Amazon Starts Flexing Muscle in New Space (reuters.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Starts Flexing Muscle in New Space (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on Friday December 23, 2016 @05:20AM from the expanding-horizon dept.

A cargo plane emblazoned with "Prime Air" descended from an empty sky at Lehigh Valley International Airport on Tuesday, ninety minutes from the bustle of New York City, loaded with crates of goods during the peak holiday shopping season. From a report on Reuters: It's one of 40 jets leased by Amazon.com Inc for a new cargo service to meet delivery demand from the retail giant's customers. Exclusive payload data reviewed by Reuters and interviews with airport officials around the country show that Prime Air planes are flying nearly full, but with lightweight loads, taking away valued business from FedEx Corp and United Parcel Service Inc. Expanding into transportation, from trucks to planes, is one of Amazon's most important endeavors as it strives to lure new customers with fast shipping while keeping costs under control. The world's largest online retailer is sending more packages, more often, and later in the day to serve its estimated 35 million to more than 50 million U.S. members of Amazon Prime, a service that promises two-day shipping for $99 per year.

70 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Still profit-neutral by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 05:27 · Score: 0

Sooner or later Amazon has to start paying dividends...
1. Re:Still profit-neutral by EvilSS · 2016-12-23 05:43 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Sooner or later Amazon has to start paying dividends...
  No, they don't. They just need to keep their share price afloat. Dividends are not a requirement of any company, and there are plenty out there that don't pay them. They are a nice perk, for sure, but not some sort of "you must do this or go out of business".
  
  --
  I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
2. Re:Still profit-neutral by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  They just need to keep their share price afloat.
  Amazon is still pretending to be a tech stock when they should be a dividend-paying blue chip stock?
3. Re:Still profit-neutral by fahrbot-bot · 2016-12-23 06:03 · Score: 2
  
  Sooner or later Amazon has to start paying dividends...
  No, they don't. They just need to keep their share price afloat. Dividends are not a requirement of any company, and there are plenty out there that don't pay them. They are a nice perk, for sure, but not some sort of "you must do this or go out of business".
  Coming soon: Amazon Shareholder Prime -- "now with dividends"
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
4. Re:Still profit-neutral by Wrath0fb0b · 2016-12-23 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  Sooner or later Amazon has to start paying dividends...
  No, they don't. They just need to keep their share price afloat. Dividends are not a requirement of any company, and there are plenty out there that don't pay them.
  Well, sure, in one scenario a company never turns a profit. In fact, many sole proprietorships and other small companies do just this, they just "zero out" by paying the principals the remaining profit as a bonus each year.
  If, on the other hand, a company makes a profit, that profit must either be reinvested in the company or returned to shareholders in the form of dividends or stock buybacks. That extra money has to go somewhere, if only into the company's bank account (or embezzled by the CFO to pay for blow, but I digress). In Amazon's case, it's being spent expanding the company into new market areas. That process of reinvesting profits, however, is necessarily bounded -- they cannot become infinitely rich* or control infinitely many market sectors. So one of two things need to happen eventually: either they stop making a profit or else they start returning the profit to the shareholders. Any other state is transient -- although if they go through a number of profit/loss/profit/loss cycles, I suppose it could just wash out for a very long time.
  So yeah, dividends are not a requirement. But they are a logical outcome of long term profitability because the opportunities for expansion are finite.
5. Re:Still profit-neutral by ixidor · 2016-12-23 18:47 · Score: 1
  
  this " opportunities for expansion are finite" is somewhat true. the is an absolute upper bound on available land to build, and cash flow. but in practice, they are growing and re-investing. the could push out fedex,walmart, bestbuy, other grocery stores, samsclub, costco, barns & noble, and many others. oh, and clothing stores, transportation sector like trucking, whoever makes corrugated boxes and bubble warp. then they start buying out the producers, so no more proctor & gamble, just Amazon store brand. the practicle amount of growth they could potentially sustain seems nearly unbounded, to the point of being almost infinite, within the constrains of time and space here on earth.
6. Re:Still profit-neutral by EvilSS · 2016-12-24 21:22 · Score: 1
  
  Sooner or later Amazon has to start paying dividends...
  No, they don't. They just need to keep their share price afloat. Dividends are not a requirement of any company, and there are plenty out there that don't pay them.
  If, on the other hand, a company makes a profit, that profit must either be reinvested in the company or returned to shareholders in the form of dividends or stock buybacks.
  
