So Amazon making good fat margins on every small business that sells on Amazon is demonstration of an ineffective market. And hence why the FTC are stepping in.
I cannot speak for every location, but Amazon isn’t the cheapest in the UK. I would say it is about average.
Where Amazon wins is the range of stock and its next day deliveries. Which means most people default to Amazon because it’s quicker and easier than shopping around. But you can definitely get cheaper if you were to shop around.
Also by Amazon owning the whole pipeline, from stock to delivery, they can squeeze costs down and thus improve their margins. For example, I guarantee you that other online retailers are paying more to ship their products than Amazon are.
I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days.
Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created.
Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider.
> I agree fully, but Amazon is still the "cheapest" when you consider the all in price of cost_of_goods+cost_of_delivery|want_goods_in_fewer_than_two_days.
Why say you agree when you only go on to disagree with me?
I've bought plenty of things cheaper on other sites. Delivery included. There have been things that were cheaper on Amazon as well. This is why I said it's about average. But there are so many variables at play here (location, items you're looking to purchase, etc) that it might just be easier to agree to disagree.
> Amazon has the most efficient business, which allows them to survive on lower margins and attract buyers because of the vertically integrated pipeline they've created.
Those vertically integrated pipelines come with significant cost savings though. That's why they do it. And because it saves them $$$, it then also increases their margins.
> Your example of other companies selling the same product at cheaper prices helps to illuminate the fact that there isn't any real impact from the supposed anti-competitive behavior to the consumer. Cheaper prices still exist! Amazon hasn't become the sole provider.
Those two arguments aren't mutually inclusive. Other companies might be offering cheaper prices but making a loss in the hope that loyalty will win customers in the long run. Or other corners might get cut that could ultimately lead to that businesses demise, such as not hiring skilled staff, not following health and safety or other local laws, etc. And even if none of the aforementioned is true, it still doesn't mean that Amazon aren't being anti-competitive.
Also "anti-competitive behaviour" applies to how they block other businesses from competing. You cannot be "anti-competitive to the consumer"
Yeah, that’s really the anti-competitive part. The vertical integration is so incredibly difficult to compete against.
At some point you have no choice but to give them a slice of your revenue and some control of your product, lest your access to customers is severely limited.
Good fat margins are a result of an ineffective market.