Google is Essentially Building an Anti-Amazon Alliance, and Target is the Latest To Join (recode.net)

Google and the country's biggest brick-and-mortar retailers have one main problem in common: Amazon. Now both sides are acting like they are serious about working together to do something about it. From a report: On Thursday, Target and Google announced that they are expanding what was a years-old delivery partnership from a small experiment in a handful of cities to the entire continental U.S. The expansion will allow Target to become a retail partner in Google's voice-shopping initiative, which lets owners of the Google Home "smart" speaker order items through voice commands like owners of the Echo can do from Amazon. The announcement comes seven weeks after Walmart inked a similar deal with Google to offer hundreds of thousands of products through the service. Other big-box retailers like Home Depot are also on board. Voice commerce was the core of these recent announcements, and it may someday become popular for types of shopping like reordering household staples. But that's not what is most interesting here to me. Instead, it's the promise that Target is also beginning to work with Google "to create innovative digital experiences using ... other cutting-edge technologies to elevate Target's strength in style areas such as home, apparel and beauty."

Comments

Count me IN!

[Anonymous Coward]

I love to be PROBED by Teh G! And only Teh G!

Scroggling Part 2!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like Amazon is about to get Scroogled!!

Here's a odd idea:

[Gravis Zero]

Why not create a competitive service? -_-

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

That’s what they are aiming to do. They are building an alliance to create what they hope will be a competitive service.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Frosty Piss]

Why not create a competitive service? -_-

That's essentially what Google is doing, but without the investment in infrastructure and in most cases inventory, because they don't handle fulfilment, only ordering - their retail partners handle the heavy lifting.

This sort of thing could conceivably put a serious dent in Amazon's business. Perhaps not much initially, but eventually the loss of sales will be noticed.

Amazon has a lot going for it, but a lot of "baggage" as well in terms of their impact on small and large retailers alike. Their quest for World Domination(tm) may come back to bit them. Or take a small nip in their shins...

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Lunix Nutcase]

Did you not even bother to read the summary? That is exactly what they are trying to do with these retail partners.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[JohnFen]

Their quest for World Domination(tm) may come back to bit them.

But Google's quest for world domination won't?

I have a hard time seeing how people who would like to avoid Amazon for being monopolistic would be OK with Google's monopolistic tendencies.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[someone1234]

Well, with Google, it looks like the brick & mortar stores will live on, at least for now. Amazon would kill them all, asap.
Only time will tell if Google will co-exist in a symbiotic relationship with them or is it parasitic.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[JohnFen]

But it looks like Google is only teaming up with the big box retailers. If preserving brick and mortar businesses is a priority, that's pretty weak sauce.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Tailhook]

That is exactly what they are trying to do

No it isn't. They're prattling on about this "voice-shopping" gimmick, augmented-reality mumble mumble... No mention of delivery performance, one place they could really outflank Amazon. This isn't competitive with Amazon. Not even a little. Amazon has got USPS delivering stuff on SUNDAY ffs.

This is a celebrity executive wankfest. These retailers aren't yet hurting badly enough to get serious so they're still playing games. You'll know they've stopped screwing around when you can fill a cart online and have it appear at your door same day. Till then its just games and Amazon will continue to eat their lunch.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

"This sort of thing could conceivably put a serious dent in Amazon's business."

Pfft. I used to shop at Target (I switched to Walmart because Walmart carried more and was consistently cheaper and without playing the gift card game). I liked Target quite a bit. Still do if price wasn't king for most of my buying decisions. And Target sold some nice upper scale stuff, like Apple products, though I never bought any there (and I don't own a single modern Apple device).

One thing Target is not is efficient. If you want Target to handle inventory, Amazon is going to win handily It's not because Target is necessarily bad or awful or that Target can't change; Target has good but slow customer service, good stores, good locations, and they are a good retailer. It's just that Target is specious in their selection, and doesn't have the warehouse capacity or distribution and won't because they won't move inventory as fast at Amazon or Amazon's anticipated rate of growth. And Amazon is better inventory selection _and_ has value added their website esp if you are with Prime.

Also, when it comes to privacy, I trust grudgingly go with Amazon, more as the lesser evil. I've yet to see Amazon noticeably upsell my activities offsite. I *definitely* have seen Google do this though.

