There's a cheat-code in US #antitrustm it's been increasingly used since the #Reagan administration, when the "#ConsumerWelfare" theory ("#monopolies are fine, so long as the lower prices") shoved aside the long-established idea that antitrust law existed to prevent monopolies from forming *at all*.

-

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/06/attention-rents/#consumer-welfare-queens

1/

Pluralistic: Amazon is a ripoff (06 Nov 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

The idea that a company can do anything to create or continue a monopoly so long as its prices go down and/or its quality goes up is directly to blame for the rise of #BigTech. These companies burned through investors' cash for *years*, selling goods and services below cost, or even giving stuff away for free. Think of #Uber, who lost $0.41 on every dollar they brought in for their first 13 years of existence, a move that cost their investors (mostly Saudi royals) $31 billion.

2/

The monopoly cheerleaders in the consumer welfare camp understood that these money-losing orgies could not go on forever, and that the investors who financed them weren't doing so for charitable purposes. But they dismissed the possibility that would-be monopolists could raise prices after attaining dominance, because these prices hikes would bring new competitors into the market, starting the process over again.

3/

Well, Uber has doubled the price of a ride and halved the wages of its drivers (not that consumer welfare theorists care about workers' wages - they care about *consumer* welfare, not *worker* welfare). And not just Uber: companies that captured whole markets have jacked up prices and lowered quality across the board, a Great Enshittening whose playbook has been dubbed "#VenturePredation":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/19/fake-it-till-you-make-it/#millennial-lifestyle-subsidy

4/

Pluralistic: Venture predation (19 May 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

Not only was this turn predictable - it was *predicted*. Back in 2017, #LinaKhan - then a law student - published a earthshaking *#YaleLawJournal* paper, "#AmazonsAntitrustParadox," laying out how monopolists would trap their customers and block new competitors as they raised prices and lowered quality:

https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox

5/

Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox

Amazon is the titan of twenty-first century commerce. In addition to being a retailer, it is now a marketing platform, a delivery and logistics network, a payment service, a credit lender, an auction house, a major book publisher, a producer of television and films, a fashion designer, a hardware manufacturer, and a leading host of cloud server space.

Today, Khan is the chair of the #FTC, and has brought a case against Amazon that turns her legal theories into practice, backed by a cheering chorus of Amazon customers, workers, suppliers and competitors who've been cheated by the e-commerce giant:

https://pluralistic.net/ApexPredator

Khan's case argues that Amazon is not the house of bargains that it's widely billed as.

6/

Opinion | Lina Khan vs. Amazon

Why Lina Khan and the F.T.C. must prevail in their long-awaited lawsuit against Amazon.

The New York Times

She points to the sky-high fees Amazon extracts from sellers (45-51% of each dollar!) and the company's use of #MostFavoredNation deals to force sellers who raise their Amazon prices to pay those rents to raise prices everywhere else, too:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/25/greedflation/#commissar-bezos

Now, a new Amazon Paradox has dropped, and it drills into another way that Amazon overcharges most of us by as much as 29% on nearly every purchase, disqualifying it from invoking that consumer welfare cheat code.

7/

Pluralistic: How Amazon makes everything you buy more expensive, no matter where you buy it (25 Apr 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

The new paper is "#AmazonsPricingParadox," from law professors #RoryVanLoo and #NikitaAggarwal, for the *#HarvardJournalOfLawAndTechnology*:

https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/3645/

The authors concede that while Amazon *does* have some great bargains, it goes to enormous lengths to make it nearly impossible to *get* those bargains.

8/

Amazon's Pricing Paradox

Antitrust scholars have widely debated the apparent paradox of Amazon seemingly wielding monopoly power while offering low prices to consumers. A single company’s behavior thereby helped spark an intellectual renaissance as scholars debated why Amazon’s prices were so low, whether antitrust enforcers should intervene, and, eventually, how the field should be reformed for the era of large online platforms. One of the few things that all parties have agreed upon amidst those contentious conversations is that Amazon offers low prices. This Article challenges that assumption by demonstrating that Amazon charges higher prices than commonly understood. More importantly, unraveling the disconnect between perception and reality yields broader insights. One of the reasons why perceptions of Amazon’s pricing have remained disconnected from reality is that conversations about regulating Amazon have paid inadequate attention to behavioral economics. Behavioral economics reveals how the company leverages its sophisticated algorithms and large datasets to build a marketplace of consumer misperception by, for instance, making it difficult to find the lowest prices. Such practices undermine competition, in the uncontroversial economic sense of the word. But these practices reside in the domain of consumer law, not antitrust. Thus, a behavioral consumer lens is necessary to see that what was originally framed as an antitrust paradox is better viewed as a pricing paradox. To see the full set of concrete legal solutions for promoting competition in Amazon’s marketplace and beyond, it will be important to move consumer law out of antitrust’s shadows. These two bodies of law operating at full force offer the best chance for an era of open retail.

