The Death of the Smart Shopper(theatlantic.com)
theatlantic.com
The Death of the Smart Shopper
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/02/online-amazon-shopping-informed-consumer-quality-control/673017/
21 comments
Given their ever increasing list of their stealth own brand ventures this seems unlikely. They clearly do want to sell too (selectively) not just provide the infra
The fantastic irony of using archive.is to remove the paywall on an article about the supposed modern lack of consumer sophistication.
Aside from that the article seems to completely fail to take notice of the fact that Amazon enjoys a rather extensive monopoly across most of it's operation. Of course the seller will always have more information than you, but if there's a large selection of sellers to choose from, then there's zero incentive for them to use that information _against_ me or to prevent me from having it.
Consumers don't lack savvy, the marketplace lacks options.
Aside from that the article seems to completely fail to take notice of the fact that Amazon enjoys a rather extensive monopoly across most of it's operation. Of course the seller will always have more information than you, but if there's a large selection of sellers to choose from, then there's zero incentive for them to use that information _against_ me or to prevent me from having it.
Consumers don't lack savvy, the marketplace lacks options.
I might be misinterpreting the article, but the first two paragraphs specifically describe the over-abundance of marketplace sellers offering similar and sometimes identical products. They're using the same seller platform - Amazon - but that doesn't seem the same as lacking marketplace options as a consumer.
Not sure if it's a perfect analogy, but if we compare the Amazon marketplace to a giant flea market, I think the claim that consumers need a reasonably high level of 'savvy' to operate effectively is pretty easy to defend. When there are lots of sellers, lots of noise, and difficulty verifying quality, the consumer will frequently lose out despite the surplus of marketplace options.
Not sure if it's a perfect analogy, but if we compare the Amazon marketplace to a giant flea market, I think the claim that consumers need a reasonably high level of 'savvy' to operate effectively is pretty easy to defend. When there are lots of sellers, lots of noise, and difficulty verifying quality, the consumer will frequently lose out despite the surplus of marketplace options.
Well there's 'Amazon', the market it provides. But there's also Amazon itself. Amazon itself doesn't really have competition. Therefore there's no insentive for it to clean up it's listings, protect consumers from bad actors or generally help consumers in anyway. If Amazon had to actually compete to attract customers to its platform then it would improve the experience.
Your own example proves the point. Flea markets might be cheap to run for the owner, but would people go there by choice if there were a superior alternative?
Your own example proves the point. Flea markets might be cheap to run for the owner, but would people go there by choice if there were a superior alternative?
> Aside from that the article seems to completely fail to take notice of the fact that Amazon enjoys a rather extensive monopoly across most of it's operation.
Well, it depends. Walmart's quarterly revenue is still higher, though they don't have quite as broad a selection of merchandise.
Well, it depends. Walmart's quarterly revenue is still higher, though they don't have quite as broad a selection of merchandise.
The actual title is: It's impossible to know what you're buying online
It's not even so much as online or off, it's the platforms who have interposed themselves between consumer and producer. Online, one has to actively seek independent retailers or manufacturers because the convenience factor even witb Shopify is still a discovery problem.
Relevant term: "Confusopoly"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusopoly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusopoly
My theory is that what Amazon has allowed is for people to cut out the middle-men, and this is ultimately good for the consumer.
Most of the well-known brands (e.g. Hamilton, Cuisinart, Betty Crocker in kitchen supplies) were essentially resellers sourcing from the same pool of Chinese manufacturers. Now the Chinese manufacturers are directly selling to consumers and competing with each other, and the business model for these reseller brands is suddenly defunct.
Most of the well-known brands (e.g. Hamilton, Cuisinart, Betty Crocker in kitchen supplies) were essentially resellers sourcing from the same pool of Chinese manufacturers. Now the Chinese manufacturers are directly selling to consumers and competing with each other, and the business model for these reseller brands is suddenly defunct.
I naively expected to see the same thing. However, it turns out that brands were (at least in some cases) useful intermediaries - especially where consumers are short on time. And if reputation fails, you can sue brands when they screw up. The host of ABCDEFG brand frying pans or whatever seem to rather create a race to the bottom where the only thing that is left is the price signal.
I suspect the lifecycle of a brand is different based on when products "commoditize".
In "non-commodity" products, brands represented a proprietary offering. Think back when a Trinitron CRT TV or monitor commanded a premium price. The label on the box meant it had a unique design and came from factories known for quality output.
In an industry like frying pans, small appliances, midrange electronics, basic modest-quality tools, these days, there is no special sauce. There's no breakthrough tech or unique manufacturing process. The best they can offer is "we curate the OEMs, selecting sensibly, holding to high standards." The brand is a signal of predictably consistent perhaps more than great. Now, that can work to an extent. The Costco Kirkland brand is probably the best example-- they make very little directly, but you know most products are going to be predictably middle-to-above average.
However, as a brand, the "Predictable OEM curation" just as hard to build as a "real manufacturing" brand, but much easier to undermine (how tight is your leash actually?) This is why you're still seeing the same brand names selling can openers and toaster ovens as your Grandma did. They're slowly burning through their original equity-- earned mostly when they were still direct manufacturers. It's still enough to present a headwind for new brands to take their place.