  No, that is not a requirement at all. Just look at Apple. They could have built their new headquarters out of literal stacks of cash they were sitting on before they finally started to pay a dividend. Ditto with Microsoft. These are not non-profits, they are allowed to accumulate cash if they wish.
  
  --
  I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
7. Re:Still profit-neutral by Wrath0fb0b · 2016-12-26 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  No, that is not a requirement at all. Just look at Apple. They could have built their new headquarters out of literal stacks of cash they were sitting on before they finally started to pay a dividend. Ditto with Microsoft. These are not non-profits, they are allowed to accumulate cash if they wish.
  Both stock paid dividends this year buddy.
Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 05:28 · Score: 0

FedEx and UPS suck. It is not Amazon's responsibility to keep them afloat.
This move is a rare one in corporate America, it puts their customers first.
1. Re:Good for them by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-12-23 05:52 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I live in western Washington state. We've had the Amazon delivery people for quite some time now - and I don't share your rosy opinion of the company's priorities. I think they've saved money by hiring people who wouldn't make the cut for other businesses, on the cheap.
  Amazon-delivered packages often end up in puddles or dropped over the front yard fence. We have a big sign saying "please deliver to back door", with an arrow pointing towards the (non-fenced) door maybe 15 feet away... and Amazon drivers have left packages, exposed to the elements, right below that sign. Either they just don't care, or they can't read English (my daughter has interacted with a couple Amazon drivers, and she suspects the latter).
  I've never had an issue with FedEx or UPS drivers like that. The only people who seemed as bad as the Amazon crew were the USPS folks, back when they were doing Sunday deliveries for Amazon.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
2. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 05:57 · Score: 0
  
  FedEx and UPS hire the dregs, mostly ex-cons and wanna-be criminals.
3. Re:Good for them by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-12-23 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  FedEx and UPS hire the dregs, mostly ex-cons and wanna-be criminals.
  Apparently they are "dregs" who at least have been screened for literacy.
  It's funny how these pro-Amazon-delivery comments here are being posted anonymously... I take it Bezos lets you browse the web while you're on the clock?
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
4. Re:Good for them by Joe_Dragon · 2016-12-23 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  They have time pressures so they don't want to walk that far. hell some just pitch them out over the fence
5. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:12 · Score: 0
  
  True story: When my daughter was 6 we were living in a small apartment complex. My neighbors ordered a laptop from somewhere. Fedex delivered it by leaving it by their door and my daughter was out playing and they had her sign for it. It went missing...
  Fedex sucks balls.
6. Re:Good for them by gmack · 2016-12-23 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  My issue with Fedex is that up here, they show up during my working day, discover I'm not home and then demand that I drive across town to pick up my package. UPS at least has up locations but they randomly refuse to send packages to it and demand I drive across town. Really, I wish they would just ship Canada post instead. At least in that case, the pick up point is 2 blocks from my apartment.
7. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:35 · Score: 0
  
  Apparently they are "dregs" who at least have been screened for literacy.
  Citation needed.
  
  It's funny how these pro-Amazon-delivery comments here are being posted anonymously... I take it Bezos lets you browse the web while you're on the clock?
  It's funny how these pro-Fedex and UPS comments here are being posted from dumbshits with no arguments. I take it you are one of those "screened for literacy".
8. Re:Good for them by TechyImmigrant · 2016-12-23 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  >I've never had an issue with FedEx or UPS drivers like that.
  We have that issue all the time. Business downstairs with big sign declaring that the business is right there. We live upstairs. Packages to the business usually get taken upstairs and packages to the home usually get taken downstairs. It's frequent enough that it has to be deliberate. On the other hand, when the Amazon van comes around (as has happened a few times in December) they always look at the label and take it to the right place.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
9. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:50 · Score: 0
  