Google can partner repeatedly with online and brick and mortar sites all they want. It'll just slow Amazon's expansion. A bit. Nothing more.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Junta]

It's less about the consumer impression and more about the business impression.

If you are target, the situation with Amazon is looking grim. Google sounds like a household name that is less overtly threatening, so for now, an alliance.

WalMart is interesting as they recently bought Jet to compete with Amazon on more equal footing, and hypothetically they would have more control over their destiny that way, but probably a wise idea to hedge their bets.

The brick and mortar thing is nice for me as there is at least a chance for instant gratification if it happens to be in stock. Even if not in stock, I'd feel better grabbing it from a store after it ships rather than left on my doorstep. If I were in a rural setting that would be different of course.

The challenge of course is that Google doesn't feel like a brand that can pull this off, and they have a long history of random bets they've had to abandon. This seems ripe to be the next failure.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Junta]

Also, a coherent and deep unified shopping experience.

Google shopping is crappy. It's damn near useless for researching a product or browsing categories. Forget ordering. Voice shopping is a gimmick that is only barely good enough for repeat purchases of cheap consumable goods even if you liked it. AR and all is neat I suppose, but they are so far off the fundamentals.

If they had pretty much the amazon experience with "select a local store to instantly pick up form", that would be a serious threat, but I suspect that would be a bridge too far for their business partners to erase any pretense of value add the merchants think they provide to the shopping experience.

Re: Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

Parasitism is also a form of symbiosis. The word you were looking for was "mutualistic".

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, with Google, it looks like the brick & mortar stores will live on, at least for now. Amazon would kill them all, asap.

And why should I care?

I don't sell brick or mortar for a living.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it took too long to shutdown retail stores when, a year or two later, they grew tired of this and move on to the next "big thing". Just like the long string of Google "products" they have announced and then abandoned.

By partnering with existing companies, they can just cut the ties as quickly as they shutdown their other products.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that Google can easily make complaints about their monopolistic tendencies unsearchable.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[swillden]

Their quest for World Domination(tm) may come back to bit them.

But Google's quest for world domination won't?

A competitive duopoly is much better for consumers than a monopoly. Even more players would be better, but network effects are going to inherently favor the emergence of a small number of big online retail and distribution systems. Two major competitors with a handful of minor players seems to be the common pattern that emerges.

It has been looking like we were running headlong toward an online retail monopoly, and I don't see how anyone other than Google (or maybe Microsoft... but it would be much tougher for them) could have both the capital and the online mindshare needed to make a go of it. Frankly, I'm still quite skeptical that Google will succeed.

This, by the way, is what I think is really foolish about the EU ruling about Google Shopping. The real competition isn't between Google and the small players who were complaining about not getting free placement on Google's search engine. That's a sideshow. The real competition is between Google and Amazon. Increasingly, people (myself included, frankly) don't search for products they want to buy on Google, they go straight to Amazon. Hindering Google's ability to provide broad-reaching and useful product searches is just going to cement Amazon's monopoly position, and there's no obvious anti-trust play to limit Amazon, because they've managed to define their market space as "Everything".

Don't get me wrong. I really like Amazon. I search for stuff I need to buy there because I know I'll find it, the price will be reasonable, it'll show up quickly (I generally filter for Prime only), and if I have problems they'll take care of me. It's a very rare day at my house that one or more boxes with Amazon logos don't show up on my porch. But I get nervous when a single player controls an entire market. I'd like to use someone other than Amazon from time to time, just to ensure there's some competition in the online retail space.

Google is the only company positioned to have a prayer of being that competing service, and Google is very far from having everything needed to do it. Google + Wal-mart + Target have the pieces, but integrating them all into an operation as smooth-running as Amazon's is going to be a bitch, and it's extremely likely that friction between the companies is going to doom the effort. Wal-mart in particular is well-known for being incredibly hard to work with, used to dictating terms to everyone, and it's clear that nothing less than the threat of Amazon could have motivated them to work with anyone. Google and Target seem well-matched, but Target by itself doesn't have enough reach; they need Wal-mart's enormous distribution network.

So... this is a very good thing for consumers. The only question to me is whether it's enough, soon enough. It would have been much better if these companies decided to team up three or four years ago. It would be even better if another competitor or two could emerge, but I really don't see how that's possible.

(Disclosure: I work for Google, but that really has nothing whatsoever to do with my attitude about this. In fact, given the fact that I get paid partly in Google stock, I'm a little worried that this move may drag Google's profits down. But as an economically-literate consumer I'm really glad to see it.)

