Not working for me on Firefox Mobile here, adblocker disabled.
But other things like embedded Google Maps also refuse to load, probably the same issue.
Could it be bad wording on the label - may be it means 7.5 percent of all units sold are Amazon brand, like the ebooks thing.
I don't know if this is related but bought a couple of things off EBay last week and they came wrapped in packaging labelled Amazon and with a packing list mentioning Amazon selling.
If the packing list mentions Amazon, you probably bought from an eBay dropshipper. They scan Amazon listings and repost all the listings +X% (where X=eBay fees+profit loading) to eBay. When you order from eBay, they just go ahead and order from Amazon on your behalf.
If you look up the product you bought on Amazon.com, you'll probably the find the price to be lower than you paid.
Is it me, or is traditional news always attacking tech?
Why don't I see the same fervor targeted at the likes of Walmart, who dominates traditional retail?
Or Comcast/AT&T owning our internet infrastructure, continuing to acquire other massive companies? They have massive media holdings now.
Or CVS acquiring Aetna?
> Why don't I see the same fervor targeted at the likes of Walmart, who dominates traditional retail?
The media spent the entire 1990s and early 2000s very aggressively attacking Walmart at every turn. They were the destroyers of all small towns; they were the anti-labor bully; they were the crusher of mom & pop shops everywhere. Some of it was accurate, some of it was typical media propaganda appealing to their audience. Walmart is still basically barred from opening stores in New York and San Francisco because of the Walmart-as-villain press job from that time.
The way this works is, now it's Amazon's turn to be the villain because they're the new giant on the block. Fair or not, it always works that way (see Microsoft today, vs Google as the new 1990s-Microsoft-style villain getting endless amounts of negative press; tomorrow some company will be the new villain that replaces Google in the media, and Google will be the old, less-feared company in the style of Microsoft now; and on it goes). No doubt Walmart is relishing that aspect of having to compete with them.
Youre not wrong that there is a lot of focus on tech specifically with regards to progressive anti-trust policy. But it doesnt have to be one or the other. Our definitions of what a monopoly is, like the article states, has to do with consumer pricing rather than if a firm is a monopoly or not.
Personally, I think amazon, if properly divided, could be dozens of healthy, competitive businesses. Maybe if there were less monolithic, open standards would be more important to facilitate cooperation and integration. In some ways this applies to the brick and mortar / ISP companies too.