Scholarly Commons at Boston University School of Law

Drawing from the literature on #BehavioralEconomics, the authors make the reasonable (and experimentally verified) assumption that shoppers generally assume that the top results in an Amazon search are the best results, and click on those.

But Amazon's search-ordering is enshittified: it shifts value from sellers and shoppers (you!) to the company.

9/

A combination of self-preferencing (upranking Amazon's knock-offs), pay-for-placement (ads), other forms of payola (whether a merchant pays for Prime), and #JunkAds (that don't match your search) turn Amazon's search-ordering into a rigged casino game.

The ability to manipulate customers and sellers and get more money from both explaiins Amazon's incentives to use its internal search tool, rather than, say, searching Amazon via Google, which can yield *far* superior results.

10/

For years, Amazon ran a program called #AmazonSmile, where a share of every purchase you made would be given to a charity of your choice - but only if you found that item by searching for it on Amazon, and not via Google or a direct link:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys

11/

Pluralistic: Tiktok’s enshittification (21 Jan 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

In their new paper, the authors extract and analyze a large dataset of common items you might buy on Amazon, determining which result is best - the lowest price at the highest rating - and then calculating how much more you'll pay for that item if you click the first relevant (non-ad) item on the search results.

If you trust Amazon search to find you the best product and click that first link, *you will pay a 29% premium* for that item.

12/

If you expand your selection to the "headline" - the first four items, which are often all that's visible without scrolling - you'll pay an average of 25% more. That top row accounts for 64% of Amazon's clicks.

On average, the best deal on Amazon is found in the *seventeenth slot* in the search results. Seventeen!

13/

Amazon argues that none of this matters, because it allows users to refine their searches to get the best bargains, but Amazon's search won't let you factor in #UnitPricing - that is, the price per unit. So if you order your search by price, the seller who's offering a single pencil for $10 will show up above a seller who's offering *ten* pencils for $10.01.

14/

Here's an iron law of cons: any time someone adds complexity to a proposition bet, the complexity exists *solely* to make it hard for you to figure out if you're getting a good deal. Whether that's the lines on a craps table, the complex interplay of deductibles and co-pays on your health insurance, the menu of fees your bank charges, or the add-ons for your cell-phone plan, the complexity exists to confound your intuition and overwhelm your reason:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/04/house-always-wins/#are-you-on-drugs

15/

Pluralistic: 04 May 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

And Amazon certainly knows how to pile on the complexity! First, there's the irrelevant results - AAA batteries that show up in a search for AA batteries, or dog accessories that show up in a search for cat accessories:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/28/enshittification/#relentless-payola

Then there's the #DripPricing: extra charges that get tacked on at checkout, like shipping fees.

16/

Pluralistic: How monopoly enshittified Amazon/28 Nov 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

I once found an item on Amazon that advertised "free shipping" - but at checkout, that "free shipping" came with a delivery date that was *three months* in the future. Upgrading to shipping in the current quarter *doubled* the price.

Drip pricing makes it hard to figure out if Prime is a good deal, too.

17/

Recall that Amazon already comps shipping on orders over $25, so a potential Prime purchaser has to evaluate whether they'll place enough sub-$25 orders in the coming year to justify the price - and also factor in the fact that Prime items are often more expensive on a per-unit basis than their non-Prime equivalents.

18/

Yes, Prime comes with other perks - music and videos - but valuing these just adds complexity to your calculations about whether Prime is a good buy for you, and requires that you factor in the possibility that Amazon will enshittify those services and reduce their value in the coming year, say, by taking away the ability to turn off shuffle when listening to music:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-prime-music-alexa-restrictions-shuffle-11674054533

Or stuffing ads into your videos:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/22/23885242/amazon-prime-tv-movies-streaming-ads-subscription-date

19/

Alexa, That Isn’t Elvis! New Music Shuffle Irks Amazon Prime Users

Bigger song catalog brings less choice for some; ‘a lot of cussing’

WSJ

Finally, there's the nonsense labels that Amazon pastes onto its search results: "Best Seller," "Climate Pledge Friendly," "Highly Rated," "Top Rated From Our Brands" and other gibberish that doesn't necessarily mean what it seems like it means. Is an item a "best seller" because it was briefly price-dropped, or elevated in search results, or both, or because other shoppers genuinely liked it better?

20/

The authors conclude that getting the best price on Amazon requires that you "first spend considerable time searching through pages of results and then utilize, at a minimum, spreadsheet algebraic capabilities to determine the product’s full price...[and] somehow de-bias from the psychological effects of anchoring, and labels such as 'limited time deal' and 'Best Seller,' as well as many other subtle psychological influences."