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[JohnFen]

A competitive duopoly is much better for consumers than a monopoly.

Well, yes, a duopoly is better than monopoly, but not by very much. If a duopoly is firmly established, then the two tend to start colluding and generally acting together as a monopoly.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[swillden]

A competitive duopoly is much better for consumers than a monopoly.

Well, yes, a duopoly is better than monopoly, but not by very much. If a duopoly is firmly established, then the two tend to start colluding and generally acting together as a monopoly.

If they're colluding, they're not a competitive duopoly.

Re:Here's a odd idea:

[JohnFen]

Indeed so!

Re: Here's a odd idea:

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude just fucking stop. Do you have no shame?

Anti-Not Google

[DarkRookie]

Its anti-NotGoogle and not just Amazon. They have screwed over Windows and Mac users before as well.

I'd love nothing but be a

[future assassin]

Target by the G Men in my own house.

Sorry, Google

[JohnFen]

A year or so ago, I would have welcomed this -- but since then, you've done pretty much everything in your power to burn your bridge with me. And you've succeeded.

Re:Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

I’m sure Larry and Sergey will be absolutely devastated once they hear about this. How will Google ever survive without JohnFen as a user?

Re:Sorry, Google

[irrational_design]

We could start a gofundme for them!

Re:Sorry, Google

[JohnFen]

They are. They'll never say it out loud, but you can see it in their eyes.

Re:Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Dunno, but I'm cutting Google out wherever I can too. They have definitely become evil.

Re:Sorry, Google

[DNS-and-BIND]

James Damore did not say what most people think he said. He did not say women are unsuited for tech jobs. He did not say women only have tech jobs due to affirmative action. That is all bullshit piled on by those mau-mauing him, in an effort to expel someone whose questioning made them uncomfortable.

Why it made them uncomfortable is the fascinating part of all this.

It makes them uncomfortable because it shatters the brittle shell of their enforced narrative, which can only be kept by keeping everyone from saying anything against it. It is very much a "the king is naked" situation. If James Damore is allowed to say men and women are different, the entire project of feminism shatters.

And yet everyone who doesn't live in academia or in a social justice echo chamber knows that men and women are different. If you think statistically different from men means inferior, then YOU are the misogynist.

Re: Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you stopped raping your neighbor's goats yet?

Re:Sorry, Google

[JohnFen]

Umm, did you mean to reply to my comment? It seems entirely unrelated.

Re: Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

As Harvey Weinstein say: "It's not rape if it's consensual."

Re: Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

As Hillary's husband said: That depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

Re:Sorry, Google

[Junta]

He jumped to a conclusion about why you would hate Google, because evidently he doesn't notice anything else to be concerned about.

Re:Sorry, Google

[DNS-and-BIND]

You were obviously referring to Google's face-heel turn a few months back. That convinced a lot of people Google was evil.

Re:Sorry, Google

[Cyberax]

He hadn't said it, but he did imply it. And that there should be affirmative action for conservative views, because they are underrepresented.

Oh, and if you look at his later twitter posts that show that he's totally enamored with KKK, you can clearly understand why he was fired. He's an asshole.

Re:Sorry, Google

[JohnFen]

You are mistaken. Damore plays no role in my opinion of Google.

Re:Sorry, Google

[Anonymous Coward]

> James Damore did not say what most people think he said.

And most journalists got their information from (and linked to) the "full" and "exclusive" version of the memo, which was actually edited a lot to make it seem worse.

This is how fake news becomes common knowledge. Lazy journalism.

Doomed

[Tailhook]

So I have to have a google bug device and struggle with a "voice" interface buy stuff... this is DOA. Just put in my regular not-mobile web browser with a fast, full size, not-flat, non-suck UI. Make EVERYTHING in Target/Home Depot/Walmart have accurate stock levels and be same-day delivery from this site. That's how you compete with bleeping Amazon.

that is fine with me

[FudRucker]

i been an amazon customer for a few years and for the most part they are okay, but the last year or two i noticed they have been slacking off when it comes to checking the quality of the people they allow to sell on amazon, i been ripped by deceptive bait & switch items a couple of times and it reminded me of the ebay tricks that made me quit buying from ebay, (are the bad vendors following me around?)

