
Washington Post to be sold to Jeff Bezos - Volscio
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/washington-post-to-be-sold-to-jeff-bezos/2013/08/05/ca537c9e-fe0c-11e2-9711-3708310f6f4d_story.html
======
ChuckMcM
I think this is a bold move by Bezos. One of the interesting data points in
the world of Journalism has been the transition of the New York Time from
mostly paper to being mostly digital. Something Jeff is profoundly aware of.

Every morning while I eat my breakfast I download the Wall Street Journal and
times to my iPad, and on the train to work scan them and this weeks Economist
for interesting stories of the day, combined with this month's Scientific
American, Smithsonian, and Science News.

If I could use Evernote with those "publications" on the iPad I could be very
efficient in my collection of various inputs on news of the day. For now, I'm
constrained to making notes to myself in my notebook.

To pull an interesting analogy here, Google sees everything through the lens
of "You will be connected 100% of the time to the network." which is their
future point that they are building systems around, sometimes today they seem
ungainly or even useless when no network is available. Jeff (and Amazon) seems
to see everything through the lens of "You will consume all of your media on a
tablet like device." and building around the complete media experience there.

~~~
nwzpaperman
It's $250mm for the WaPo brand. Empowering the ordinary citizen to contribute
to the global pool of community information is the future. Blogging was the
first attempt in this direction, but it has failed because the distributed
nature of blogs doesn't support __content discovery __.

As far as I'm concerned, AMZN already has plenty of brand recognition to talk
about any technological innovation they might integrate with the WaPo brand. I
look forward to AMZN playing its cards in the space and seeing if they can
compete against a truly focused and unencumbered competitor.

Production is easy, discovery and profitability are the problems.

Best wishes, Bezos!

~~~
austenallred
Journalistic institutions, in an effort to inform the masses, perform three
critical functions: 1. Production of information, 2. Curation of information
3. Verification of information. A more colloquial way to say that might be
"creation, curation, and fact-checking."

So far the creation aspect is almost entirely dominated by ordinary citizens.
With nearly everyone carrying internet-connected devices for photo, video and
text input, there's simply no way a news organization, no matter how large or
well funded, can keep up.

Where "News" is still lacking now has more to do with the latter two points.
The best content is invariably on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Vine, etc. but
finding that needle in the haystack that is a news event is borderline
impossible for the "ordinary citizen." Even the major news organizations are
largely poring over the data that comes in and trying to find the best stuff.
The third part - the fact checking- not many have time for anymore. The world
moves so quickly that verifying accuracy is much less beneficial than seeking
the next scoop. News orgs can move fast, make mistakes, and issue retractions
later if they were wrong. Or they can just say "we're getting reports that..."
(Translation: "We're watching Twitter and people are saying...")

I truly believe that creating a system that allows ordinary citizens to curate
(vote on) and fact check the firehose of information flowing through social
media networks is the bright, sustainable, profitable (!) future of
journalism.

Full disclosure: I've been building and testing a product for a year that does
precisely that, so I'm a little bit biased.

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
> So far the creation aspect is almost entirely dominated by ordinary
> citizens.

Not true at all. The in depth long-form journalism that e.g. Matt Taibi does
at Rolling Stone
[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog](http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog)
_cannot_ be done by people who have day jobs with smartphone on a street
corner. And it's thousands of times more valuable than the "man bites dog"
type of stories that Joe Smartphone can capture.

~~~
mercer
Indeed! I have some journalist friends who, as a group, spent months just to
write one piece of investigative journalism.

Another journalist friend once managed to work on something like that on his
own, but only through crowdfunding.

Good journalism is expensive!

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
Ah yes, "investigative journalism", or as I like to think of it, "journalism".
Not just reporting.

~~~
mercer
Indeed! I did a minor in journalism in the hopes of perhaps going in that
direction professionally, only to realize that my idea of journalism was
nothing like reality.

We spent a significant portion of the classes just learning how to write news
items. The teacher then told us that what we were doing one day a week for six
months is what full-time journalism students spend an entire year doing, and
that this is much of what they'll be doing once they enter the job market.

She specifically advised those of us interested in being journalists to just
get really good in our academic field, and move into journalism as
'specialists' from there.