  True story: When my daughter was 6 we were living in a small apartment complex. My neighbors ordered a laptop from somewhere. Fedex delivered it by leaving it by their door and my daughter was out playing and they had her sign for it. It went missing...
  Fedex sucks balls.
  There was no rental office at the apartment complex? I have all my packages delivered to a UPS Store so I can be away from home and even out of town without fear of mail and packages vanishing from the doorstep.
10. Re:Good for them by green1 · 2016-12-23 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  Canada Post is the worst of the bunch. They absolutely REFUSE to knock or ring a doorbell, instead leaving boxes in plain sight on my front porch next to a busy road for anyone to see. Additionally, despite having a post office 2 blocks away, they refuse to send any packages there instead preferring to send them to a much further one. Not to mention that packages can sit for multiple weeks sometimes with no accountability (I had one sitting at the sorting centre a few blocks from my house for 2 weeks at one point, nothing I could do but wait)
  FedEx, UPS, and even Purolator (despite their Canada Post association) have all been willing to ring doorbells and/or hide packages from view, and their pick up points, while further than my closest post office, are all much closer than the post office Canada post decides to actually use.
  Of course I've also had issues with many other couriers. UPS, don't bother with their next day guaranteed service, the guarantee is worthless, they won't even reimburse the shipping cost on a package that's delivered over a week after the "guaranteed" time. I also had DHL "accidentally" ship a next day overnight air package by ground adding a 4 day delay, (they were also unwilling to reimburse anything, even the premium paid for the next-day service). I recently had a FedEx package do an extra lap of the country (tracking info showed it arrive in my city the day before delivery was scheduled, over the next 2 days the tracking info showed it go back out and visit 3 other cities, some over 1000km away, before returning to my city for a late delivery)
  Honestly, the only shipper I have never had issues with is Greyhound, but they don't do express overnight, so their use is limited, I also don't know any online retailers who use them.
11. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  Canada Post is so horrible. I get enraged when I hear people trash talk the United States Postal Service, having experienced both.
12. Re:Good for them by Digicrat · 2016-12-23 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  FedEx is definitely among the worst.
  Twice in the past year or so I've had a large-ish packages arrive that required a signature. FedEx left a note and required that I go to their office (about 20 minutes away) to pick up the package. There was no option to schedule re-delivery for a time that I'd be home (without paying extra) or to sign to let them leave it at the front door or with a neighbor (I work during the day, like most of us). UPS in comparison has multiple pickup places within minutes of my house, and never has a problem leaving a signature-required package with a neighbor or on the front door if I sign the notice for them (and sometimes even if I don't...).
  Another fun experience with FedEx, though this was over 10 years ago (I feel old saying that ...) I had ordered a bunch of parts for a new computer. Tracking number showed that it was delivered and left with the super (I was living in an apt building at the time). That normally would be fine and normal behavior. Except for the fact that they left it with the super of the WRONG BUILDING. Two weeks later, getting nowhere with either the retailer or FedEx's claim process, my package magically showed up on the door (and yes, the address was correct on the box). I was lucky that the super from a block away was a nice, honest guy otherwise I would've been out a lot of money (and this was back when I was still in HS).
  USPS isn't perfect either ... or at least my postman lacks common sense. They love sticking small-ish packages in the regular mailbox (I don't blame them...it's closer than the dedicated package box). The problem is that they ALWAYS try sticking it in the mailbox first. Even if it requires stuffing the rest of my mail into a messy ball. Even if the package just barely fits into the box from the postman's side. On occassion I've had to wait several days to get my package because it wouldn't fit out the front, and it took several days of pulling out all other mail and replacing with a sticky note before the postman realized that the package was stuck and removed it for me. On several other occasions I've actually resorted to cutting the box open inside the mailbox so that I could get the contents out without waiting...
  I guess USPS and FedEx have annoyed me more than I thought given how much I just wrote . . .
13. Re:Good for them by citizenr · 2016-12-23 17:09 · Score: 1
  
  Canada Post is the worst of the bunch. They absolutely REFUSE to knock or ring a doorbell, instead leaving boxes in plain sight on my front porch next to a busy road for anyone to see.
  So whats the problem? Claim every package left like that as missing and collect insurance.
  