21/

Amazon says it's entitled to use the consumer welfare cheat-code to get out of antitrust enforcement because it has so many bargains. But to get those bargains, you have to pay such minutely detailed attention - literally spreadsheeting your options and hand-coding mathematical formulas to compare them - that you'll almost certainly fail. The price of failure is incredibly high - a 25-29% overcharge on every purchase.

22/

Amazon's burying of this vital information will be familiar to #DouglasAdams readers, as the "#BewareOfTheLeopard" tactic. It's not even the first time Amazon's deployed it:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/27/beware-of-the-leopard/#relentless

Another group of scholars recently coined a useful term to describe this ripoff: in a paper published last week, @timoreilly, #MarianaMazzucato and #IlanStrauss dubbed the costs of all this complexity #AttentionRents:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/03/subprime-attention-rent-crisis/#euthanize-rentiers

23/

Pluralistic: 27 Mar 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

It's fascinating to see these two different groups of scholars, coming at the problem from many disciplines, converging on the same analysis! When technologists, trad economists, behavioral economists, and antitrust lawyers all study Amazon and point to the same sleazy tactic as being at the heart of the scam, it feels like maybe we're having A Moment. What's more, all of this is so thoroughly presaged by Khan's 2018 paper that it suggests that she's a bona fide *prophet*.

24/

The authors of this new paper are pretty confident that this gimmick violates antitrust law. They point out that it doesn't matter if Amazon customers feel like they're getting a good deal - just as it doesn't matter if don't know that you got charged a higher rate for your mortgage because you're Black, that's still illegal.

What's more, consumer protection law doesn't require that the merchant *intends* to rip you off.

25/

There's plenty of laws requiring supermarkets to post unit prices. These laws don't start from the assumption that supermarkets who don't use unit pricing are trying to scam! Rather, they start from the assumption that you will make better-informed purchases if you have that information, and so you should get it.

Regulating the presentation of prices is firmly in the purview of antitrust law, especially consumer welfare antitrust, which fetishizes low prices above all else.

26/

@pluralistic A quick test usable for items that have "real" brands rather than meaningless alphabet soup is to try and find them on other sites and businesses that play less games with the prices.

In many cases the "limited time" discount isn't amazing or works out *exclusively* because the other store you'd have to drive to otherwise charges shipping fees that tilt the pad in Amazon's way.
@pluralistic As a slight aside, #OrgMode's spreadsheeting features are quite nice and sufficient for the task of handling online purchases, for the most part.

calc.el is also a wonderful calculator, with fraction-mode helping to mitigate the impact of floating-point imprecision by enabling symbolic manipulation of division as fractions. (Of course you can set arbitrarily high precision on floats operations too.)

#Calc #Emacs
@pluralistic One way to help with that is to consider any attempt at using FOMO to be a personal insult and an attempt at manipulation.

Which it largely is, so that works out pretty well.
@pluralistic Sometimes the reviews can help figuring out, but since they seem to get deleted sometimes, it is entirely undecidable in many cases.

At least some obvious scams reusing the postings but modifying them to be about a completely different item often forget to remove the reviews that make it blatantly obvious it's unrelated.
@pluralistic They all require accepting #proprietary #DRM so they're effectively worthless.
@pluralistic This does tend to be the case if you frequently buy electronic components and other utility parts.

Some of the Prime prices also do get a significant margin dropped for a length of time I suspect to be closely corelated with how many actually end-up buying the item while it's discounted, so as to diminish the number of people that actually get to benefit from the discount.
@pluralistic This point reminds of when the then-CEO of New Zealand’s largest telco admitted "Think about pricing. What has every telco in the world done in the past? It's used confusion as its chief marketing tool. And that's fine," https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/gattung-admits-telcos-not-being-straight/CVL6FXSNGGNID32ZGUPGWPQHTE/
Gattung admits Telcos not being straight

Latest breaking news articles, photos, video, blogs, reviews, analysis, opinion and reader comment from New Zealand and around the World - NZ Herald

NZ Herald
@pluralistic Anyone who thinks Amazon's filter and sort options negate the algorithm problem has never used them (or has, but is an oblivious fool).
@pluralistic The lack of support for unit pricing effectively makes search-by-price entirely useless.

@pluralistic Those Bastards!

"For years, Amazon ran a program called #AmazonSmile, where a share of every purchase you made would be given to a charity of your choice - but only if you found that item by searching for it on Amazon, and not via Google or a direct link: https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys

Pluralistic: Tiktok’s enshittification (21 Jan 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

@MarcusHayes @pluralistic
If you came in from a direct link or Google there would be a popup asking if you wanted to instead open the page in AmazonSmile.

Uggh. Can't believe I just defended Amazon.

Of course they did get rid of the program, with the explanation that somehow this would lead to increased charitable contributions.

@jetton @pluralistic

Yes! We used to have to remember to change pages to get that perk.

It was all just a way to give ourselves permission to buy more stuff we don't need... Because we're helping fund charities.