------
miles
_Few people were aware that a sale was in the works for the paper, whose
reporters have broken such stories as the Pentagon Papers, the Watergate
scandals and disclosures about the National Security Administration’s
surveillance program in May._

Claiming credit for the NSA story seems disingenuous at best, especially given
their antagonism towards Snowden:

[http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/how-
washingt...](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/how-washington-
post-lost-prism-exclusive/66048/)

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130702/11474423694/washin...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130702/11474423694/washington-
post-stop-us-before-we-do-any-more-real-journalism-like-that-cute-little-
guardian-paper.shtml)

[http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/washing...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/washington-
post-walter-pincus-correction)

EDIT: While acknowledging the WaPo's significant contributions in the early
70s, it seems like they lost their way somewhere along the line:

 _Washington Post Kills Account of Its Failures in Iraq Reporting and Runs a
Defense Instead_ [http://gawker.com/5992158/washington-post-kills-account-
of-i...](http://gawker.com/5992158/washington-post-kills-account-of-its-
failures-in-iraq-reporting-and-runs-a-defense-instead)

~~~
untog
Can we have just one thread in HN that doesn't mention Snowden?

~~~
anologwintermut
I'd settle for a top comment that doesn't mention Snowden.

~~~
milsorgen
Yes, it's best we forget the whole affair and move on.

~~~
anologwintermut
It's actually probably best, from the point of view of dealing with the NSA
wiretapping, that we forget about Snowden and focus on what the NSA is still
doing.

So the comment was both off topic and toxic towards what it wanted to advance.

------
guard-of-terra
\- Mr. Bezos, we've bought Washington Post as you ordered.

\- Good. I hope it's a fresh issue?

\- ...issue!?

~~~
w-m
It.. seemed neater.

------
epistasis
>“There would be change with or without new ownership. But the key thing I
hope people will take away from this is that the values of The Post do not
need changing. The duty of the paper is to the readers, not the owners.”

The Washington Post is an important institution for the USA, and comments like
this make it seem that Bezos will be a good steward. I hope, and am fairly
certain, that this is a good thing for everyone involved.

~~~
aridiculous
Apart from believing a public statement, do you have any reason to believe he
will be a good steward of a journalistic entity?

As far as I know, he has no experience in reporting the unbiased truth and a
lot of experience in selling stuff.

~~~
bennyg
As far as I know, he has expertise in launching innovative technology at scale
- something the Post desperately needs to stay afloat. Removing the politics
of the business and replacing with innovation would do the whole country some
good.

~~~
nfoz
Innovation _is_ political.

~~~
bennyg
Sure. But a family-run, corporate business is definitely more so.

------
aridiculous
Looks like Bezos has a propaganda arm now.

I mean, sorry for the cynicism, but this is an obvious conflict of interest.
Retail, distribution, infrastructure, and now politics & media.

The man can do what he wants but the public probably shouldn't applaud this.

~~~
walid
> The man can do what he wants but the public probably shouldn't applaud this.

I kinda disagree with you on this one. Not only will something like the Kindle
and Kindle apps benefit, but this is a huge win since the old style of media
wasn't capable of figuring out how to stay in business. The reason why the
Kindle, iTunes, Google Play or any other store is succeeding while the rest
are failing is because all the rest didn't have monetized digital distribution
mechanisms. All media was given out for free and now you can't stay in
business if you decide to pay-wall your website. They weren't smart about it.
However all other walled gardens are thriving because they are monetized from
the get go and an effort has been made to make them simple to use.

The public is the winner here, and the Kindle. The only loser is probably B&N.

~~~
DamnYuppie
The public loses when a news source losses all credibility for being unbiased.
We need more news organizations that are doing real hard hitting journalism
and fewer media mouth pieces...long term this is not a good thing...

~~~
whatusername
You have a media mouthpiece owned by Bezos. Don't complain too much. My
choices for national media mouthpieces are owned by: Rupert Murdoch, Gina
Rhinehart, The Australian Government.

~~~
sien
Rinehart only owns 15% of Fairfax.

Also, what about all the TV and radio networks? Their ownership is wider than
the three people you list.