  --
  Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
14. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-24 08:41 · Score: 0
  
  You never having an issue == no problem exists == you are a fucklenut
15. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-28 05:19 · Score: 0
  
  What part of small complex confused you?
16. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 08:10 · Score: 0
  
  That is funny. Fedex does suck. Last week I ordered a new monitor and Amazon stupidly used Fedex to ship it. I wasn't home so the delivery guy kept it despite being next door to my townhouse complex office and they have the authority to sign for my stuff. They didn't bother taking it there.
  I contacted Amazon and even though Friday was the guaranteed delivery date, they said give until Saturday which I knew it wouldn't make it because Fedex doesn't deliver here on Saturday. It didn't come so Amazon said give it to Tuesday. What the fuck is that?
  Amazon claims that they take responsibility for their shippers incompetence and gave me 3 extra months of Prime + a meager $20 back on a roughly $400 purchase. I asked them if they can set shipping preferences, they said they can't. Newegg does it but Amazon doesn't. I told them if they ever use Fedex for my orders again I will refuse the order and send it back on their dime.
  That seems to be the only way to get companies to not use Fedex anymore. It is almost the end of the day and it is still not here, despite the fact that it is in town. Last time they sent me something via Fedex it was a similar situation and Amazon let me keep the item and refunded 120% of the cost. That is great CS but they could avoid it by not using Fedex. I don't care about refunds, if the cost of the item was a concern I wouldn't have ordered it in the first place. One thing I can't stand is incompetence and Amazon is showing just that by using Fedex.
Amazon is Santa. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 05:32 · Score: 0

50 million customers at $99 a pop really adds up to nice Christmas for Amazon.
1. Re:Amazon is Santa. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:02 · Score: 0
  
  Subtract all the free shipping
  Subtract the bandwidth for the free music and movie streaming
  etc
  It is not just free money
2. Re:Amazon is Santa. by TheCastro1689 · 2016-12-23 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  You're paying for that shipping through the product, Prime products are almost always a few dollars more than any one with free shipping, but you don't get it in 2 days with the savings of a couple bucks.
3. Re:Amazon is Santa. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:56 · Score: 0
  
  You are one dumb motherfucker that doesn't understand how Amazon works.
  If it is not prime, more often than not it is sold by a third party seller and shipped from them, not Amazon. Third party sellers set their own prices and can usually opt for free shipping or not. None of this has anything to do with prime.
  An item that is prime eligible costs the same for both prime and non-prime members. There is no markup for prime, that is a myth by morons who think that everything on Amazon's website is sold and shipped by Amazon.
  Prime members can also opt into no rush free shipping and get a $5 credit on prime pantry. For those of us that use amazon a lot, that translates into a ton of free food. I break up my orders into individual items to get multiple $5 savings.
  I save at least $500 or more every year by spending $99 and that is not counting my streaming usage.
4. Re:Amazon is Santa. by TheCastro1689 · 2016-12-27 04:33 · Score: 1
  
  The $5 credit can only applied once per order, their food prices are normally more costly and then you pay for the box. You aren't saving anything.
5. Re:Amazon is Santa. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-28 05:23 · Score: 0
  
  Depends what you buy.
  Standard packaged bullshit, sure. Why would you buy manufactured food? I don't buy that bullshit at a grocery store, I wouldn't order it.
  Hard to find things like Moroccan spices, not so much. I fill a box with things that I can't get anywhere near me at any price.
  It is also trivial to get that box with free shipping.
Amazon Lockers are always full... by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 05:45 · Score: 1

