Comment by systemerror

Comment by systemerror 21 hours ago

29 replies

Don't give money to amazon that is better spent on an amazingly efficient postal service. Amazon is subsidized by imaginary money until they put all their competition out of business(including USPS).

Fwirt 21 hours ago

My honest question is: If you pull shenanigans like this, isn't it actually making Amazon burn through said imaginary money, thus hastening its demise? The cost of delivering a potato has to be on the order of at least a couple dollars.

  • roncesvalles 19 hours ago

    I don't think Amazon is losing money. It's really just that efficient.

    E.g. an Amazon van rolls through my street multiple times a day. What is the marginal cost of them stopping at my house and dropping off a potato?

    • PaulDavisThe1st 19 hours ago

      At your house it might be fractions of a cent.

      At my house, it's a 140 mile round trip between the fulfillment center ("are you feeling fulfilled yet?") and the drop off location.

      OTOH, there's likely more of "you" than there are of "me" ...

      • ajdlinux 17 hours ago

        Assuming it's the US we're talking about, the federal minimum wage is $7.25, which means that if every worker involved is paid at the minimum wage, you incur a cent of labour costs every 4.97 person-seconds. AFAICT, most Amazon workers are paid substantially higher than the federal minimum wage. And that's just labour costs.

        While Amazon is efficient, "fractions of a cent" is probably the wrong order of magnitude for even the most efficient order.

        • hekkle 15 hours ago

          That's not even mentioning their additional overheads, like the cost of fuel for their idling van as they drop off your potato.

      • saaaaaam 16 hours ago

        You might be 140 miles round trip to the nearest fulfilment centre, but you're almost certainly closer to your nearest neighbours who regularly buy stuff from Amazon, so the van is probably coming pretty close to you any way.

      • [removed] 15 hours ago
        [deleted]
  • relaxing 21 hours ago

    Amazon will close your account before you can impact their bottom line.

    • crumpled 20 hours ago

      I think they let you (not YOU necessarily, but the proverbial you.) get away with stuff because they know your habits and you probably make more money for them than you realize.

      I can almost guarantee that everyone mentioned in that blog post is a habitual Amazon user. They're all renewing Prime each year at full price and making a ton of regular purchases. The family has even turned on the FOMO by making Prime a family social network with social pressure to stay. I see it as a self-own, personally.

      Edit: I'm taking part of this to the root of the thread

vidarh 20 hours ago

Can you explain? Amazon is wildly profitable, and while AWS is far higher margin than their retail businesses, everything I can find suggests their retail segment also has a healthy operating margin.

  • bandrami 14 hours ago

    If you put all of the money Amazon as a whole has taken since it was founded in 1994 in a stack on the left, and all of the money Amazon as a whole has spent since then in a stack on the right, the stack on the left is slightly larger, but this has only been true for a couple of years now.

    It's the difference in 1990s billionaires and 2020s billionaires. Bill Gates was so rich because he owned a lot of Microsoft shares and received profits from those shares as dividends. Jeff Bezos is so rich because he owns a lot of Amazon shares and people keep being willing to pay more and more for those shares so his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend).

    • vidarh 5 hours ago

      None of which supports the argument of the person I replied to that what you buy from them today is somehow "subsidised by imaginary money"

    • ornornor 10 hours ago

      > his notional net worth increases (AMZN has never paid a dividend).

      But that’s exactly the loophole: you can borrow for very cheap against this notional equity without incurring a cent in taxes (since divodends are never paid out)

    • [removed] 13 hours ago
      [deleted]
    • umanwizard 14 hours ago

      Can you share numbers? What are Amazon’s margins?

      • vidarh 5 hours ago

        Across the board they're about 11%, I believe, though retail seems to be about 5% despite being the bulk of revenue. AWS has far higher margins.

dec0dedab0de 21 hours ago

I hate USPS, and will not be doing anything to benefit them until they offer a way to limit my deliveries to once a month, and opt out of anything that has "or current resident"

At the very least they should charge more for bulk mail, not give out discounts.

  • jonpurdy 19 hours ago

    In Canada, you can place a red dot (or write no unsolicited mail) on your mailbox and they will withhold delivering anything not directly addressed to you.

    I was shocked when I moved to SF and found out there was no way to opt out of unaddressed mail (or "current resident").

    • euroderf 12 hours ago

      In Finland AFAICT there's no bulk postal rate. Instead, paper spam is delivered thru mail slots by private services that hit all the buildings in the neighborhood and drop collections of paper spam. So, many people post a note on their door opting out from this stuff. (Ei mainoksia = No ads.) It must be saving absolutely huge amounts of paper.

      • sgerenser 4 hours ago

        Fun fact: in the U.S. it’s illegal to put anything but mail (delivered by USPS) in a mailbox or mail slot. USPS wants a monopoly on that paper spam.

  • SoftTalker 19 hours ago

    Unfortunately bulk mail is the only thing paying the bills. That and being a last mile delivery service for Amazon.

    • umanwizard 18 hours ago

      Which is a totally valid reason to hate USPS.

      The USPS is a government-run spam delivery service that there is no way to opt out of. Those of us who do banking and other administrative tasks online would be better off if the government shut it down completely, or better yet subsidized it slightly so it doesn't have to deliver spam to survive.

      But as it is, I don't see any good reason to have any more respect for USPS than I do for any other spammer.

      • lkbm 15 hours ago

        Doesn't seem like USPS is the spammer. They're Gmail. People send spam and USPS/Gmail delivers it.

      • dec0dedab0de 18 hours ago

        Yes, exactly. I wish the post office were subsidized and acted in the interests of the public. But it is not, and does not.