~~~
whatusername
Those 3 names feature pretty prominently in TV ownership. The two dedicated
news services are Murdoch (sky) and govt (abc24). Rinehart also has a decent
chunk of 10.

So I guess there's Kerry Stokes. And whoever is looking after 9 these days.

------
tptacek
I presume this means he hasn't bought the WaPo company, and thus not other
assets like Slate.

~~~
epistasis
No slate.com, though there are many other assets. Check out page 4:

>The deal does not include the company’s headquarters on 15th St. NW in
Washington (the building has been for sale since February), or Foreign Policy
magazine, Slate.com, the Root.com, the WaPo Labs digital-development operation
or Post-owned land along the Potomac River in Alexandria.

~~~
showerst
The headquarters building has actually been for sale anyway for a few months.

------
rgbrgb
Of all of the big Tech companies to have deep ties with a national news
source, Amazon seems like a decent fit. They were one of the first retailers
to allow negative reviews on their site and have a culture that allows
employees to make decisions that prioritize long term thinking over short term
profits ("willingness to be misunderstood for long periods of time"[1]). This
type of thinking is really important in an often buzzy industry that relies on
advertising for revenue.

[1]: [http://blogs.hbr.org/ideacast/2013/01/jeff-bezos-on-
leading-...](http://blogs.hbr.org/ideacast/2013/01/jeff-bezos-on-leading-for-
the.html)

------
salemh
Interesting. Warren Buffet has always gobbled up a large chunk of newspapers
(albeit not directly as an individual (ala Bezos), rather, through Berkshire
Hathaway): [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-13/buffett-poised-
to-a...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-13/buffett-poised-to-add-
newspapers-as-publishers-face-slump.html)

 _Buffett, 81, has been expanding Berkshire’s media operations in the past
year as he wagers that publications focused on local communities can withstand
the shift of readers and advertisers to the Internet. The billionaire’s firm
bought the publisher of his hometown paper, the Omaha World-Herald Co., in
December, and acquired 63 daily and weekly newspapers from Media General Inc.
(MEG) for $142 million last month._

Local papers vs something larger like WaPo.

And note: _While Buffett’s firm holds the largest stake in Washington Post Co.
(WPO) and has shares of Gannett Co., he said Berkshire is less likely to make
more stock market investments in the industry._

~~~
joonix
It's a trendy thing amongst billionaires lately. Even in Australia they are
trying it. I think there may have been a consensus of some sort made at one of
the many "billionaire conferences" that happens every year.

~~~
aridiculous
Or they recognize, as they should, the role that media plays in society. Being
in the media oligarchy expands your range of influence.

------
pla3rhat3r
Does anyone believe or trust in the American propaganda machine (i.e.
mainstream media)? We live in a world of stories that seem to be in a
perpetual loop. When we eliminate news for the sake of ratings or the number
of papers/magazines sold, then we return to a time when the media will resume
reporting on things that matter. The "news" in the US is a dumbed down version
of TMZ and that's being nice.

~~~
tnuc
Lots of people love the american media. They usually believe it by reading
news from one side of the political spectrum and confusing it with fact.

Half of what I read is bull and the other half is shit.

------
blackaspen
I don't see anyone majorly naysaying this move, but in case anyone does,
remember that Jeff is smart. Very, very smart. I've heard him referenced to as
"a hyper-intelligent alien who has only a tangential in human affairs" before.
AMZN represents a bit of this.

My money's on Jeff - he's got something up his sleeve here.

~~~
pclark
what does "… alien who has only a tangential in human affairs" even mean? he
owns a huge commerce company and just bought a newspaper. isn't he trying to
launch humans into space? didn't he recover the rockets from one of humanities
greatest space exploits? doesn't he have a famous laugh?

~~~
gohrt
It is from a Steve Yegge article accusing Bezos of treating his staff like
assembly line machines.

------
anigbrowl
Great. Now it will be delivered in a 6 cubic foot box.

------
badclient
_The first is the courage to say wait, be sure, slow down, get another source.
Real people and their reputations, livelihoods and families are at stake._

A 1000 times. At least it won't turn into the next PandoDaily(and its
BeachMint fiasco).

------
minimaxir
To put things into perspective, the $250M purchase price is lower than the
purchase price of The Huffington Post at $315M.

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/07/aol-huffington-
post...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/07/aol-huffington-
post_n_819375.html)

