I know a lot of people discuss how Amazon never exposes actual sales numbers to the world, and just tell us how great things are going. Well, just seconds before I posted here, I checked the hot stuff at Alexa "http://www.alexa.com/whatshot" and on the hot products Top Ten list are seven Amazon hardware products with the Amazon Fire Phone 32GB being #3 on the list:
Hot Products
Amazon owns Alexa. The "Hot Products" are not top selling products but what Amazon wants to promote.
Dumping is something American companies use when they can't compete with a foreign competitor. Sometimes the charge is valid, sometimes (usually when used by the auto industry) it's not.
Their CTO needs to be fired just for this stupid statement. It's clear they got the product wrong, not the pricing when even FREE (99 pennies) is not low enough to move the inventory.
Their CTO needs to be fired just for this stupid statement. It's clear they got the product wrong, not the pricing when even FREE (99 pennies) is not low enough to move the inventory.
Profits are meaningless to Amazon. Their CTO has nothing to worry about.
Dumping is something American companies use when they can't compete with a foreign competitor. Sometimes the charge is valid, sometimes (usually when used by the auto industry) it's not.
Dumping can be done by foreign companies in this country as well. It is not uniquely American. It is usually done when an industry is heavily subsidized by a government—the foreign steel industry being a notable example. Note, the discussion below, while indicating international behavior, does not limit it to that.
At any rate, definitional squabbles aside, Amazon's pricing policies could be considered indicative of monopolistic behavior (an attempt to stifle competition by pricing their products lower than possible for the competition this making it unprofitable for the competition to continue operations or, at least, continuing to sell that product.)
Dumping can be done by foreign companies in this country as well. It is not uniquely American. It is usually done when an industry is heavily subsidized by a government—the foreign steel industry being a notable example. Note, the discussion below, while indicating international behavior, does not limit it to that.
At any rate, definitional squabbles aside, Amazon's pricing policies could be considered indicative of monopolistic behavior (an attempt to stifle competition by pricing their products lower than possible for the competition this making it unprofitable for the competition to continue operations or, at least, continuing to sell that product.)
It's an opinion. Okay?
Seems you're the one "squabbling" over commonly understood definitions.
It's 99 cents and it's not selling!! How much cheaper can you make it?!?!
You could instead buy yourself a delicious breakfast sandwich from McDonalds for the same price. So you have to ask yourself, what will it be.......
What's scary is that one may actually have to think about that decision for a few seconds,,,,
Amazon made the Free Fire Fone virtually free a month ago. They still have $83 millions dollars in inventory. I would say things are going well. Maybe they could lower the price even more. How about they pay us $200 to buy the phone. It'll be like the used car sells man (not meaning to offend anyone). We lose $200 a car but we make it up with VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME!
Actually, it's 99 cents and free Amazon Prime for a year ... they are hoping that offering Prime will lock in users for a 2nd year at full price since the Fire is primarily an Amazon consumption and purchasing device, so you could say they expect the final price to be 99.99 ... and that is on a contract that locks you in with a cell provider for 2 years, otherwise you are paying $499 for the phone.
Comments
I know a lot of people discuss how Amazon never exposes actual sales numbers to the world, and just tell us how great things are going. Well, just seconds before I posted here, I checked the hot stuff at Alexa "http://www.alexa.com/whatshot" and on the hot products Top Ten list are seven Amazon hardware products with the Amazon Fire Phone 32GB being #3 on the list:
Hot Products
Amazon owns Alexa. The "Hot Products" are not top selling products but what Amazon wants to promote.
If the Fire phone was free, I might consider it.
How can it be either dumping or predatory pricing when no one wants the product?
You've no proof of illegality occurring.
And, even if a prosecutor brings a case, that in itself is not proof either.
So, what's your point?
Still, I'm entitled to have an opinion.
Of course. That doesn't make it valid.
Dumping is something American companies use when they can't compete with a foreign competitor. Sometimes the charge is valid, sometimes (usually when used by the auto industry) it's not.
Profits are meaningless to Amazon. Their CTO has nothing to worry about.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
At any rate, definitional squabbles aside, Amazon's pricing policies could be considered indicative of monopolistic behavior (an attempt to stifle competition by pricing their products lower than possible for the competition this making it unprofitable for the competition to continue operations or, at least, continuing to sell that product.)
It's an opinion. Okay?
Seems you're the one "squabbling" over commonly understood definitions.
99 cents.
What's scary is that one may actually have to think about that decision for a few seconds,,,,
"No" cents.
Predatory pricing happens most often with the same product, not necessarily a similar one.
Free without contract probably still wouldn't be enough to move these paperweights
99 cents.
Actually, it's 99 cents and free Amazon Prime for a year ... they are hoping that offering Prime will lock in users for a 2nd year at full price since the Fire is primarily an Amazon consumption and purchasing device, so you could say they expect the final price to be 99.99 ... and that is on a contract that locks you in with a cell provider for 2 years, otherwise you are paying $499 for the phone.
Oh hell nah.....