Hacker News Reader

Comment by sequoia | Hacker News Reader

Any bets on when people who are "shocked, shocked" about Amazon's treatment of its workers are going to put their money where their mouth is and actually forgo the convenience of next day delivery & rock bottom prices?

Americans have it tough in so many ways (health care system, lack of public transit, kleptocratic federal government), it's sad to see us making it even worse for our fellow small-guys like this to buy ourselves some convenience and save a few dollars on consumer goods. (Notwithstanding the many people for whom home delivery etc. is a godsend without which they'd have a much more difficult life. It's complicated.)

We vote with our dollars and currently we are telling Amazon "this is OK, keep doing it" loud and clear.

View on HN

I don't think it's reasonable to expect the average consumer to research the worker quality of life (and the product safety history, and the environmental record, and the political donations, and the tax evasion tactics, and ...) of all of the hundreds or thousands of companies that they give money to. These aren't the kinds things we can expect to solve with consumer boycotts.

Yes but you and I and the royal We of hackernews are aware of the issues. Further research is not required. So how are We reacting to it with our actions? Continuing to give amazon gobs of money & data?

Some of us are doing it! I no longer do business with Amazon due to their association with law enforcement and surveillance.

This is a really bad take, voting with your dollar works when there’s actually competition. Amazon has an effective monopoly, and we need people to vote with their vote for regulation to protect works.

What does Amazon have that you can't purchase at any other retailer? With the exception of Amazon-branded products, you can find almost any item on another online marketplace.

I agree that regulation is probably needed to curb the excesses of a company Amazon's size. It doesn't follow to me, however, that you and I must continue shoveling money into their coffers whilst we complain about how bad they are.

Is there some reason you can't vote with both your dollar and your vote? Most of us can still buy our toothpaste, toilet paper, headphones, and cat litter at a local pharmacy, electronics store, or mall.

Monopoly? Everything you can buy at Amazon you could buy before Amazon ever existed. And guess what? You still can.

Not even remotely a monopoly.

This is not what the parent is talking about. Amazon has a virtual monopoly over online buying and selling, with even other sellers having to sell their products on Amazon to reach customers.

What does Amazon do with these third-party sellers? It uses the sales data that Amazon collected for them to create cheaper products with Amazon branding, which are then suggested ahead of the third-party products. This is blatant anti-competitive behavior; effectively no one can compete with Amazon’s online marketplace - not even the people in that marketplace.

> This is blatant anti-competitive behavior;

Agreed. So take them to task via the law/regulation, and stop giving them your money! Seek out the product website, pay the extra shipping to order right from the seller, buy the TV at best buy etc. etc. If you want other markets to be viable, it will certainly help if you put your money into them.

I really don't see why people think they can't resist Amazon's hegemony both in the political arena and with their wallets.

What’s your source on Amazon using sales data to stifle competitors? I’ve read this claim a lot but haven’t seen any clear evidence.

What prevents these folks who fund all the unicorns from starting their own Amazon competitor? You made a pretty bold claim that nobody can compete with Amazon, but it’s not even clear how anyone is forced to use Amazon or sell on its website.

Literally nothing prevents you from standing up your own website and selling items. Consumers in most of the US can decide for or against shopping on Amazon, although many rural places have no options at all other than WalMart or Dollar General in terms of physical stores.

There’s literally nothing Amazon offers that you can’t get from a competitor, and often times at a better price in my experience.

This is missing the point. Amazon is acting anti-competitively towards the sellers currently using its platform. That is the problem, not that businesses could potentially set up their own sites. The conflict of interest is the problem; Amazon undercuts its own competitors using their data.

Maybe it is a better decision for a given business to not sell in Amazon. But that doesn’t make Amazon’s behavior any less anti-competitive. Many small-time sellers have no way to reach a large market without using Amazon to reach customers. Most people don’t go to smalltimeseller.com to buy stuff; for a large portion of consumers, online shopping is synonymous with Amazon.

Here’s source about the undercutting claim https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304441404577482...

I mean, when it comes down to it, is individual action really going to convince Amazon to have higher working standards? Or, will it come down to law?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com