California Attorney General Rob Bonta last night filed a request for a preliminary injunction in California’s existing case against Amazon for price fixing. Attorney General Bonta’s 2022 lawsuit alleged that the company stifled competition and caused increased prices across California through its anticompetitive policies in order to avoid competing on price with other retailers. New evidence paints a clearer and more shocking picture. The motion for a preliminary injunction comes after a robust discovery process where California uncovered evidence of countless interactions in which Amazon, vendors, and Amazon’s competitors agree to increase and fix the prices of products on other retail websites to bolster Amazon’s profits. Time and again, across years and product categories, Amazon has reached out to its vendors and instructed them to increase retail prices on competitors’ websites, threatening dire consequences if vendors do not comply. Vendors, bullied by Amazon’s overwhelming bargaining leverage and fearing punishment, comply — agreeing to raise prices on competitors’ websites (often with the awareness and cooperation of the competing retailer), or to remove products from competing websites altogether. Amazon’s goal is to insulate itself from price competition by preventing lower retail prices in the market at the expense of American consumers who are already struggling with a crisis of affordability.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 8 months ago (10 children)

Companies like Amazon can't exist if people don't buy from them. The fact that you think people have to buy from them is the problem.

No one has to spend their money with Amazon. There's always going to be a personal responsibility aspect when people willingly do something they know is wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    We're not talking about Facebook. We're talking about buying things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] -5 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    How about... you do what you want with your own money and let other people do the same?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    I do. It's just the claim that people aren't personally responsible for where they choose to spend their money is preposterous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah, free will sucks like that...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    What, taking responsibility for your choices?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Yes. Because heaven forbid someone does something you don't like.

    People REALLY need to mind their own business. 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    Bro, I'm not denigrating anyone for spending money on Amazon. I'm guilty of forgetting the moral and ethical implications for a short term dopamine rush too.

    But I'm not going to delude myself into thinking I had to spend money with them.

    My problem is with people using flimsy excuses trying to assuage their guilt for doing something they knew was wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)