Re:that is fine with me

[JohnFen]

Yeah, at some point, Amazon started getting a ton of Chinese vendors, and so you have to be much more careful now. The days when you can just blindly place an order are gone -- now you have to actually pay attention to who the order is going to.

Weirdly, I've even ordered stuff from Chinese vendors on eBay and had the order fulfilled through Amazon!

I've got zero brand loyalty

[rsilvergun]

and my kid had what I think could be negative brand loyalty. It's funny because I know people in their 60s who still have it and it's weird to talk to them. They'll say good things about a brand without much cause and if you point to a cheaper / better alternative they're not interested.

Still, I wonder what happened that killed brand loyalty so completely. I'm guessing the crap economy and declining wages mean folks pinch pennies a lot harder. Maybe general cynicism but that could be chocked up to the wage thing too.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[JohnFen]

I'm an old fart, but I've never had brand loyalty as such. The very idea always struck me as bizarre.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading Let My People Go Surfing, I'm thinking of becoming brand loyal to Patagonia, even though I've not yet bought any of their products.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Anonymous Coward]

Could be that all the brands of old are just that now names and trademarks held by a few large brand holdings companies, they don't make their own product anymore. They're all the same product made in china with whom evers brand label the holdings companies decided to slap on it.

Likely all sourced from something like alibaba oh we will order 100,000k of these toaster ovens and slap the black and decker brand on them, We will order 100,000k of these same toaster ovens with different knobs and a different lcd screen and slap the Oster brand on those. Gullible public will think they're different all the profits end up in our pocket.

The days of brands being real separate entities of their own that designed and made their own products is long gone. I dare you, look up some major brands on wikipedia, guarantee most of them are now in the hands of some holding company.

These brands of old are probably kept around just for the old farts who are so brand loyal, where as the younger generation may not give two shits what the brand is as long as its cheap and not a total piece of crap.

If it weren't for the younger generation being like this brands like Visio who were barely heard of a decade ago wouldn't be a big as they are. It is also a lot of the asian brands, Sony, Toshiba, Samsung, Visio all their own entities as far as I know. American brands, RCA brand holding company, Zenith brand holding company, Westinghouse brand holding company. These are all the brands today that are selling worthless crap no brand shit shipped over from china then the branding slapped on them.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Lunix Nutcase]

Vizio is not an “Asian brand.” The company was founded in California.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Kjella]

Still, I wonder what happened that killed brand loyalty so completely.

Greater transparency and lower transaction costs. Brand is always a substitute for some real product/service quality you want to know but is too much effort. Like if you're in a foreign country, you could go to $random place or you could go to McDonald's. And McD was a "known quantity", you get a burger that - for better or for worse - tastes exactly like at home. Been there, done that - too much weird stuff let's just get a burger and fries. Now you have like a zillion suggestions and reviews, if you care to make a slight effort you can find something local, authentic and to your taste. Still, looking at the number of sequels, prequels, spin-offs and remakes in say the movie industry I'd say brands are alive and well in some areas. "Nobody got fired for buying X" is always about branding, even though it's a bad product it's not your fault that you picked a bad apple from generally reliable provider.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Junta]

I will say it's a convenience to keep more loose track of a market and get to kind of trust a brand instead.. Apart from being sold off, a brand tends to evolve slowly in quality, so if I have a good experience with a brand, I'll tend to get lazy on research and stay with it unless I see news that they got bought, they carry more than a 15% premium, or I clearly notice a decline or hear of a decline... then I start seriously evaluating again.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Junta]

"Visio who were barely heard of a decade ago wouldn't be a big as they are. It is also a lot of the asian brands, "

He said "also a lot of the asian brands", so he didn't say Vizio was an asian brand.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Junta]

Others have mentioned the betrayal of long trusted brands failing or selling themselves out to random companies.

I will say also prior to the internet, there was little recourse but to place your trust in a brand. With the internet, good and bad news travels quickly. You can find multiple in depth video product reviews of a random 5 dollar item. It comes from a large populace that can be gamed, but not nearly so easily as controlled advertising back in the day. So brand loyalty becomes but a smaller factor, and requires more sincere effort to keep people 'coasting' on your brand strength. I don't care if I see a brand like RCA it will carry zero meaning anymore, but a brand like "ThinkPad' still carries weight for me, but they about lost it all when they did a touch strip and removed all clicky buttons one gen, but they rapidly reverted.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[JohnFen]

Yes, I do that. I don't consider that "brand loyalty", though, as the instant an alternative that is better for me comes around, I'll buy it instead with no qualms.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Anonymous Coward]

Still, I wonder what happened that killed brand loyalty so completely. I'm guessing the crap economy and declining wages mean folks pinch pennies a lot harder. Maybe general cynicism but that could be chocked up to the wage thing too.