I tried to order something from Amazon to deliver to a local Amazon Locker. No can do. It's full. As are the half-dozen Amazon Lockers in the surrounding area. No space, no delivery. Oh, well. I'll my business elsewhere.
1. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by fahrbot-bot · 2016-12-23 06:00 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I tried to order something from Amazon to deliver to a local Amazon Locker. No can do. It's full. As are the half-dozen Amazon Lockers in the surrounding area. No space, no delivery. Oh, well. I'll my business elsewhere.
  Sorry, that was me. I ordered an Amazon Locker and accidentally had it delivered to an Amazon Locker.
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
2. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 06:04 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that was me. I ordered an Amazon Locker and accidentally had it delivered to an Amazon Locker.
  That's funny. I have a friend wears an Amazon hoodie that he got from the Amazon brick-and-mortar store at the shopping mall. Whenever he walks around the mall in that hoodie, people think he works for Amazon and asks him questions. Now he is looking for a different hoodie to wear.
3. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by The-Ixian · 2016-12-23 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  Your friend is what we lovingly refer to around here as "a shill"
  An Amazon hoodie doesn't even make sense in an ironic joke...
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
4. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  An Amazon hoodie doesn't even make sense in an ironic joke...
  My friend also works for the Sprint Store in the same mall. Whenever he walks around in his Sprint shirts, no one ever comes up and ask him questions. Go figure.
5. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-12-23 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that was me. I ordered an Amazon Locker and accidentally had it delivered to an Amazon Locker.
  Yo, dawg, ...
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
6. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by wbr1 · 2016-12-23 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  I think you accidentally a word.
  
  --
  Silence is a state of mime.
7. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  I think you deliberately a word.
  FTFY
8. Re:Amazon Lockers are always full... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-26 07:03 · Score: 0
  
  That is because anyone who works in a cell phone store is a wanna-be who is technically illiterate.
New Space by The-Ixian · 2016-12-23 05:56 · Score: 1

Amazon Starts Flexing Muscle in New Space
New Space: When Flexing Muscle in Old Space just isn't going to cut it anymore.
I mean... you gotta Flex Muscle somewhere...

--
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Dividends require profits by sjbe · 2016-12-23 05:59 · Score: 1

Amazon is still pretending to be a tech stock when they should be a dividend-paying blue chip stock?
To pay dividends you need to be kicking off lots of spare cash. Amazon has never fit that description once in their existence. They reinvest pretty much all profits back into growing the company.
1. Re:Dividends require profits by __aaclcg7560 · 2016-12-23 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  They reinvest pretty much all profits back into growing the company.
  I've always thought Amazon's strategy was: "Let's buy another company to distract the shareholders from the fact that we don't have any profits to our name."
2. Re:Dividends require profits by lgw · 2016-12-23 06:52 · Score: 2
  
  Their financials have started to be less secretive. It's been clear for a couple of years now that the core businesses, retail and AWS, are quite profitable before reinvestment. Whether they'll grow into their stock price is anyone's guess, but it's not impossible.
  The cargo planes are a different matter - it's not a new business, it's all about owning the distribution side. Amazon is getting too big for FedEx and UPS.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
3. Re:Dividends require profits by iamgnat · 2016-12-23 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  I've always thought Amazon's strategy was: "Let's buy another company to distract the shareholders from the fact that we don't have any profits to our name."
  That's what creimer said. They think they are a Tech company.
Uh oh by TheDarkMaster · 2016-12-23 05:59 · Score: 1

Amazon + ten years = Buy n Large?

--
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
If the drones don't work out by dasgoober · 2016-12-23 06:18 · Score: 1

They'll just air-drop it from 35,000 ft..
1. Re:If the drones don't work out by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 10:35 · Score: 0
  
  "... Lehigh Valley International Airport on Tuesday, ninety minutes from the bustle of New York City,..."
  LVIH is... ~50 miles from NYC. WTF? Their jets must be traveling at roughly 33mph. Jets? Hell, Drones fly faster than that.
  Just kidding; summary is the usual msmash mush. It implies that the Amazon goods originate from NYC, whereas the article doesn't even mention the originating airport. (It's Wilmington, Ohio.) Bad Editor! Bad!
Amazon could easily be profitable by sjbe · 2016-12-23 06:18 · Score: 1

I've always thought Amazon's strategy was: "Let's buy another company to distract the shareholders from the fact that we don't have any profits to our name."

Amazon could have fairly substantial profits today if they really cared to. But that would be rather short sighted of them. I've done the analysis on their financial statements. The company actually kicks off a fair bit of free cash flow but they are plowing most of it back into various investments. Some sensible, some not so much. They are no longer some fly by night dotcom.
1. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by Attila+Dimedici · 2016-12-23 06:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Which means that buying Amazon stock is short sighted. Sooner or later, people are going to realize that owning Amazon stock returns no value to the owner of said stock and stop buying it. Right now, Amazon stock holders are taking part in a complex ponzi scheme. The only way you get your money back, let alone make a profit, is to find some other sucker to pay you as much for your stock as you paid for it.
  
  There are times when investing in a company which does not pay dividends is a good move, but when it becomes clear that part of the company's business strategy is to NEVER pay dividends that is not one of them.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
2. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by sjames · 2016-12-23 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  Most of the stock market is playing that game now. It's all about anticipating fluctuations in the stock's price and trading it around. Dividends would need a long term investment to pay off.
3. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by stikves · 2016-12-23 10:31 · Score: 1
  
  That's two of the three benefits for owning a stock in the company. The other one is actual ownership stake in a business. In theory you have a say in the board meeting (albeit very small), and steer the company in the long term, including asking the board to issue dividends in the future.
  Of course this requires buying a lot of the stock to have any real say in the company, and be really active. But still it's possible in theory.
4. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by John.Banister · 2016-12-23 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  You're quite wrong. People invest in Amazon by buying its stock. Amazon uses the money to build the company, making the stock more valuable. Investors then sell the stock for more money than they paid for it. The additional money is called capital gains. This works very well. Pick any 5 year period since 2007 and you'll find that an investment in Amazon at the start of that period pays well at the end of it. This is called investing, not ponzi. When the company builds itself into a larger company, the stock is worth more, because it's the same percentage of a larger company.
5. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by Attila+Dimedici · 2016-12-23 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  Except that you do not get any of that value unless someone else is willing to give you their money for it.
  
  Pick any 5 year period since 2007 and you'll find that an investment in Amazon at the start of that period pays well at the end of it.
  
  There was a similar period of time when that could be said of Enron.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
6. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by John.Banister · 2016-12-23 12:43 · Score: 1
  
  Except that you do not get any of that value unless someone else is willing to give you their money for it.
  If only there was a place where one might find people willing to purchase stock...
7. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-26 06:55 · Score: 0
  
  Depends on what you are doing.
  Most buy and sell stock to make money on the stock.
  Dividend investing is more long term than people have the stomach for these days.
  At any rate, Amazon is under no obligation to ever pay dividends. Most publicly traded companies never do.
8. Re:Amazon could easily be profitable by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-26 06:58 · Score: 0
  
  You are wrong.
  When person X buys stock from person Y, the company gets jack and shit for it.
  What you are referring to is gambling based on value determined by emotion and irrationality.
  Real investment means buying real things to make money from.
  Even buying stocks for dividends is not real investment.
Nearly Full But With Lightweight Loads by sexconker · 2016-12-23 06:23 · Score: 2

Hardly surprising when you consider the fact that Amazon will send out a pack of AAA batteries in a 36"x24"x6" box with 2 more boxes inside it.
Prime... not so much any more by fyngyrz · 2016-12-23 06:38 · Score: 1

I'm an Amazon prime member in rural Montana. FedEx and UPS get my 2-day shipments to me in 2 business days from the time they get the package almost every time, barring bad weather. I rarely have any problems with either service.
Amazon, however, has within the last year been failing to get 2-day air out within 24 hours (and sometimes quite a bit longer) of when the item is ordered. So "Prime 2-day" delivery can be 3- or 4- or 5-day delivery. It used to be that if I ordered early in the morning, say 9 AM my time or earlier, they'd get the package to the shipper that day. So I could order Monday morning, and the goods would arrive Wednesday. Since this is the main reason I have Prime — I shop a lot on Amazon, and the free 2-day shipping means (used to mean) a lot less waiting on this end — I'm considering dropping Prime this year. Ordering Monday morning, and receiving the goods Friday or even the next Monday... that's not worth $99/year. Or more.
Prime membership was great for me for years in a row; not so much any longer. Plus a lot of items are now "add-on" items, so I don't get the shipping advantage unless I buy things I wasn't planning to buy, or coincidentally was buying anyway.
Like most corporations, Amazon seeks to trim costs because shareholders aren't satisfied with just doing well, they require constant growth, or at least, the appearance of growth. Those costs will be trimmed at the expense of customer service if the corporation thinks they can get away with it. It's one of the faults with the "invest in shares for increase in share value" model as opposed to the "invest in shares to receive dividends" model. I'm pretty sure this is exactly what I've been seeing in the last year or so.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
1. Re:Prime... not so much any more by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 06:58 · Score: 0
  
