Topic: AMAZON POSTS $437M LOSS IN Q3 (Read 1066 times)
Funny, that's exactly how much I owe them for all my mining EC2 instances.
I think that CC do increase their costs (actually decrease the revenue, but this is an accounting technicality) however the CC costs do not affect their bottom line enough so they would have been profitable had they accepted bitcoin (even if all transactions were done in bitcoin).
Their primary cost is that of shipping as they offer "free" shipping that is getting increasingly expensive for them to offer to customers. There was actually an article in the WSJ recently about how many companies are increasing the minimum purchase required to be eligible for free shipping
Their primary cost is that of shipping as they offer "free" shipping that is getting increasingly expensive for them to offer to customers. There was actually an article in the WSJ recently about how many companies are increasing the minimum purchase required to be eligible for free shipping
CC fees don't decrease revenue. Revenue is the topline number. CC fees decrease profitability, but not revenue.
I think that CC do increase their costs (actually decrease the revenue, but this is an accounting technicality) however the CC costs do not affect their bottom line enough so they would have been profitable had they accepted bitcoin (even if all transactions were done in bitcoin).
Their primary cost is that of shipping as they offer "free" shipping that is getting increasingly expensive for them to offer to customers. There was actually an article in the WSJ recently about how many companies are increasing the minimum purchase required to be eligible for free shipping
Their primary cost is that of shipping as they offer "free" shipping that is getting increasingly expensive for them to offer to customers. There was actually an article in the WSJ recently about how many companies are increasing the minimum purchase required to be eligible for free shipping
Huge losses probably from all those carders that do "refunds" 
What's all this then?
Huge losses probably from all those carders that do "refunds"
If any of these outfits started transferring their savings via payment in bitcoin on to the consumer there would be an added demand factor for using such a system. I still don't get why BitPay hasn't enticed more companies to pass on the savings in a voluntary way tho I suppose at some point it will manifest itself.
I thought Overstock gave a bitcoin discount because they didn't have to pay credit card fees on those transactions.
If any of these outfits started transferring their savings via payment in bitcoin on to the consumer there would be an added demand factor for using such a system. I still don't get why BitPay hasn't enticed more companies to pass on the savings in a voluntary way tho I suppose at some point it will manifest itself.
Amazon accepting btc wouldn't change a thing for them. They're doing 20 billion in revenue per quarter, bitcoin transactions would be a drop in the ocean to them.
Also, if they did accept bitcoin, this might initially give a big boost to bitcoin because it would validate the currency further, but over the long run I think it would put downward pressure on the price of btc. Amazon won't transact in btc, just like Overstock doesn't. They "accept" it as a payment, but they use a vendor to immediately convert to fiat. So all transactions Overstock does are immediately sold so they have no risk to price volatility which can eat away their profit, so this is constant selling pressure on the price of btc. If Amazon did that, it would be the same thing, but on a larger scale.
Also, if they did accept bitcoin, this might initially give a big boost to bitcoin because it would validate the currency further, but over the long run I think it would put downward pressure on the price of btc. Amazon won't transact in btc, just like Overstock doesn't. They "accept" it as a payment, but they use a vendor to immediately convert to fiat. So all transactions Overstock does are immediately sold so they have no risk to price volatility which can eat away their profit, so this is constant selling pressure on the price of btc. If Amazon did that, it would be the same thing, but on a larger scale.
And warns of more to come. Seems like they could start stifling some of their losses if they started to accept a certain form of payment. Then we could 'moon' each other. 
More...http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/10/23/amazon-posts-loss-for-3rd-quarter/17783495/
Quote
LOS ANGELES — Amazon had warned that it would lose bundles of cash in the third quarter, and it didn't disappoint.
But the size of the loss and a forecast that warned of more red ink by year's end chilled investors, who had already sent shares sharply lower for the year.
The Seattle-based online retailer (TICKER: AMZN) said it had a net loss of $437 million for the quarter, or 95 cents a share, compared with $41 million, or 9 cents a share, in the year-ago quarter. Analysts had forecast a loss of 74 cents a share.
Revenue rose 20% to $20.6 billion, short of the $20.84 billion projected by analysts. Amazon shares tumbled 11%, to $278.89, in after-hours trading. Ahead of the report, shares had lost 23% year to date, singed by prior big losses.
But the size of the loss and a forecast that warned of more red ink by year's end chilled investors, who had already sent shares sharply lower for the year.
The Seattle-based online retailer (TICKER: AMZN) said it had a net loss of $437 million for the quarter, or 95 cents a share, compared with $41 million, or 9 cents a share, in the year-ago quarter. Analysts had forecast a loss of 74 cents a share.
Revenue rose 20% to $20.6 billion, short of the $20.84 billion projected by analysts. Amazon shares tumbled 11%, to $278.89, in after-hours trading. Ahead of the report, shares had lost 23% year to date, singed by prior big losses.
More...http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/10/23/amazon-posts-loss-for-3rd-quarter/17783495/
Jump to: