A free market competition where the market in California feels competitive because the prices on Amazon are much cheaper while the images and quality of goods have the same strength. This is not only happening in big companies, mostly triggered by the rise of imported goods with similar duplication and sold at relatively cheap prices, even much cheaper. So that consumers are interested because the value set is much different. The global market competition system is almost the same as other micro markets. Let's say a market with a Chinese supplier of duplicate goods has a low selling point. This makes consumers unable to distinguish between genuine and fake goods, especially if the goods are on Amazon, which is the largest marketplace platform in the world.
A little story, I am a reseller (third party) in the biggest marketplace in my country, which is selling goods at low prices by shops/suppliers (I only act as an affiliate). Indeed, in terms of fixing the price, we are given the freedom as long as we get from one item x around 1-$2 x 100 items. Only selling pictures and taking care of the goods is the supplier's job.
Topic: California sues Amazon, alleging its policies cause higher prices everywhere - page 2. (Read 238 times)
September 20, 2022, 10:10:56 AM
September 20, 2022, 07:53:03 AM
California as a state should be able to regulate how Amazon works in their state and with their regulations can prevent things like this from happening .. I totally agree that California officials sued Amazon because their policies can cause significant price increases which will harm consumers
September 20, 2022, 06:33:35 AM
Amazon is super predatory in nature. They are the sole reason for the death of millions of businesses around the world. It's great that California detected the trend and taking actions accordingly.
It's their practice to create products under the brand name of Amazon Basics and sell it at a low price to capture the market. Once they capture the majority percentage of sales in the market, they start increasing price. That's how they play the game. I believe California government is doing the right thing.
It's their practice to create products under the brand name of Amazon Basics and sell it at a low price to capture the market. Once they capture the majority percentage of sales in the market, they start increasing price. That's how they play the game. I believe California government is doing the right thing.
September 20, 2022, 03:38:13 AM
Is this a case of good competition, or are other motives at play?
Amazon is so big it can pretty much act like a monopoly. If you want to sell at Amazon, you may have to lower the price or even sell at a loss. Many think that their products being sold at Amazon is a commercial by itself.
So it's a complicated issue and I would not be surprised that everybody who sells at a loss at Amazon, will try to recover that loss somewhere else.
Maybe this is what "California" is implying? I don't know. It will be a very interesting case, however.
September 20, 2022, 12:14:23 AM
Is this a case of good competition, or are other motives at play? I think this is an interesting experiment that should help inform consumers, and sellers. Thanks to the Internet, the cost of selling goods is more transparent than ever.
Speaking as an individual consumer myself, I'd rather pay more if I have to than risk paying less and possibly never getting my stuff at all because free market forces dictate retailers until they decide it's no longer profitable for them to operate.
Consumers should be able to pay whatever price they think is fair. In this respect, there is no difference between selling directly on Amazon compared to going through a retail store. If Amazon has raised their prices because of the shortfall caused by the new law, Maybe, then more power to them.
Speaking as an individual consumer myself, I'd rather pay more if I have to than risk paying less and possibly never getting my stuff at all because free market forces dictate retailers until they decide it's no longer profitable for them to operate.
Consumers should be able to pay whatever price they think is fair. In this respect, there is no difference between selling directly on Amazon compared to going through a retail store. If Amazon has raised their prices because of the shortfall caused by the new law, Maybe, then more power to them.
September 19, 2022, 06:52:56 PM
Quote
California sued Amazon on Wednesday, accusing the company of pushing sellers and suppliers into anticompetitive deals that lead to higher prices, including at rival online stores.
The lawsuit, filed by state Attorney General Rob Bonta, focuses on the way Amazon — the largest online retailer — deals with third-party merchants, who account for most of the sales on the platform.
California alleges that Amazon penalizes sellers and suppliers that offer cheaper prices elsewhere on the internet, including Walmart and Target, for example by displaying their items lower or less prominently or outright blocking their new postings.
"Amazon makes consumers think they are getting the lowest prices possible," the lawsuit alleges, "when in fact, they cannot get the low prices that would prevail in a freely competitive market because Amazon has coerced and induced its third-party sellers and wholesale suppliers to enter into anticompetitive agreements on price."
