For example, supermarkets have been in the generic brands business for decades. They contract out making some generic version a name brand product and sell it a lower price, giving it preferential space (both size and position) on the shelves. Why? To capture a greater portion of the profit for themselves.
Why is anyone surprised Amazon is any different?
I've said it once and I'll say it again: the current focus on antitrust in Big Tech is, at best, completely misguided. If anyone is guilty of anticompetitive behaviour, it's not Google or Facebook, it's Amazon.
Amazon literally controls online selling, logistics, distribution and delivery to such a degree that no one else can reasonably compete.
I don't think anyone is surprised, but they're worried about the scale. Amazon encompasses more of the ecommerce market (approaching the majority of all ecommerce) than any individual retailer covers brick-and-mortar, by a large margin. IIRC even Walmart is only ~15% of physical retail, Amazon is >40% all ecommerce.
Personally I think all store-brands should be stopped. These companies should have to choose between being the marketplace or being the product and should have to diverge if they're both.
For example, supermarkets have been in the generic brands business for decades. They contract out making some generic version a name brand product and sell it a lower price, giving it preferential space (both size and position) on the shelves. Why? To capture a greater portion of the profit for themselves.
Why is anyone surprised Amazon is any different?
I've said it once and I'll say it again: the current focus on antitrust in Big Tech is, at best, completely misguided. If anyone is guilty of anticompetitive behaviour, it's not Google or Facebook, it's Amazon.
Amazon literally controls online selling, logistics, distribution and delivery to such a degree that no one else can reasonably compete.