In a way, it's sort of weird that what we ended up with was the EQFFDN "psuedo-brand". Whoever is doing that marketing is creating an abstraction with no value. It conveys neither "directly quality manufacturing" nor "predictable curation" If they went to full transparency-- selling "Guangzhou Industrial Iron Forge #23" brand frying pans-- that at least restores the idea of "we at least know that they're using the same factory that at one time produced a product I was satisfied with."
In "non-commodity" products, brands represented a proprietary offering. Think back when a Trinitron CRT TV or monitor commanded a premium price. The label on the box meant it had a unique design and came from factories known for quality output.
In an industry like frying pans, small appliances, midrange electronics, basic modest-quality tools, these days, there is no special sauce. There's no breakthrough tech or unique manufacturing process. The best they can offer is "we curate the OEMs, selecting sensibly, holding to high standards." The brand is a signal of predictably consistent perhaps more than great. Now, that can work to an extent. The Costco Kirkland brand is probably the best example-- they make very little directly, but you know most products are going to be predictably middle-to-above average.
However, as a brand, the "Predictable OEM curation" just as hard to build as a "real manufacturing" brand, but much easier to undermine (how tight is your leash actually?) This is why you're still seeing the same brand names selling can openers and toaster ovens as your Grandma did. They're slowly burning through their original equity-- earned mostly when they were still direct manufacturers. It's still enough to present a headwind for new brands to take their place.
In a way, it's sort of weird that what we ended up with was the EQFFDN "psuedo-brand". Whoever is doing that marketing is creating an abstraction with no value. It conveys neither "directly quality manufacturing" nor "predictable curation" If they went to full transparency-- selling "Guangzhou Industrial Iron Forge #23" brand frying pans-- that at least restores the idea of "we at least know that they're using the same factory that at one time produced a product I was satisfied with."
There is a well-known brand backing them: Amazon. Their no questions asked return polucy gives consumers all the protection they need. Most consumers are pretty happy with this tradeoff and have optimized their shoppping habits accordingly.
Partially. Mostly, it's to be able to fold up and relaunch whenever. There's no need to keep or invest in reputation when it's disposable or not positive. OTOH, shill purchases of cheap items, SKU reuse, and nagging customers to leave reviews can inflate an items's rating.
Also, it's too much work for most manufacturers and vendors who are essentially selling low-end "flea market" items that they themselves wouldn't purchase. AliExpress and drop shippers on Amazon, eBay, and Etsy are guilty of pushing low-end items with barely / no concern for regulatory standards. I mean, have you seen the flaws in the USB deathdapters sold in the US and the "shower heaters" and "baby water heater" sold to South America that expose live wires.
Also, it's too much work for most manufacturers and vendors who are essentially selling low-end "flea market" items that they themselves wouldn't purchase. AliExpress and drop shippers on Amazon, eBay, and Etsy are guilty of pushing low-end items with barely / no concern for regulatory standards. I mean, have you seen the flaws in the USB deathdapters sold in the US and the "shower heaters" and "baby water heater" sold to South America that expose live wires.
So funny you mention the shower heaters. I experienced them first hand in two air bnbs I stayed in on Costa Rica a couple months ago. Live wires just hanging on the side of the shower I was using.
My take is that brands were mined, starting in the 80s, for their reputation by private equity. Before that, good brands put their reputations on the line.
Then PE came in and brought in MBA optimizers who realized they could have lower production costs by using overseas supplies. The quality obviously dropped as part of cost cutting.
Now we don’t have middlemen brands, but a lot of the direct from the Chinese mfg products have safety issues. Brands serve as a backdrop who can be sued, and as such have become a bit of the quality control that isn’t available when buying direct.
I, for one, have become a lot more brand conscious. For example, when I know a PE firm buys a company, that “brand value” almost immediately drops to zero for me. But when I know a company produces high quality and reliable goods, I’ll buy because I know somewhere there’s a person looking at preserving that value and doesn’t want to kill my dog or cat or child.
Then PE came in and brought in MBA optimizers who realized they could have lower production costs by using overseas supplies. The quality obviously dropped as part of cost cutting.
Now we don’t have middlemen brands, but a lot of the direct from the Chinese mfg products have safety issues. Brands serve as a backdrop who can be sued, and as such have become a bit of the quality control that isn’t available when buying direct.
I, for one, have become a lot more brand conscious. For example, when I know a PE firm buys a company, that “brand value” almost immediately drops to zero for me. But when I know a company produces high quality and reliable goods, I’ll buy because I know somewhere there’s a person looking at preserving that value and doesn’t want to kill my dog or cat or child.
A quick look at Amazon shows that's part of the problem is that now instead of a few well known middlemen it's now several hundred to several thousand. That's part of the article's point.
At first I was like "I hate malls and shops with their ads and upselling, I don't want Coca Cola, Lays, Snickers, and chewing gum with every purchase, I'm buying everything online", and now I'm like "they asked for my birth date and mobile phone number, somehow I managed to order without installing their app, then finally the item which arrived is nothing like the item on the photos and in the description, and it stinks".
Some market places seem to have things worked out though. I have been stung buying car parts from ebay a few times: wrong parts, badly described parts, lying about what they actually had in stock. etc. to the point where I stopped buying car parts there except for a couple of vendors I trust.
Rockauto seem to have it worked out. All the part equivalents laid out in price order, cross referenced properly with OEM part numbers and honesty about stock levels.
Just stop shopping where the experience is bad. If what you want is on aliexpress then ironically they seem to do a better job of policing vendors than amazon or ebay do.