California's antitrust lawsuit is among the biggest legal challenges to Amazon in recent years, as lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. and abroad have investigated the retail giant for potential anticompetitive practices.
An Amazon spokesperson denied any antitrust violations, pointed out that a similar case in the District of Columbia was dismissed, and said the California Attorney General has it backwards.
"Sellers set their own prices for the products they offer in our store," the company said in a statement. "Like any store we reserve the right not to highlight offers to customers that are not priced competitively."
California also accuses Amazon of creating a "vicious anticompetitive cycle": Sellers view Amazon as a must; Amazon charges them higher fees to be able to sell on its platform; Sellers, in turn, raise their Amazon prices. And, even though it costs them less to sell on other websites, Amazon's policies push sellers to raise prices on those sites, too.
"Through its illegal actions, the, quote, "everything store" has effectively set a price floor, costing Californians more for just about everything," Bonta said at a press conference on Wednesday.
Earlier this year, a judge dismissed a similar lawsuit that was filed in Washington, D.C., though the city's attorney general has appealed.
In that case, Amazon argued its deals with merchants were meant to prevent shoppers from being overcharged, and punishing Amazon would hurt consumers.
Amazon has separately proposed a settlement with European antitrust regulators, who charged the company with violating competition laws. Their key allegations accused the company of using data it collected from third-party sellers to its own benefit.
https://www.npr.org/2022/09/14/1122995430/california-sues-amazon
The lawsuit, filed by state Attorney General Rob Bonta, focuses on the way Amazon — the largest online retailer — deals with third-party merchants, who account for most of the sales on the platform.
California alleges that Amazon penalizes sellers and suppliers that offer cheaper prices elsewhere on the internet, including Walmart and Target, for example by displaying their items lower or less prominently or outright blocking their new postings.
"Amazon makes consumers think they are getting the lowest prices possible," the lawsuit alleges, "when in fact, they cannot get the low prices that would prevail in a freely competitive market because Amazon has coerced and induced its third-party sellers and wholesale suppliers to enter into anticompetitive agreements on price."
California's antitrust lawsuit is among the biggest legal challenges to Amazon in recent years, as lawmakers and regulators in the U.S. and abroad have investigated the retail giant for potential anticompetitive practices.
An Amazon spokesperson denied any antitrust violations, pointed out that a similar case in the District of Columbia was dismissed, and said the California Attorney General has it backwards.
"Sellers set their own prices for the products they offer in our store," the company said in a statement. "Like any store we reserve the right not to highlight offers to customers that are not priced competitively."
California also accuses Amazon of creating a "vicious anticompetitive cycle": Sellers view Amazon as a must; Amazon charges them higher fees to be able to sell on its platform; Sellers, in turn, raise their Amazon prices. And, even though it costs them less to sell on other websites, Amazon's policies push sellers to raise prices on those sites, too.
"Through its illegal actions, the, quote, "everything store" has effectively set a price floor, costing Californians more for just about everything," Bonta said at a press conference on Wednesday.
Earlier this year, a judge dismissed a similar lawsuit that was filed in Washington, D.C., though the city's attorney general has appealed.
In that case, Amazon argued its deals with merchants were meant to prevent shoppers from being overcharged, and punishing Amazon would hurt consumers.
Amazon has separately proposed a settlement with European antitrust regulators, who charged the company with violating competition laws. Their key allegations accused the company of using data it collected from third-party sellers to its own benefit.
https://www.npr.org/2022/09/14/1122995430/california-sues-amazon
....
For many years, consumers were encouraged to by local. Pay higher prices for locally produced products. Rather than shop on amazon for rock bottom prices.
Now it appears california is making the inverse opposite case. They're claiming that amazon pushes prices higher. Rather than lower. And that there are illegal business practices in the form of market collusion and price gouging. Which are pushing prices higher in stores across the board.
These are interesting claims to say the least.
California being the home of silicon valley and 5th largest economy in the world. As well as the homes of google, apple, tesla, microsoft and countless other world famous US tech start ups. One might wonder how california came to have leadership which blames amazon for high market prices. Is this the future direction for silicon valley and the united states as a whole?
Interesting case to say the least. What does everyone think about this?
Jump to: