I find her ideas (that Amazon is anti-competitive by being big) interesting, but I find her reasoning unconvincing. Her point is that breaking up large companies, merely because they are big, into smaller companies would improve the economy. She says:
"the economics of platform markets create incentives for a company to pursue growth over profits, a strategy that investors have rewarded. "
She is upset because companies pursue growth over profits. I'm not sure I see this as a bad thing. Even if it were a bad thing, it's not something that only large companies pursue, it is probably more common among small companies.
Small companies can't lose billions in order to destroy a single competitor, and then recover it by jacking up prices when they're gone. Read the diapers.com story and tell me there's not a problem with Amazon.
Yes, they can run at a loss for a long while. However, as soon as they adjust the prices, the competition comes back.
This even happened to Amazon. They had the greatest return and price match policies. However then they changed those, I started going back to Best Buy. Being able to return stuff for free at the counter beats paying $7 postage for a small item.
However, as soon as they adjust the prices, the competition comes back. This even happened to Amazon. They had the greatest return and price match policies. However then they changed those, I started going back to Best Buy. Being able to return stuff for free at the counter beats paying $7 postage for a small item.
Your buying behavior is not an indicator of how well Amazon has performed after changing their return and price match policies. They are currently making record profits so I doubt your behavior is common enough to damage Amazon's pricing strategy.
But people learn quickly, and so do the competition. And you can burn so many billions before you have to stop.
Amazon is no longer the cheapest option. People know this. They no longer price match. People know this, too.
Yes they made record profits. So did Walmart [https://www.forbes.com/sites/shelleykohan/2021/02/18/walmart-revenue-hits-559-billion-for-fiscal-year-2020/?sh=21a3dfb63358], or any other online outlet. When local stores are artificially removed from competition, of course national online retai
WARNING TO ALL PERSONNEL:
Firings will continue until morale improves.
Her paper (Score:3, Insightful)
I find her ideas (that Amazon is anti-competitive by being big) interesting, but I find her reasoning unconvincing. Her point is that breaking up large companies, merely because they are big, into smaller companies would improve the economy. She says:
"the economics of platform markets create incentives for a company to pursue growth over profits, a strategy that investors have rewarded. "
She is upset because companies pursue growth over profits. I'm not sure I see this as a bad thing. Even if it were a bad thing, it's not something that only large companies pursue, it is probably more common among small companies.
Her second argument addresses A
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
In practice this almost never works.
Yes, they can run at a loss for a long while. However, as soon as they adjust the prices, the competition comes back.
This even happened to Amazon. They had the greatest return and price match policies. However then they changed those, I started going back to Best Buy. Being able to return stuff for free at the counter beats paying $7 postage for a small item.
Re:Her paper (Score:2)
However, as soon as they adjust the prices, the competition comes back. This even happened to Amazon. They had the greatest return and price match policies. However then they changed those, I started going back to Best Buy. Being able to return stuff for free at the counter beats paying $7 postage for a small item.
Your buying behavior is not an indicator of how well Amazon has performed after changing their return and price match policies. They are currently making record profits so I doubt your behavior is common enough to damage Amazon's pricing strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
They are making record profits because for a lot of the year, online shopping was the safest way to shop
Re: (Score:2)
But people learn quickly, and so do the competition. And you can burn so many billions before you have to stop.
Amazon is no longer the cheapest option. People know this. They no longer price match. People know this, too.
Yes they made record profits. So did Walmart [https://www.forbes.com/sites/shelleykohan/2021/02/18/walmart-revenue-hits-559-billion-for-fiscal-year-2020/?sh=21a3dfb63358], or any other online outlet. When local stores are artificially removed from competition, of course national online retai