Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You've been making stuff up throughout this conversation. I'm quite well informed; my information on brands comes both from direct experience as well as from talking to brand owners and others in the field.

>Brands want to have it such that brick and mortar retailers can still exist, so they create pricing models that allow for that additional discount.

The brands that really care about preventing distribution will buy back and destroy their inventory at the end of the season. See e.g. https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/9/17/17852294/fashion-bra...

But plenty of brands don't feel like buying back and destroying hundreds of millions of dollars worth of inventory. So they use cheaper alternatives, namely perjury to get rid of legitimate sellers.

>They add no value, only take. It hurts brands, manufacturers, retailers and even consumers to a large degree.

This is incorrect on most counts. For the most part this benefits retailers, which is why most retailers have liquidation programs to sell off their overstock in the first place. This benefits consumers as resold goods lead to lower prices. It does hurt some brands, as they can no longer channel stuff to pad revenues. But increased competition hurting companies and benefiting consumers with lower prices is generally considered a good thing, in economics.

I've been to many conferences and spoken at a couple. In my experience most conferences on Amazon selling are geared towards private label brands that add little value.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: