闂傚倸鍊搁崐鐑芥嚄閼哥數浠氱紓鍌欒兌缁垶宕濆Δ鍐ㄥ灊闁哄啫鐗婇崐濠氭煢濡警妲搁柣搴弮濮婅櫣绮欓幐搴㈡嫳缂備緡鍠栫粔鍫曞焵椤掍胶顣茬€光偓閹间礁钃熼柨鐔哄Т閻愬﹪鏌嶆潪鐗堫樂婵炲矈浜铏圭矙閸喖姣愰梺鐟板殩閹凤拷
缂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸閻ゎ喗銇勯弽顐粶闁搞劌鍊块弻娑㈡晜鐠囨彃绠归梺鎼炲妽缁诲牓寮诲☉銏犵闁肩⒈鍓欐俊浠嬫煟鎼淬垻顣茬€光偓閹间礁钃熸繛鎴欏灩缁犵粯淇婇悙棰濆殭濞存粓绠栧娲传閸曨厾鍔归梺鐟板殩閹凤拷
濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閹间礁纾绘繛鎴旀嚍閸ヮ剦鏁囬柕蹇曞Х椤︻噣鎮楅崗澶婁壕闂佸憡娲﹂崑澶愬春閻愬绠鹃悗鐢登瑰瓭濡炪倖鍨靛Λ婵嗙暦閺囩偟鏆嗛柛鏇ㄥ墮娴狀垶姊洪幖鐐插姶濞存粍绮撻幆鍐惞閸︻厾锛滄繝銏e煐缁嬫帞鈧熬鎷�
闂傚倸鍊搁崐椋庣矆娓氣偓瀹曘儳鈧綆浜堕悢鍡樻叏濡炶浜鹃悗瑙勬处閸ㄥ爼鐛惔銊﹀殟闁靛鍎辨晶鐐繆閻愵亜鈧牠鎮уΔ鍐ㄥ灊鐎广儱娲i悞濠囧箹濞n剙濡介柣鎾存礋閺岋繝宕堕妷銉ヮ瀳濠电偛鎳忛敃銏ゅ蓟濞戙垺鍊婚柛銉e妼椤忥拷
Lawmakers Slam Amazon for How It Treats Competing Merchants
Sean Captain
Temperatures hit nearly 100 degrees in Washington D.C. But it seemed even hotter inside a House of Representatives Judiciary Committee hearing where lawmakers grilled Apple, Facebook, Google, and especially Amazon on whether they are in effect monopolies that stifle competition and hurt consumers. (Many of the questions echoed those suggested by conservative and liberal experts to Fast Company before the hearings.)
The offensive on Amazon began with a line of attack from Democrat Pramila Jayapal, who represents Amazon’s hometown of Seattle. “When people sell products on your site, do you track what products are most successful, and do you sometimes create a product to compete with that product?” she asked the company’s associate general counsel Nate Sutton.
He claimed that Amazon doesn’t use that data when trying to decide what house brands to offer, but it’s understandable why Jayapal would be suspicious. Since staring its private-label program in 2007, Amazon has launched over 100 brands.
But it has not, so far, taken the retail sector by storm. In fact, Amazon’s house brands, like AmazonBasics, account for just a tiny portion of its sales, according to a study by Marketplace Pulse. (The fear, of course, is that Amazon is simply playing a long game to eventual dominance.)
Still the hammering continued. “You are selling your own products on a platform that you control, and they are competing with products in the marketplace from other sellers,” said David Cicilline (D-RI). He pushed Sutton on whether Amazon is using its data and even manipulating algorithms to favor its brands, adding, “I remind you sir, you are under oath.”
(Cicilline also referenced journalist Brad Stone’s 2013 book, The Everything Store, which quoted CEO Jeff Bezos as saying that Amazon should approach small publishers, “the way a cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle.”)
Others pressed Amazon on the advertising it sells so that vendors appear more prominently on the site. Val Butler Demings (D-FL) quoted directly from a July 15 Bloomberg article, stating, “Amazon’s advertising is better understood as an additional tax the company imposes on the millions of businesses that sell through its vast digital mall.”
Sutton called advertising “an optional service that is not necessary,” and countered that most sellers don’t use ads.
And Lucy McBath (D-GA) asked Sutton if Amazon gives special treatment to vendors that prefer its order fulfillment services to other service providers. He said the company does not. (As an Amazon Prime member, I confess that whenever possible I pick a product delivered by Amazon, so I can get my free two-day delivery.)
Republicans were largely absent from this discussion – although some, like Kelly Armstrong (R-ND) pushed other companies, for instance, asking to what extent Facebook buys smaller firms to squelch competition.
Gregory Steube (R-FL) asked what percentage of total U.S. retail (online and in-store) sales Amazon accounts for. Four percent, said Sutton, saying that Walmart is “two to three times larger than we are.”
- 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鐑芥嚄閼哥數浠氱紓鍌欒兌缁垶宕濆Δ鍐ㄥ灊闁哄啫鐗婇崐濠氭煢濡警妲搁柣搴弮濮婅櫣绮欓幐搴㈡嫳缂備緡鍠栫粔鍫曞焵椤掍胶顣茬€光偓閹间礁钃熼柨鐔哄Т閻愬﹪鏌嶆潪鐗堫樂婵炲矈浜铏圭矙閸喖姣愰梺鐟板殩閹凤拷
- 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹妞嬪孩顐介柨鐔哄Т绾惧鏌涢弴銊ョ€柛銉墮缁狀喚绱掑☉姗嗗剱闁哄拋浜幃妤冩喆閸曨剛顦ュ┑鐐额嚋婵″洭鍩€椤掍焦鐨戠紒顕呭灦婵$敻宕熼姘鳖啋闁诲酣娼ч幗婊堟偩濞差亝鐓熼幖娣灮閸熸煡鏌熼崙銈嗗
- 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閹间礁纾绘繛鎴旀嚍閸ヮ剦鏁囬柕蹇曞Х椤︻噣鎮楅崗澶婁壕闂佸憡娲﹂崑澶愬春閻愬绠鹃悗鐢登瑰瓭濡炪倖鍨靛Λ婵嗙暦閺囩偟鏆嗛柛鏇ㄥ墮娴狀垶姊洪幖鐐插姶濞存粍绮撻幆鍐惞閸︻厾锛滄繝銏e煐缁嬫帞鈧熬鎷�
- 闂傚倸鍊搁崐椋庣矆娓氣偓瀹曘儳鈧綆浜堕悢鍡樻叏濡炶浜鹃悗瑙勬处閸ㄥ爼鐛惔銊﹀殟闁靛鍎辨晶鐐繆閻愵亜鈧牠鎮уΔ鍐ㄥ灊鐎广儱娲i悞濠囧箹濞n剙濡介柣鎾存礋閺岋繝宕堕妷銉ヮ瀳濠电偛鎳忛敃銏ゅ蓟濞戙垺鍊婚柛銉e妼椤忥拷