Hacker News Reader

Comment by post_below | Hacker News Reader

> and then de-listed the original thing from their store

While they don't delist items, their algo favors products they sell directly to the extent that Amazon will get the buy box over a third party seller even when that seller is reputable and cheaper. Add that the 3rd party seller has to pay a sales fee to Amazon, often making it impossible to compete with them without approaching zero margin.

It's not delisting but it's the next best thing. If Amazon starts selling something you sell, your sales are gone, you were just free market research for them.

View on HN

>While they don't delist items, their algo favors products they sell......

Which is still the same in the Target example where their own brand product get much favourable placement. This practice has been going on for so long possibly before all of us on HN were born.

I would argue its not similar at all. Finding those reputable sellers can be more difficult whereas this would be similar to the same target item showing up four or six different times on the shelf intermixed and tagged multiple times. No?

Not really, Visual Merchandising and placement is a field on its own. Target knew precisely where to put items if they dont want that brand to do any sales, to the point where it could be 30% to 40% drop even from a Reputable brand and sellers, and 70%+ from lesser known brands, effectively killing it.

It is a tactic often used in dispute, that is why Brands needs to work on Branding to combat this stronghold from Distribution. And one reason why small brands likes the Internet so much rather than working with conventional distribution channel.

If you're selling to Target they can certainly hurt your sales with unfavorable placement, but the impact isn't really comparable to the buy box on Amazon, the overwhelming majority of sales are buy box clicks.

A direct comparison would be target putting your product behind their product on the shelf where the shopper can't see it without digging for it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com