|
Walmart is not predatory? Tell that to all of the small businesses that go out of business when a Walmart moves in. You don't think that part of their business plan is to buy large enough quantity of a good to be able to sell it a low enough price, without losing money, to knock out the local competition so that they can have a dominant position in the local market?
Do you think Walmart has low prices because they are nice people?
Walmart, like every business in the US is in it to make a profit. Walmart, like Amazon, does this by buying large quantities of a good so that they can drive down prices. One side effect is that they can undercut smaller businesses because Walmart and Amazon can afford to charge less, they bought the good for less, then the other businesses.
Toss in the fact that both companies have poor labor histories and a series of complaints ranging from not hiring people full time and giving them benefits, to using temporary workers in warehouses so that they don't have to provide benefits, to firing people for trying to join a union, and the list goes on. They do these things to keep costs down. No benefits = less money paid out = more money for buying stuff = more profit.
People can complain about Amazon all that they want. They are not a perfect company, they are not a good company in many ways, but they are a business. They are there to make a profit and they are going to do whatever they can to maximize that profit. They do so following the law, bending it where they can get away with it, and do what they can to change laws to their benefit.
Just like every other business out there. BN and Borders did the exact same thing. Airlines do the same thing. Restaurants do the same thing. For gods sake, there is no Metro out to Dulles Airport because small business did not want the Metro stopping at Tysons Corner, potentially making it easier for people to shop at the mall and abandon local Mom and Pop shops, and the Taxi cabs did not want to lose fairs from DC to Dulles. They are finally building the Metro out to Dulles and the local stores and taxis are pissed.
Capitalist economies run on the principal that business maximize their profit. To complain when there is one company more successful at that then the others is ignoring the whole premise of the economic foundation for the US and most of Europe.
I want competition but I am not going to blame Amazon for being successful. I am going to blame BN for being stupid and still not selling books that are available (and not exclusive) in e-book format that Amazon sells. I am going to blame BN for not finding a way to sell e-books for the Kindle and losing that entire market. I am going to blame the Publishers for being twits in how they are dealing with the emerging e-book market. Make the books DRM free so that BN can sell Mobi books that can be read on a freaking Kindle and give them a chance to snag some of that market.
But I am not going to blame Amazon for doing what it did to become the dominant player. Without the Kindle, there is no Nook and there is no Kobo. Sony was not lighting the world on fire with its e-reader. I had never heard of it. I learned about the e-reader when I looked at Amazons website and then when I saw one in a bookstore. I know I saw the Sony but I had no clue it was a Sony and not a Kindle, it was so well advertised at the store that I could not remember the brand when I told my then boyfriend about it. I did remember the Kindle from Amazons webpage.
It was the aggressive marketing of the Kindle and e-book prices on Amazons webpage that really got the e-reader ball rolling. Once Amazon demonstrated that it could work, other players jumped into the market.
At least, that is how I view the history. My view could be wrong, or at least partially wrong.
Since BN entry it has managed to keep pace device wise, heck at times it led (Sony had a touch screen first but once again, most people had no clue of the Sony device. Nook was the first touch screen that most people would identify with). But it still is behind in times of the bookstore, marketing, and international sales. Blame that and not the fact that Amazon continues to be the dominant player.
I follow the Chicago Cubs. For the most part, they suck. It is not because the Yankees and Red Sox spend far too much on their teams (I follow the Red Sox as well) but because the management for the Cubs is simply awful and cannot put together a decent team or find a way to coach the team so that they can finally win a freaking World Series. I can hate the Yankees (and I do) because they are arrogant, annoying, and spend an obscene amount of money. I can acknowledge that the Red Sox fan in me is a hypocrite because, well, the Red Sox spend an obscene amount of money and god knows most of the fans are annoying (not me of course) but they are not the reason the Cubs suck. The Cubs suck because they need better ownership and better coaching and a better developmental system.
Amazon is arrogant and annoying but that is not why BN is in trouble or the Pubishing companies. They are in trouble because of their own poor decisions and not keeping up with the times.
|