I'd love to see how this applies to store brands and shelf placement in retail stores as well. I've noticed this comment constantly pop up on Amazon antitrust discussions. It's not the same thing.
Retail stores buy the products they put on their shelves, at wholesale prices. They then mark up the prices to a retail price charged to the end buyer when they resell the products to the end buyer.
For store brands, the store still pays for the goods up front, but they're usually just buying white-label products from suppliers that don't need to make up for marketing expenses, and so the wholesale prices are cheaper.
There is no competitive concerns here because the product maker has already been paid for their goods.
Amazon isn't being investigated for the products it buys from its suppliers. It pays for those and so it can do whatever it wants. It's being investigated for the products it doesn't, i.e., the "Marketplace" of third-party sellers where Amazon is using its internal data gathered from the third-party sellers to compete with them. There is a competitive concern here because Amazon controls the marketplace and is using its market position to compete against these third party sellers.
There is no comparable analog to the physical/retail world because such an arrangement doesn't exist in the retail world.
Contrast to ebay or etsy, which are all third-party sellers. No competitive concerns there, because they aren't trying to compete with their own sellers.
I've noticed this comment constantly pop up on Amazon antitrust discussions. It's not the same thing.
Retail stores buy the products they put on their shelves, at wholesale prices. They then mark up the prices to a retail price charged to the end buyer when they resell the products to the end buyer.
For store brands, the store still pays for the goods up front, but they're usually just buying white-label products from suppliers that don't need to make up for marketing expenses, and so the wholesale prices are cheaper.
There is no competitive concerns here because the product maker has already been paid for their goods.
Amazon isn't being investigated for the products it buys from its suppliers. It pays for those and so it can do whatever it wants. It's being investigated for the products it doesn't, i.e., the "Marketplace" of third-party sellers where Amazon is using its internal data gathered from the third-party sellers to compete with them. There is a competitive concern here because Amazon controls the marketplace and is using its market position to compete against these third party sellers.
There is no comparable analog to the physical/retail world because such an arrangement doesn't exist in the retail world.
Contrast to ebay or etsy, which are all third-party sellers. No competitive concerns there, because they aren't trying to compete with their own sellers.