~~~
tanzam75
The Huffington Post does not have pension obligations, and it doesn't pay its
reporters six-figure salaries and benefits. (Well, not most of them, anyway.)

~~~
willbill
It doesn't do the same investigative reporting either.

------
adventured
I'm a bit surprised Buffett didn't make a play for that asset, particularly
given his recent expeditions in buying more newspapers. Perhaps he regards
Bezos as a better long term steward given the age difference. At the least
Buffett had to give his blessing to this deal, and absolutely knew about it
and chose not to outbid Bezos.

~~~
prewett
He played that asset a long time ago: Berkshire bought about 20% in 1973, and
was on the board until 2011. But yes, he absolutely knew about this.

He paid $11 million and is getting about $44 million after 40 years of holding
it. That's kind of lousy rate of return, and the newspaper business has some
question marks. So I can see why he might not be interested in buying it. And
if Bezos is buying the paper for civic-minded reasons, I could see Buffet
encouraging him.

~~~
jsyedidia
The Washington Post is only a small piece of the WPO company, which has a
market cap of $4.4 Billion. So by my math Buffett paid $11 million for a 20%
share of a company that's now worth $4.4 Billion, or a net return of 80 times
over 40 years, which isn't up to Buffett's usual returns, but not too bad.

------
cpr
The WaPo is just a prominent member of what Joe Sobran so elegantly called
"the Hive"\--people who all think pretty much alike ("enlightened liberalism",
in their own minds), know only other members of the Hive, and only read each
other. (The NYT being the other major member.)

And nothing will change.

------
larrys
Announced after market close. Expecting NYT stock to rise quite a bit.

I was surprised when Jack Welsh (x GE) wanted to buy the Boston Globe (he
backed out). He realized the the shine was one of the past. It's interesting
that Bezos sees value here but I think the value is in the same sense taking a
small part of his billions and buying something that is a legend. (After all
rich people buy art and other trinkets because they can so why not a
newspaper?).

~~~
adventured
I agree. Bezos is almost 50 years old now. What's the point of having $28
billion in assets if you can't do some interesting things with it (like Bezos
Expeditions, the millennium clock, or retrieve the apollo engines).

------
josh2600
How does this mesh with his investment in Business Insider?

Is Jeff pursuing a content strategy? Washington Post for investigation and
Business Insider for Biz news would be great.

Personally I'd rather have Jeff Bezos than Rupert Murdoch, but maybe that's
just me...

~~~
threeseed
Seriously don't EVER compare Bezos and Murdoch.

Murdoch is easily one of the most evil people to have ever walked on this
planet. He enabled the Iraq war which has seen a mass loss of life for no real
gain. He supported the widespread hacking of UK citizens. His meddling in
politics and elections in the UK, US and Australia is unprecedented, brazen
and has unquestionably undermined democracy.

Even now he flew over an Editor from the NY Post to Australia to influence the
election here who already is shocking the political scene here.

~~~
newbie12
Absurd to blame Murdoch for a war that had majorities of Congress vote for it.
If any media outlet deserves some blame for Iraq, it was the New York Times.
In any event, the Iraq war has saved lives compared to the sanctions regime
that it replaced.

~~~
threeseed
It is not absurd to blame Murdoch for his role in the war.

He didn't take a negative or neutral position. He actively campaigned for it
across three continents (UK, US and Australia). And it has been widely
reported that Blair was heavily influenced by Murdoch.

The NYT didn't officially take a position. It just failed in its duty to check
the facts.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq_War](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq_War)

------
lifeisstillgood
This is not a power grab - this is the natural effect of gravity - the last
twenty years saw an almost cataclismlc shift in strategic leverage from non-
Internet to Internet businesses, and now all that cash is exerting its pull -
and power is sliding over the table.

Just watch as the rest of the baby boomer generation die off and hand over
their assets.

~~~
foobarqux
What are you saying? That WaPo does not have strategic leverage or that the
demographics of the owner-class is changing?

~~~
lifeisstillgood
The latter

------
patmcguire
Is this in the category of buying sports teams, or does he expect to make
money off of it?

