Comment

Comment by NickC25

1. He's the chair of the board, so he has an outsized amount of control. He could easily fire the CEO or any other C-Suite members if he wanted to.

2. He owns a bit more than a minority stake, he owns (I've found several estimates, so I'm putting in a range here) between 9% and 12.5%. That's hardly a minority stake for a company worth nearly $1.5 trillion. He's the single largest shareholder.

3. Maybe not a full on monopoly, but AWS has the same market share in the cloud space as the next two providers combined. (MSFT + Google). That's as close to a monopoly as I can think in of a competitive industry without getting trust busted.

4. Most people I know would prefer to keep things the way they are - they pay for a premium service on top of already paying for Prime. If Amazon offered Prime Video for free but it was ad-supported, I'd be fine with that. I don't think I'm alone when I say that if I'm paying for a premium service (Video) on top of already paying for a service (Prime), Amazon shouldn't be allowed to triple-dip by selling ads.

Streaming platforms usually have ad-supported tiers, yes, but most of those are either free or very cheap.

parent NickC25 3 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton