Amazon made a promise that it would remove from its website Google Chromecasts and Apple TVs. And true to its word, if you search on any of these you get Amazon Fire TV or Now TV as the top results.
But should Amazon be allowed to do this?
Amazon has grown to become a massive force in shopping, wiping out high street and online stores in the process. It now has a near monopoly on shopping. Amazon has achieved this by not paying tax at the same levels as its competitors and by offering fast class customer service. There are also stories about how it treats staff but that is a post for another day.
I always thought once Amazon had removed the competition it could raise its prices and nobody could stop them. In addition, it could start to decide what it was going to sell. But with such a monopoly and in some cases potentially being the only place to purchase a particular item, should any one company have the power to remove competitor’s products overnight? I think not.
Now it is clear there is more to this than meets the eye and I reckon behind the scenes there is some business fallout between the companies, but even so Amazon has a privileged position, a near monopoly and therefore should not be allowed to remove major products from other companies! I also think the timing is very deliberate to try and damage Apple’s release of their new Apple TV.
But do you agree?
Gavin's Gadgets & Photography 
Didn’t Apple do something similar with Fit bit devices from its store close to launch of the Apple Watch?
LikeLike
Yes but only temporarily while they rearranged the store. Difference here Jah is Amazon sell everything and have destroyed high street shops etc. So now their power is more scary
LikeLike
Amazon pay UK taxes. They changed their practices in May. Argos could have been our Amazon but were too lazy.
LikeLike
They don’t pay proper amount of UK Tax vs sales. Hopefully Argos can come back and take on Amazon.
LikeLike
Gavin, but Google and Apple and Starbucks don’t pay proper tax. In fact even Vodafone was accused of not paying proper tax. Blame poor legal enforcement I think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I get that. But that’s off topic slightly to my post. My post reflects the dominance of Amazon as the main shopping arena to buy a full range of goods, but that its using its monopoly to control what it sells and doesnt. I was pointing out that now it has killed off a lot of its competitors should it have the power to remove whatever it likes etc….
I dont mind it you agree or disagree either 🙂
LikeLike
Consumers have the choice on where to shop, many go to Amazon because they offer a great price and service, but if you go here and can’t get what you want then you go elsewhere. Any business selling other peoples products have the right to not sell them for whatever reason in my opinion. Making it compulsory is an absolute no, where is the differentiation and individualism of stores?
Will it hurt Apple and Google? In the long term no. Will it hurt Amazon, in the long term I don’t think so. In fact, if anything it helps because everyone is talking about the companies and their products.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All good points. I often get annoyed that the networks don’t sell the full range of mobile phones and the amazingly stupid decision of Samsung not to sell the Note 5 in Europe.
LikeLiked by 2 people
My opinion you are 100% correct
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think Amazon is well within its rights to remove competing products from its stores. If Apple (Apple doesn’t let apps mention the names of competing brands in the app store) and Google aren’t compelled to sell Amazon or each others products, Amazon should do what it wants.
And I think there are other options available to the customers would would want to buy the Apple TV or Chromecast like the Apple Store (Physical and online) and the Play Store.
LikeLiked by 1 person