But they've only been unprofitable the last hand few of years. Before that they were quite profitable. Amazon's pursuit of businesses with high R&D costs is the reason for their current lack of profitability.
The first ten years of their operating life were spent being famous for bleeding prodigious amounts of red ink. That's why the tag: Amazon.toast - it was assumed they would bleed to death without the easy money of the public market and a massive valuation.
Here's their net income statement going back to '97:
1997: -$32m; 1998: -$124m; 1999: -$719m; 2000: -$1.4b; 2001: -$567m; 2002: -$149m; 2003: $35m; 2004: $588m; 2005: $359m; 2006: $190m; 2007: $476m; 2008: $645m; 2009: $902m; 2010: $1.15b; 2011: $631m; 2012: -$39m; 2013: $274m
They've never been quite profitable. Only one year, 2004, did they show even a modest level of profitability (in part due to one-time gains). The rest of the positive years the margin was between 1% and 4% typically.
You'll forgive me if I don't trust in the judgment of a business plan built on losing money for two or three decades.
They can be a good company, grow to X hundred billion in sales, struggle to ever make money, and that's all perfectly fine - but it doesn't mean they deserve a hyper valuation. Target trades at a mere $38b valuation, and they only generated $8b in net income the past three years.
People say the enterprise cloud market is a Trillion dollar opportunity world wide in the next decade.
A Trillion dollars up for grabs, and Amazon has a healthy lead in the segment.
When you go to an AWS event the thing that stands out is the number of consulting and service companies that offer integration/application services to enterprises based wholly on AWS. I've been to Google Cloud events and its not even in the same ballpark as AWS. The Amazon lead is huge.
I think Amazon is still a good buy.