~~~
adventured
A little of both I suspect. The Washington Post can generate a very modest
profit if it's well run. It's around 1/4th to 1/5th the size of the New York
Times.

The question would seem to be, whether Bezos intends to run a tight profitable
ship, or if he is willing to forgo the profits for a larger staff. I'm hoping
he has something creative in mind, a new business model that isn't free+ads or
just a copy of what the NYT is doing.

WaPo is #8 by its daily circulation in the US, and #4 for its Sunday
circulation.

~~~
adamtj
I bet he puts up a paywall, but offers free access to Prime members. Combined
with instant video and other benefits, Prime starts to look pretty attractive,
even without the free shipping. But once you've got the free fast shipping,
it's much easier to justify buying stuff from Amazon instead.

------
tcpekin
If Bezos integrates this with Amazon, how could this change the newspaper with
respect to the Kindle and e-publishing? Could this change daily print media?

~~~
freehunter
The article says that Amazon will have no role in the purchase. Time will tell
if that's true, though. I'd love to have my Kindle be both my book library and
an automatically updated copy of the newspaper every morning. Having tried
Kindle newspapers, I've found them to be quite lacking (and pretty expensive).
Some Kindle newspapers are even missing entire sections of the print version!

~~~
eurleif
In this context, I think "Amazon will have no role in the purchase" just means
that Bezos is buying WaPo with his own money, and he will own it personally. I
don't think it precludes him from making deals between the two companies.

~~~
DannyBee
If he did, such a thing would usually need to be approved by a disinterested
majority of a disinterested quorum of directors.

~~~
eurleif
In practice, is that likely to be a serious impediment?

~~~
DannyBee
Maybe? It depends on whether the deal is plausibly good for the company or
not. If so, i'd say "no, it's not a serious impediment".

------
psbp
I'm not sure if this is good news. Doesn't this portend further monopolistic
control over publishing and distribution? Amazon isn't known to fairly and
openly distribute its content.

------
Eliezer
Let's all hope that this day we have witnessed the birth of the anti-Murdoch.

------
squozzer
I will celebrate by watching "Citizen Kane."

------
ferdo
I think that this signals that Bezos is going into the fish and chips
business.

------
peterwwillis
I was thinking about this when I heard the announcement, and I thought, what a
disruptor! Here are some ways that a newspaper (with "internet content") would
be superior than digital media:

    
    
      * Much larger viewing area than an iPad
      * It's more compact than an iPad
      * It's cheaper than an iPad
      * It's disposable
      * It's recyclable
      * You can use it in places digital media aren't allowed
        (security buildings, airplane takeoff/landing, subway, etc)
      * You don't have to know how to use it
      * You don't need a data plan or need to use a computer
      * You don't have to recharge it
    

All you have to do is create targeted content and sell to places that digital
media doesn't work as well. Fill with context-specific in-line ads and make it
more interesting to the target market audience. (And probably figure out a new
way to print it so that makes monetary sense)

------
Kurtz79
Lots of cynicism around here.

Nobody is saying that Bezos will be a steward of good journalism (I can't see
him doing much worse as the head of a major news medium than Rupert Murdoch,
though) and has reasons to buy the paper that go beyond, ultimately, making
more money.

But from a technology enthusiast standpoint, it can't be denied that the guy
has a amazing track record of innovating the sectors he has been involved in,
and personally I'm curious to see how he will tackle this one.

The main takeaway from the story, in my opinion, is seeing a steady trend of
the "new" technology companies trying to get in a position of influence, like
Facebook interested in getting into politics, Google having already plenty of
lobbying/funding activities, and now Amazon getting its own paper...

~~~
northwest
> I can't see him doing much worse as the head of a major news medium than
> Rupert Murdoch

Worst compliment ever.

