Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Patents Bad Service For Bad Customers
mikesd81 writes "Techdirt reports that Amazon has been awarded a patent for Generating Current Order Fulfillment Plans Based on Expected Future Orders. Essentially, if Amazon deems that you won't be a long time customer or ordering again soon, your order will take longer to be expedited."
I can understand why you would DO this, but why in God's name would you patent it? Amazon already has the black eye from attempting to give targeted prices to members (oops) and a patent black eye by flouting the USPTO's decision on one-click. What business model is being protected by patenting the mechanism to put orders on the back burner?
Patents are supposed to protect an inventor's invention so that other's can't duplicate it allowing the inventor to earn money for his invention. Generally speaking a patented idea is a good idea. Yet lately I'm seeing more and more patents being approved that just seem downright bad ideas. They are trying to protect themselves from potential 'bad customers'(being those that will only buy once or twice). How can someone even think of something as idiotic as this? Seriously? They're already marking some people as 'bad customers' before we've gotten our merchandise!!!
Amazon's delivery performance has degraded so greatly in the last year or two that I thought they were already doing something like this. I've been a big shopper with them since they began, and I have seen their delivery performance going into the sewer for quite some time. As their delivery performance suffered, my purchases from them have dropped-off to almost nothing. Whatever possessed them to think that a punishment would improve their sales is beyond my imaginiation. BN
And slow service will make me want to be a repeat customer?
this is a GOOD idea, and not that far removed from the Newegg concept. Newegg spends money and charges more in order to push items out the door faster. You can pay MORE in order to get something tomorrow. Partially what allows them to do this IS an ordering system that prioritizes orders from one source over anothers. That is what allows them to fill boxes and get them to UPS faster.
In the case of Amazon.com, you are talking about getting this service without paying for it. If you buy things from Amazon that indicate that you will buy fancy stuff in the future, your order will get pushed out the door faster. If you only buy used books from allied used retailers, then you're order will get fewer CPU cycles devoted to it.
It's just interrupt priority for shipping, basically.
Amusingly, they used to charge existing customers more, presumably on the grounds that they've already hooked you and don't need to try as hard. I don't think that little trick lasted very long. I might go to Amazon first to check the price and get details of the product, but I always then look elsewhere to see if I can get it cheaper.
Now, I hate business method patents in general, but this one appears to be sufficiently arcane as to not risk much litigation. The point being that it would be extremely difficult to prove infringement by another business, given that business practices are typically kept private.
Of course somebody probably has a patent on labeling isles in stores according to what products are found, and I know somebody had to at least try to patent the mall display that provides a map and legend system to locate stores. Those patents, if they exist, would be an easier target for an infringement suit.
Have we reached such a perfect state of justice that lawyers have nothing better to do than this? Isn't there an ambulance to chase somewhere?
Even mom&pops shops have been doing it for a long time: best customers are treated better.
I just don't understand how patents can be delivered for such obvious things..
Claim prior art on this one?
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
I order to different yet related items yesterday. For some reason one of them was eligible for free shipping. But the default order packaging is to ship the items together and charge me $15. I have to go in, tweak the order, separate it into 2 shipments and the shipping cost goes down by half, that is one of the items is free. They both come to me from the same place. I am scratching my head on this. It can't be good for Amazon to break up the order. And it irritates me to have to muck with their order. Plus - why is only one item eligible for free shipping? Both items are very similar, the cost nearly the same, they come from the same place, and are made by the same company. I'd feel better if they just lied to me and told me that they're giving me a 50% discount on the shipping cost. Or better yet - don't tell me anything at all and wrap it up and charge me the discounted price.
to take advantage of amazon's free shipping, you have to be willing to let amazon sit on your order for a while before actually picking it. in my experience, across many orders, this results in about a one week (!) delay. then it's another week or so for ground shipping to deliver it to you.
amusingly, amazon's own marketplace sellers typically ship right away, so it's generally faster to order from one of them than amazon directly. those, of course, don't ship for free. but they do typically ship for less than amazon charges (at least for what i tend to buy).
i'd buy at least twice as much from amazon if they'd just pick the orders within a day or so. i often order from their competitors just for this reason.
if this is a new plan to cause certain shoppers even more delays in shipping, it may cost them even more business. not smart.
geek friendly VPS's and free API enabled DNS : zerigo.com
I guess I've been on the good end of this policy. My orders nearly always ship next-day, and I placed one yesterday that shipped same-day. Whenever I've had to contact them, I've had a reply within two hours and they've always resolved every issue I've had at least to, if not better than, my expectation.
For reference, I buy something from them about once a week.
Yeah, it really seems they got it backwards.
Lots of places treat frequent customers better, not many make it a point to treat infrequent customers worse.
Maybe not
You'd think that, but according to the 80-20 rule, 80% of a company's profits come from 20% of their customers. If they give superior service to their most loyal customers, I bet their profits will increase overall.
I decided to enroll for a second degree this year. The student bookstore ran out of three of the books I needed and wouldn't have more for a couple weeks, so I ordered them off of Amazon with expedited shipping. It was more than enough to get the free shipping, but time was essential. After three weeks, I called to find out where my order was and they said they would refund the shipping and send it out the next day. About a week later they canceled the order without bothering to tell me, and gave me a credit instead of a refund. I ended up dropping those classes, and I'm still waiting for the refund on my books; I've given up on the refund for shipping.
I guess I didn't buy enough books from them? That's not something they can expect to change in my lifetime.
Fnord.