In December 2023, I bought a Speediance home gym machine (which I love, BTW). I could order it either directly from the company or through Amazon. I chose Amazon because I've been a customer since 1997 and I trust them. The machine weighs about 200 pounds. I live in a 3rd-floor condo with no elevator. Amazon contracted with a 3rd-party shipper. When the machine arrived, they refused to bring it upstairs, saying that wasn't in their contract. I had to leave it on the ground outside the building, and the next day hire a moving company to bring it up to me, for $250. I called Amazon to complain. The rep I spoke to apologized, agreed that that wasn't right, and asked if a $250 credit to my account would make it right. Of course it would. She did not ask for a receipt, did not pass me off to a supervisor. Just fixed the problem on the honor system in less than 5 minutes.
I think most of this is about competition. Amazon are great, but more importantly, almost anyone can start competing with Amazon. It isn't like a government run service, where there's one of them that stays in business, regardless, and also, doesn't have the geographical lack of competition.
People romanticise mom and pop stores, but we got rid of them for a reason. They were expensive, inefficient and often had lousy service. Because where else were you going to go? As people became more mobile they could go to a shop on the other side of town.
Granted, our relationship with the government, or any entity with a monopoly on force, is not entirely voluntary. But that’s not the point, is it? The point is how well something *can* be done. And in a matrix of choice between providers of services, one might want to consider having more things done by the “vendor” that has elected to provide superb service in exchange for the opportunity of profit. That’s part of the struggle between we free marketeers and socialists.
Instead of imagining how Amazon might behave with a force monopoly, imagine how government might perform if tax receipts were conditioned on quality of service.
Amazon is amazing. The client service is off the charts. The only question is: why is it so cheap? For the convenience and client service, one should be willing to pay a premium, but in fact it is typically cheaper than other sources.
When my European friends get down on America, one of my responses is: only America could produce an Amazon (or a Costco, for that matter).
The problem with Amazon is that they have a de facto price parity policy: see the class action lawsuit Hopper V. Amazon. Amazon, for all their legitimate conveniences, takes a huge 10-30% cut; so, effectively, since about 50% of e-commerce is on Amazon, we're all paying a 10-30% Amazon tax since we can't find most products for cheaper outside Amazon as most sellers can't sell for cheaper elsewhere or otherwise they lose access to half the market.
People get unreasonably worked up about the quality of low-cost goods. They buy a $5 wrench from a no-name Chinese brand instead of a $25 name-brand American wrench, then get angry when it breaks. But if the cheap wrench has even a 20% chance of not breaking, it's a good buy! Case in point: I can blow through 15 pairs of cheap Amazon sunglasses and *still* come out ahead compared with Ray-Bans.
I think this has to do with an overly strong sense of "justice," or taking some deep personal offence at having been "ripped off." You can buy very high-quality goods on Amazon, they are just a lot more expensive. When I buy something cheap, I know full well there's some chance it will break (and hey, that's what the review system is for). If it does break, it goes in the trash and I order a different brand's cheap Chinese product, or maybe bite the bullet and get the expensive name brand. But often, the cheapo brand works fine! Breakage is just a cost of doing business in a global economy.
There is absolutely a place in the market for goods that are much cheaper and lower in quality and I'm happy to make the trade.
I think a salute to Jeff Bezos is appropriate here. Now, I don't know what he's like a human being...perhaps he's not a nice person. But he pushed and pushed, when everyone derided Amazon for never making a profit, to just keep selling more and more, with incredibly quick delivery times, and with excellent customer service.
P.S. For some things, I buy late at night, and even on a weekend, and am given the option of a 4 AM - 8 AM delivery time the next day. For free, with Amazon Prime. For almost all items, I don't choose that, and just go with 8 AM to noon the following day. But a few times, I've gone with the 4 AM - 8 AM delivery time. (I think one instance might have been a product with topical Benadryl, for itching.)
There is a reason Amazon achieve such great success and scale, and that is because it provides a superior service. Amazon puts the “Creative” in “Creative Destruction.”
In December 2023, I bought a Speediance home gym machine (which I love, BTW). I could order it either directly from the company or through Amazon. I chose Amazon because I've been a customer since 1997 and I trust them. The machine weighs about 200 pounds. I live in a 3rd-floor condo with no elevator. Amazon contracted with a 3rd-party shipper. When the machine arrived, they refused to bring it upstairs, saying that wasn't in their contract. I had to leave it on the ground outside the building, and the next day hire a moving company to bring it up to me, for $250. I called Amazon to complain. The rep I spoke to apologized, agreed that that wasn't right, and asked if a $250 credit to my account would make it right. Of course it would. She did not ask for a receipt, did not pass me off to a supervisor. Just fixed the problem on the honor system in less than 5 minutes.
I think most of this is about competition. Amazon are great, but more importantly, almost anyone can start competing with Amazon. It isn't like a government run service, where there's one of them that stays in business, regardless, and also, doesn't have the geographical lack of competition.
People romanticise mom and pop stores, but we got rid of them for a reason. They were expensive, inefficient and often had lousy service. Because where else were you going to go? As people became more mobile they could go to a shop on the other side of town.
We live in an amazing time.
Or, an Amazonian time. :-)
How would Amazon treat you if it had a monopoly on force?
Granted, our relationship with the government, or any entity with a monopoly on force, is not entirely voluntary. But that’s not the point, is it? The point is how well something *can* be done. And in a matrix of choice between providers of services, one might want to consider having more things done by the “vendor” that has elected to provide superb service in exchange for the opportunity of profit. That’s part of the struggle between we free marketeers and socialists.
Instead of imagining how Amazon might behave with a force monopoly, imagine how government might perform if tax receipts were conditioned on quality of service.
I imagine not very well, but then we would be living in some sort of strange cyberpunk dystopia.
Amazon is amazing. The client service is off the charts. The only question is: why is it so cheap? For the convenience and client service, one should be willing to pay a premium, but in fact it is typically cheaper than other sources.
When my European friends get down on America, one of my responses is: only America could produce an Amazon (or a Costco, for that matter).
Trump's tariffs fix that "cheap" part. But it's all to Make America ... you know the rest.
The problem with Amazon is that they have a de facto price parity policy: see the class action lawsuit Hopper V. Amazon. Amazon, for all their legitimate conveniences, takes a huge 10-30% cut; so, effectively, since about 50% of e-commerce is on Amazon, we're all paying a 10-30% Amazon tax since we can't find most products for cheaper outside Amazon as most sellers can't sell for cheaper elsewhere or otherwise they lose access to half the market.
Granted, Amazon is better than the USG, but that is a pretty low bar. Amazon also has a serious issue with the quality of goods sold.
People get unreasonably worked up about the quality of low-cost goods. They buy a $5 wrench from a no-name Chinese brand instead of a $25 name-brand American wrench, then get angry when it breaks. But if the cheap wrench has even a 20% chance of not breaking, it's a good buy! Case in point: I can blow through 15 pairs of cheap Amazon sunglasses and *still* come out ahead compared with Ray-Bans.
I think this has to do with an overly strong sense of "justice," or taking some deep personal offence at having been "ripped off." You can buy very high-quality goods on Amazon, they are just a lot more expensive. When I buy something cheap, I know full well there's some chance it will break (and hey, that's what the review system is for). If it does break, it goes in the trash and I order a different brand's cheap Chinese product, or maybe bite the bullet and get the expensive name brand. But often, the cheapo brand works fine! Breakage is just a cost of doing business in a global economy.
There is absolutely a place in the market for goods that are much cheaper and lower in quality and I'm happy to make the trade.
I think a salute to Jeff Bezos is appropriate here. Now, I don't know what he's like a human being...perhaps he's not a nice person. But he pushed and pushed, when everyone derided Amazon for never making a profit, to just keep selling more and more, with incredibly quick delivery times, and with excellent customer service.
P.S. For some things, I buy late at night, and even on a weekend, and am given the option of a 4 AM - 8 AM delivery time the next day. For free, with Amazon Prime. For almost all items, I don't choose that, and just go with 8 AM to noon the following day. But a few times, I've gone with the 4 AM - 8 AM delivery time. (I think one instance might have been a product with topical Benadryl, for itching.)
Amazon is great!
There is a reason Amazon achieve such great success and scale, and that is because it provides a superior service. Amazon puts the “Creative” in “Creative Destruction.”