~~~
brymaster
Off-topic but I've noticed you've racked up a lot of karma in a short period
of time:

created: 9 days ago

karma: 549

avg: 2.34

Has to be a record.

~~~
northwest
Yeah, I should stop saying intelligent things. ;-)

------
shawndumas
one page view

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/washington-post-to-
be...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/washington-post-to-be-sold-to-
jeff-bezos/2013/08/05/ca537c9e-fe0c-11e2-9711-3708310f6f4d_print.html)

~~~
hokietriz
I want the addition of a Single Page button to be one of his first
accomplishments.

~~~
kmfrk
He'll just patent it as 1-click viewing.

------
e3pi
"...The Internet is transforming almost every element of the news business:
shortening news cycles, eroding long-reliable revenue sources, and enabling
new kinds of competition, some of which bear little or no news-gathering
costs. There is no map, and charting a path ahead will not be easy. We will
need to invent, which means we will need to experiment.

"There is no map" -from a proven visionary worth $25.2B, leaves a whole lot of
successful innovations and failures open.

------
augustocallejas
From the article:

> Weymouth said the decision to sell The Post sprang from annual budget
> discussions she had with Graham late last year. “We talked about whether
> [The Washington Post Co.] was the right place to house The Post,” she said.
> “If journalism is the mission, given the pressures to cut costs and make
> profits, maybe [a publicly traded company] is not the best place for The
> Post.”

Does this mean that the future of much of journalism is in the non-profit
sector (think NPR)?

------
aaronbrethorst
I'm kind of surprised, but this seems like the best possible direction for
them. Sort of like Chris Hughes buying The New Republic, Bezos has the cash to
give the Post breathing room to find a direction that will be profitable. And,
ostensibly, he won't want to turn it into Buzzfeed.

~~~
larrys
"give the Post breathing room to find a direction that will be profitable"

Could be but I don't think that's the case. I think there is something else
going on here either vanity or some underlying access or asset that provides
much greater value to Bezos that has not much to do with Amazon either.

I mean if you have that much money you can afford to buy and have it lose
money for years just for other valuable benefits and access. WP is a
mouthpiece he could swing elections (influence is way beyond their
circulation).

~~~
untog
_I mean if you have that much money you can afford to buy and have it lose
money for years just for other valuable benefits and access._

You can, but you can also believe in journalism and be willing to spend some
of your money on keeping it alive.

Not sure we can really make an automatic judgement either way.

------
deepblueq
There's now a box in the lower-left informing me that I can view 20 articles
in a month before they'll put up a paywall. I don't recall ever seeing
anything about a paywall before.

If that's actually new, Bezos sure didn't waste any time monetizing things.

------
photorized
I am convinced one of his next moves is going to be brick and mortar. He has
already tested the concept of free showrooms for Amazon via the likes of
Barnes & Noble, Best Buy, etc - so it's only natural to move back to the
physical world.

------
mkr-hn
I remember reading a story about how he turned Amazon into a platform to make
it more nimble and faced a lot of resistance, and it gave me a good impression
of his leadership abilities. This purchase is probably a good thing.

------
serverascode
For some reason this blows my mind. Man, it would be so cool to own the paper
that paid the guys that broke Watergate. But it seems so...weird that it would
be Bezos. I'd love to see the first meeting.

------
Tloewald
I hope the plan involves taking WaPo's news gathering expertise and delivering
seamlessly through all possible channels -- don't just fix a newspaper, fix
the news.

------
jhuckestein
It's noteworthy that the Washington Post sells for $250MM, compared to for
example OMGPOP which sold for $200MM last year.

------
mehmehshoe
Meanwhile the Koch brothers want to buy the LA times...I will grab my popcorn
and wait for the hilarity.

------
ommunist
Was it what he negotiated at Bilderberg club this summer in Watford, UK?

------
crashoverdrive
Bezos goal may be to force users to more digital media. Amazon has been trying
to push its publications by forcing book print companies out of the market, by
cornering newspapers as well, Amazon could make it self the centralized
location for e-media.

------
MaysonL
Guess what the next freebie for Amazon Prime subscribers will be.

------
zpk
Another newspaper owned by a corporation. I'm sure this is going to end well.

Can't wait for it to become another CNBC infomercial.

~~~
asmithmd1
Jeff Bezos bought the Post personally - Amazon did not buy it.

~~~
zpk
Ah true, but the underlying effect will be the same.

------
rogerchucker
I think Jeff Bezos will be bigger than Steve Jobs one day.

------
rurban
Welcome to micromanagement to its extreme

------
kenshiro_o
Hope Bezos revamps the site's design. It's quite ugly.