  Amazon, however, has within the last year been failing to get 2-day air out within 24 hours (and sometimes quite a bit longer) of when the item is ordered. So "Prime 2-day" delivery can be 3- or 4- or 5-day delivery.
  Excellent point. I have noticed multi-day delays before Amazon even hands-off the package to UPS, FedEx, USPS, or even Canada Post. I live near a "major" urban centre in Canada so delivery within 2 days (Amazon Prime) plus 1 day would be acceptable but they seem unable to meet that threshold. I recently, early morning December 22, bought two books from Amazon (Canada) yet they will not be delivered until December 30. Surely with Christmas delivery ramp-up they should have been able to deliver it by today, December 23.
2. Re:Prime... not so much any more by Hognoxious · 2016-12-23 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  Those costs will be trimmed at the expense of customer service if the corporation thinks they can get away with it. It's one of the faults with the "invest in shares for increase in share value" model as opposed to the "invest in shares to receive dividends" model.
  
  Explain why a company that pays dividends is less likely to skimp on customer service. Penny pinching is pinching pennies, irrespective of whether they end up stuffed in shareholder equity or paid out as dividends.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
3. Re:Prime... not so much any more by radarskiy · 2016-12-23 08:54 · Score: 1
  
  How much credit are you getting when you report the SLA miss?
4. Re:Prime... not so much any more by fyngyrz · 2016-12-24 16:57 · Score: 1
  
  Explain why a company that pays dividends is less likely to skimp on customer service.
  Constant growth is impossible.
  Constant profit is not.
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
5. Re:Prime... not so much any more by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 08:16 · Score: 0
  
  It is not two days from clicking the order button, it is two days once it ships.
  How so many fail to understand this is beyond me.
UPS truck full of Amazon by tgibson · 2016-12-23 07:58 · Score: 1

I went to retrieve a package from a UPS truck that had pulled up in front of my house. It was remarkable to see that nearly every box in the truck had an Amazon logo.
1. Re:UPS truck full of Amazon by xlsior · 2016-12-23 10:31 · Score: 1
  
  I went to retrieve a package from a UPS truck that had pulled up in front of my house. It was remarkable to see that nearly every box in the truck had an Amazon logo.
  ...Which gives them an insane leverage over UPS when they are negotiating rates.
2. Re:UPS truck full of Amazon by bad-badtz-maru · 2016-12-27 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  Or the other way around, since UPS knows that Fedex doesn't alone have the capacity to handle all of Amazon's freight.
Reducing damage by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 08:59 · Score: 0

UPS especially, are famous for damaging parcels.
This happens mostly at airport handling, where the handlers are pretty much immune to discipline.
I am sure Amazon would like to make customers happy and reduce returns due to damage.
Amazon is less than 10% of UPS business by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 09:50 · Score: 0

The Motley Fool put Amazon around 5 % of UPS, and 4% of FedEx (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/12/13/is-amazoncom-about-to-take-on-fedex-and-ups.aspx) a year ago when this first came up.
Having watched UPS deliver a package and Amazon deliver a package. UPS drivers are well trained and know what they are doing. Amazon drives look like they are figuring it out with each box they deliver. Amazon may get there someday as this is a solvable problem if they spend enough money on it. The question is will the Amazon deliveries be enough to warrant the expense.
Connection to parallel universe by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-23 13:59 · Score: 0

The first people establishing connection to parallel universe will be (i) Mexican drug cratels, to delivery drugs and (ii) Amazon, to deliver the rest.