Elon Musk calls for breakup of Amazon
twitter.com
twitter.com
With those two business units, Amazon can then subsidize short term loss making business strategies and M&A that focus on gaining an eventually obtaining a monopoly advantage such as grocery, general brick and mortar retail, shipping and logistics, tablets, etc.
The other companies in technology focus on PAAS, self driving cars and VR, etc. and haven't used their profit margins to extend into the real world thus far.
Is the 50% market share really necessary to claim who's a monopoly?
Maybe it's time to re evaluate the definition of monopoly.
I said that the "50% market share" seems to have flaws. Why not look at market caps?
Well, the last monopoly was broken in 1982, isn't odd that since then no other monopoly has ever existed?
You currently have monopolies that serve political agendas, that's a better stick I guess.
>Well, the last monopoly was broken in 1982, isn't odd that since then no other monopoly has ever existed?
Many monopolies have existed, like Microsoft for the most famous example. But there is no industry in which Amazon is a monopoly. Unless we were playing a witch hunt where we had to create a monopoly by thin air, I don't know what makes Amazon qualify as one.
Well my point is that 50% of a 100 million USD market is different from 50% of 1 trillion USD market. On the later you don't that much market share to pull your weight on the market.
>If companies were to be broken for profits, there are so many companies ahead of Amazon.
That wouldn't work, specially with the gymnastics that's done.
>But there is no industry in which Amazon is a monopoly.
Not even AWS?
Contrast this with Azure, which greatly benefited from the Windows and Office monopoly. I am pretty sure the Windows, AD, Office monopoly is the prime reason Azure is where it is today.
In a monopoly, a single seller controls or dominates the supply of goods and services.
The term you may be looking for is monopsony.
In a monopsony, a single buyer controls or dominates the demand for goods and services.
Amazon owns the monopoly of the ebooks for the KPF (Kindle Package Format), but it's not the monopoly of ebooks market.
Google has the monopoly of search, but doesn't have the monopoly of advertising.
The game has been exactly the same whether it is online or offline. You are simply swapping form Nationwide Stores to Nationwide Logistics.
Surely he could just post a PDF for paid download and have readers send the PDF to kindle if they really need to read it there.
Calling a book "unreported truths..." while things are rapidly changing is misleading at best
Refusing to publish content related to COVID because nobody has the time and resources to go through them all is the best you can do. If they just let people publish the story would be “Amazon doing nothing about COVID misinformation spreading through their store.”
Edit: Hey Jeff please stop down-voting me, you know it's the truth ;)
> In what sector is Amazon a monopoly. Retail? Walmart is much larger and Amazon's share of the market is too small to be a monopoly. Ecommerce? Even in ecommerce, Amazon's share is <50%.
So let's summarize: Amazon isn't a monopoly in "shopping" in any sense; there are other companies that run datacenters; since when does Amazon do live streaming? (and even if it does there are a million other apps/websites more people use for that); they don't have a monopoly in audiobooks; and they CERTAINLY don't have a monopoly in ebooks.
Just because they're a big noticeable name doesn't make them a monopoly. I'd downvote you if you could, and my name isn't Jeff.
2: Livestreaming - Twitch, with you're arguments google is not a monopoly (there are other search-engines) and no, livestreaming to millions is not something 1000 other apps can do...know why...datacenters
3: Audible probably 90% market-share
4: Ebooks of course they are the biggest seller of ebooks in combination with kindle's
5: Yes there are other's but the only competitor is Azure and google..that's maybe the only point where you are right
2. Twitch is restricted to a niche. Facebook video, YouTube, and even TikTok all have more users.
3. This might be correct but this is a very small market. Microsoft has similar market share in Office Suits.
4. Biggest seller doesn't make a monopoly. If it did, every industry will bave a monopoly.
5. How is AWS a monopoly there, when so many competitors exist, and the likes of Google have humongous internal data centres which might be on the same scale as all of AWS.
Not shopping/ecommerce..oh and i never said that google is not a monopoly
>Twitch is restricted to a niche
Facbook, ~youtube, TikTok ist NOT Livestreaming...also not Zoom or Skype
>Biggest seller doesn't make a monopoly
When you (Amazon) can make the price because everything other is a loss for you (the producer)..yes then it is a monopoly
>How is AWS a monopoly there
Yes i wrote thats maybe the only point you are right
Oh and here a interesting link for your Walmart-theory: https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail-financial/amazon-pred...
So apparently TikTok Live is mostly a competitor to those two (and maybe YouNow) but not to widescreen/desktop-oriented streams of Twitch
YouTube Live on the other hand is very much a competitor to Twitch (livestreaming to millions and NOT auto-expiring/deleting past broadcasts by default is something only YouTube can do for now)
There's a pattern here. He wants to be in the news actively. So, he picks up one thing or another. If you are not paying for marketing then you have to do it yourself.
Here's a though experiment, reductio ad absurdum, if you will.
Say you like Bezos' politics and agree with the stuff he wants to censor. Say tomorrow Bezos is run over by a bus and, through a weirdest twist of fate in history (bear with me on this one) Richard Spencer takes his place, complete with his own, very different editorial preferences.
Would you still agree that Amazon, as a company, has an unimpeded right to censor speech then? And if not, you need to think very carefully why you're _not_ against giving them this power now.
Not in Germany.
I sell books worldwide on Amazon, and the number of titles that are banned in countries (not just Germany, BTW) is pretty astounding.
And it's mostly not Hitler stuff, either.
Also, every time a rebuttal starts with "so", the rest is an attempt at mind reading. Those are always unsuccessful.
This makes no sense. Companies all have monopolies on their own products. Apple has monopoly on the iPad, which is a similar competing reading device. Sony has monopoly on the PlayStation. Microsoft has monopoly on Office and Xbox. Are you suggesting that all companies should give up the ownership of all of their products?
There are several competing products to Kindle, like Nook and even iPad (which funnily enough, tried to monopolistically engage in price fixing)