> Neither is Amazon in e-commerce, they hold ~39% of the US market and (...)
From the link:
> The complaint alleges that Amazon violates the law not because it is big, but because it engages in a course of exclusionary conduct that prevents current competitors from growing and new competitors from emerging.
I obviously read the press release, but haven't read the 173 page complaint yet. But the piece about pricing is DEAD wrong.
The complaint says:
> Amazon uses a set of anti-discounting tactics to prevent rivals from
24 growing by offering lower prices,
But Amazon's contracts with big sellers specifically state that it may only discount when competitors first lower prices, making it in effect a price follower.
It goes on to say:
> Amazon deploys a sophisticated surveillance network of web crawlers that constantly
monitor the internet, searching for discounts that might threaten Amazon’s empire. When
Amazon detects elsewhere online a product that is cheaper than a seller’s offer for the same
product on Amazon, Amazon punishes that seller
Which belies the fact that when you sell on Amazon you agree not to offer lower prices in other places. This is simply Amazon enforce one end of the two way part of the contract. Amazon agrees not to unilaterally slash your prices and you agree not to discount behind their backs. But you aren't as an eCommerce seller obligated to do business with Amazon, they don't have sufficient market share for that.
Furthermore, this statement is specifically false:
> By taming price cutters into price followers, Amazon freezes price competition
11 and deprives American shoppers of lower prices
Amazon is the price follower. If Wal-Mart offers a discount, so will Amazon. If B&H Photo discounts a camera, so will Amazon. The FTC is using sleight of hand here.
I just don't find their arguments here to be very compelling. I'm not against monopoly enforcement, but I just don't see how Amazon actually has the pricing power they're claiming.
I don't know about that. I think the FTC has a bit more insight than a random guy online who admits didn't even read the complaint, and the FCT went through the trouble of putting together a court case to sue Amazon.
I clearly read the relevant pricing piece of the claim, and have direct related work experience. So I actually think I know a lot more about Amazon's pricing behavior than some ghouls deep in the FTC who are following Lina Kahn's marching orders to find a case against Amazon.
I think it's sufficient that I'm able to tear apart the section of the complaint that has bearing on something I have direct knowledge about.
Maybe other sections have merit, but the pricing part does not.
From the link:
> The complaint alleges that Amazon violates the law not because it is big, but because it engages in a course of exclusionary conduct that prevents current competitors from growing and new competitors from emerging.