I recently wanted to get a pre-workout, I looked it up on Amazon and then I went to the company site to just order directly from there. It was like $10 cheaper on Amazon because of free shipping and subscribe & save.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
It's because Amazon requires the seller not undercut its Amazon store through other outlets, including their own website. If you are a seller and you want to take advantage of Amazon Prime, then you have to make sure your Amazon price is the cheapest price available on the internet.
My last post being unclear. Amazon has about as much a strangle hold on the tech sector as Walmart has on retail. They don't. You get the product you paid for. AWS is no different.
But the Walmart difference are brands and reduced quality in brand names. There are weird brands on Amazon but I'm not aware of any quality reductions when paying for known brands.
Amazon has so many false brands and knock off shit it’s ridiculous. Hardly any of it works yet it has a 4.8 review. It’s like Temuat this point for so much of it.
Walmart might have their “Walmart specials”, but I don’t have to worry about their stuff catching fire of giving me lead poisoning.
If you stick to brand you recognize on Amazon, this isn't an issue. I'm not defending Amazon I'm just saying these points aren't as valid as they sound.
Check Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox by Lina Khan (FTC). A very detailed review of how Amazon is a monopoly and how they dodge antitrust legislation.
That article has basically been validated over time. At the time it was written, the argument was that monopoly is bad for consumers even if it makes prices cheaper, and that consolidation of producer market power needs to be understood as consumer harm in itself, even if prices or services paradoxically become better for consumers.
It's no longer a paradox today, though. Amazon has raised prices and reduced the quality of service by a considerable margin, and uses its market power to prevent the competition from undercutting them, rather than competing fairly on the merits.
There are other online shops besides Amazon. I find an alternative for almost everything that I order and it's not more expensive. And finding the right product inside Amazon is so exhausting nowadays that it's not more work to compare different web shops.
It's hard to compete when you're basically a warehouse and your market is the literal population of the internet.
Yeah, microcenter, even if it's the only computer/electronics store for 100 miles, can still only hold so much, and they only reach people in/around their city at most. It's not like people are crossing state lines to get to a computer store.... Unless you live on the border of your state, I suppose.
Amazon has, at the very least, dozens of warehouses across the country that can deliver whatever it is you want with remarkable efficiency because postal/parcel services have been systematically improving over the past 50+ years.
I'm not saying I'm a fan of Amazon, but bluntly, is it really surprising, in the slightest, that Amazon can out price everyone else?
So the way it’s ruining those markets is by making more goods available at lower prices?
It's about how they do it. They achieve this not only by being incredibly efficient through exploiting thier employees, but also by systematically destroying competition, and using thier marketplace to unfairly favor thier own products.
It's techno-feudalism, here's a great presentation/interview about it:
Amazon is a place where you have to deal with fake items and getting fraudulent returns shipped to you as new. Your reward for this is maybe a 5% discount.
Brick and mortar will always be more expensive and there are always cheaper options than Target. I used to love Fry's but they are no more.
I enjoy this narrative of "being forced" to go against ones own morals and principals by big bad companies because one just absolutely has to have a product for as cheap as possible.
You went to two stores and then straight to Amazon. That doesn't mean they have a monopoly, that means you really didn't try that hard to find an alternative.
If you think you have no other choice you are right because you stopped looking for one.
Also there is always the second hand market... If you are really looking for deals and can take some risk which I think most adults with jobs can...
So politely, how does Amazon offering a better price on a niche paper product conflate into them having a monopoly on the "tech industry"?
I'd posit the real thing here is that Amazon's warehouses allow them to keep less-purchased products around in stock that a brick-and-mortar retail store simply wouldn't bother with at all, but that's been the case for decades at this point.
And, yes, printing out images has become an uncommon activity and I can't say I'd blame any of the larger stores for only having a single expensive option available, but that's their decision, not Amazon's.
how does Amazon offering a better price on a niche paper product conflate into them having a monopoly on the “tech industry”?
For starters, it's typically not "better price" so much as "only people able to consistently obtain supply". The real price is very likely higher than it was 5-10 years ago when production was prolific.
But also, we saw this game play out with Walmart. The monopoly retailer has an opportunity to outsource to the least ethical producer.
So Amazon gets to be the sole distributor of printer paper, the manufacturer is some old growth harvestor in the Amazon using prison/slave labor for harvesting/processing, and even then you're paying more for a worse product than when a well regulated and unionized workforce was producing the commodity a decade earlier.