D chart of stores I think my two axis would be price and reputation. Too low prices tend to go with cutting corners, unserious business practices, stock and shipping date cheating, problems with returns and so on. Then there are companies that I consider reputable, as in everything will be in order but their prices are far too high.
I'm not sure I'd rank amazon as #1 but they work well enough and their prices are typically good. That said I typically order DVDs and video game
Re: (Score:2)
Consider the source.
Reputable in the context of this dumb article means "Firms that paid Reputation Institute" to put them on the Reputable list.
Re: (Score:2)
I just ran across a book the other day that cost more on amazon.ca than on amazon.com. Not sure how that works. There is no duty. The difference in shipping costs of the printed book should be moot especially where I am, within fifty miles of Niagara Falls. And to top it off, the Canadian dollar has been worth more than the U.S. dollar for the past few months. Amazon had no good reason to charge almost ten dollars more to Canadians for the same book. Not very reputable if you ask me. But since they bought bookpool.com a few years ago, they're the only real game in town.
I think your issue might be more with book prices in general than with Amazon specifically. It's long been a North American book publisher tradition to print USD and CAD prices on books with seemingly little regard to the current exchange rate. According to Exchange Rates Revisited: U.S. Dollar and the Cost of Books [seekingalpha.com], in 2009 the CAD prices printed on newly published books were as much as 27% higher than the USD prices. This was at a time when the US and Canadian dollars were at parity. I would guess the pri
Re: (Score:1)
Oh no, a company charges a price they think will get them the most profit. Curse them!
Re: (Score:2)
I believe you are mistaking charging the market price with reputable -- just because they are a reputable company does not mean that they should discount all profits from a free market enterprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh? And Who the F is the Reputation Institute? (Score:3)
Howcome they didn't rate in the top half on their own poll?
Re: (Score:1)
Rationality (Score:2)
So, I say don't shoot the messenger. Amazon does incredible things and has contributed a gre
Re: (Score:1)
While it is disheartening that Amazon shafted WikiLeaks
Shafted? Wikileaks broke their rules and thus according to the agreement they had with Amazon they lose access to Amazon's service. Maybe they shouldn't have agreed to terms that they couldn't follow?
In b4 some Wikileaks troll mods me down again.
Re: (Score:2)
And all of us on here are free to never buy anything from Amazon again. It's a narrow mind that can't see there are now better alternatives to buy from than a company that censors publications which do not break any laws.
Phillip.
It's been earned... (Score:4, Informative)
Customer service, in short, works.
Re: (Score:2)
I too have had nothing but good customer service from Amazon. Twice I have had to return items that broke during shipment. Both were handled quickly and courteously. Yes, they do have actual people who will TALK to you about your problem. In one case, the replacement item got to my house just two days after I notified them of the problem, the same day I sent the broken one back!
Low prices, (usually) no shipping costs, no sales tax, great customer service...Amazon has earned MY business!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I actually sent in a complaint email about this very practise. If I go to Amazon it's because I want to buy from Amazon (who, otherwise, I've had nothing but good experiences with) not some random e-tailer who Amazon for some reason wants to redirect me to.
When I got my MacBook three years ago Amazon was the first place I looked. Saw the crappy seller I'd never heard of selling something I couldn't afford to fuck around with, thought "fuck this" and bought it from John Lewis instead. I trust JL a lot more t
So very reliable (Score:2)
The ratings are analyzed from nearly 33,000 online consumer responses taken in January and February.
2 months. 33,000 reports. Seriously? This "award" is worthless.
Re: (Score:2)
Singularly or doubly positive?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah-yeah.
A bit ironic, I suppose (Score:2)
Scams (Score:2)
I've seen all sorts of scams running on Amazon and they don't give a fuck. A few examples that I've seen so far:
Counterfeit items.
Products advertised as £0.01 with the actual cost in a fake shipping charge.
There are hundreds of thousands of "books" which are actually auto generated pamphlets consisting of a main Wikipedia article and some linked articles, selling for £30+ and almost all rated 1 star by anyone who bought one. (Search for Betascript on amazon)
Crap watches selling for £10, su
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds a lot more like the people who failed to notice the terms of the service they signed up for, didn't give a fuck.
Re: (Score:1)
In the U.S., sellers get fixed shipping rates, so when they charge $0.01 for something, they get the same cut from the shipping as when they charge $10. I wouldn't call that a scam.
The fake books thing is a bit of a thing, but other than copyright violations, what line are they supposed to draw?
And anybody who takes a retailers word for what something is worth and then pays the retailer less than that for the item should learn a lesson from it.
From the 150 largest companies? (Score:3, Interesting)
Conducting "Most Ethical & Respected" survey (Score:2)
I am pleased to announce that I have just formed the "Most Ethical & Respected Slashdot Reader Institute." Please send your contributions to my paypal account, so that I many conduct a purely scientific, and completely unbiased survey. I will post the results in a slashdot article I plan to submit later.
Hey if Obama can win a Nobel peace prize, and Microsoft is rated as the 4th most ethical company, and Amazon is the most respected company in the world - how could my results be any worse?
Financial Institutions and other "Reputable" Co. (Score:1)
Selex
Fuck... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Newegg has good, quick service, but it's more complicated and costs you more to do returns or exchanges, such that many times it isn't worth it. Newegg charges you the shipping fees for returns and exchanges, Amazon doesn't.
Newegg does ship quickly (depending on where you live) and the selection and prices are generally good, but all the people who give them rave reviews must not have ever tried to return anything!
Reputable? (Score:2)
Three companies that help keep Americans fat and a pharmaceutical. No wonder the world thinks so little of us.
Lies (Score:2)
Their Amazon Credit Card charged me a $30 late fee even though it wasn't late. It was sent out at the same time as another card and the other bill made it just fine. And the Indian call-center employee was rude about it when I called, insisting it was my fault. Screw them!
Re: (Score:2)
Have you considered Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz [amazon.com]? It gets rave reviews! It's a kind of human milkiness, a great party beverage, and it has been known to save lives. Nearly everyone agrees, Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz is well worth the fifty bucks.
While you're at it, consider tossing a Three Wolf Moon [amazon.com] shirt in your shopping cart.
Re: (Score:3)
And at no extra charge it comes with the complementary erasing of controversial material!
Re: (Score:2)
their food is expensive, even by NYC standards, and often not very fresh; i think that the logistics for books and electronics just don't translate well. i wouldn't buy, say, vegetable oil at amazon, much less meat or vegetables.
as far as non-food items, i mostly agree.
Re: (Score:1)
"I've been a loyal customer for years and was excited to get a job there [at a call center]"
Wow. You're either droolingly stupid or amazingly naive (or this is a really weird troll). I hope it's just naivety, and that you learned something very important. hint: it's not just amazon; by this standard, all human collectivities (not just private companies) are guilty.
Re: (Score:2)
From TFA:
The list is based on RI's US RepTrak Pulse Study, which measures trust, esteem, admiration, and good feelings consumers have towards the largest 150 companies based on revenue in the US.
You think the average consumer even knows about Wikileaks in any detail (especially in regards to your complaint against Amazon), let alone cares?