Nobody watches commercials anymore. That's why there is no brand loyalty.

Re:I've got zero brand loyalty

[Lunix Nutcase]

Yes and in the list of “asian brands” they listed Vizio.

Are they out of touch or am I?

[Cajun Hell]

which lets owners of the Google Home "smart" speaker order items through voice commands like owners of the Echo can do from Amazon.

Seriously? You seriously believe anyone wants to do that?

One of two things is happening:

1) Everyone-except-me spends most of their time shopping. If you're not asleep, then you're probably shopping. We all just sit around thinking about things we want to buy, and we're all frustrated that it takes so much work (ugh, the clicking! the endless clicking!!) to get them purchased. It's hell on earth, we have a problem, and we need it fixed. If only I had a convenient thing that would take voice commands for shopping! I would pay for that. I would order it. I'm ordering things right now. Anyone wanna sell me one of those? Oh well. I'll be ordering more stuff again in 15 minutes, so maybe my fantasy shopping interface will be ready then.

2) The aforementioned isn't true, but the people who run Amazon and Google think it's true.

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[JohnFen]

It's actually really simple:

by erasing, to the greatest degree possible, every single hassle required to buy something, you greatly increase the amount of impulse purchases. You'd be amazed at how often a minor amount of effort keeps people from buying something that they only maybe-kinda-sorta might want to buy.

This is great for retailers, and terrible for customers.

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wait, the Google device will incorporate AI to interpret what you're saying and in context.

Watching TV and an ad for some new gizmo comes on and you say "that looks kinda cool", and zing, Google has ordered one for you and charged your Target/Walmart/HomeDepot account...

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[gmb61]

which lets owners of the Google Home "smart" speaker order items through voice commands like owners of the Echo can do from Amazon.

Seriously? You seriously believe anyone wants to do that?

Not only do I want to do that, the ability to re-order items from Amazon is one of the main reasons I have an Echo, mainly because I have a bad memory or because I'm thinking about other things. So when I'm in the shower for example, and notice I'm running low on shampoo, I can just yell out (from the shower) "Alexa, order more shampoo" which is a godsend for me. Before I had an Echo, I would make a mental note that I needed more shampoo and then promptly forget about it as soon as I walked out of the bathroom.

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[Anonymous Coward]

To me that says more about you ignoring some problem with your memory (maybe just lack of sleep) than about why anyone would want some device listening for them to yell out shopping orders.

Then again, for many folks, the resident SO provides that function already :-)

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the next day you take a shower you'll notice the low shampoo and yell out for more. Then next week you'll get 5 bottles of shampoo and one container of sham poo.

Historically Amazon has raised prices on items people automatically order. Sure the initial order is lower, but keep watching and your price will rise. They pick the products and prices best for them, not you. Automatically ordering things means you're no longer getting the best deals. If you don't care then fine, just be aware of the trade offs.

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[reboot246]

You really need to check prices before you reorder from Amazon. Even ordering the same item, the seller could be different and the price could be way more than your first order. Surprise! Same goes for "Subscribe and Save" orders - sometimes the price goes way UP.

I'm not rich enough to ignore the price I pay for something. On something like shampoo the price can vary by a dollar or more for the same brand and bottle size.

Re:Are they out of touch or am I?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thankfully, when you re-order, Alexa tells you the current price and asks you to confirm before ordering it. I haven't had any problem with big price changes...yet.

Yup

[Presence Eternal]

Clearly voice shopping is the Achilles heel of Amazon. It's a market they have no part in and by the way, it is huge.

Said no one ever. Sounds more like a ship of fools, and doubly so for being captained by a company that never finishes what it starts. At least shoprunner was in the same zip code as a good idea.

Target heh

[Osgeld]

Target is like K-mart for me, except more expensive

Here's the situation the last time I went to Target, I walked, didnt find anything remotely close to what I was looking for, and left, endless isles of crap I would never buy, but something simple like a toy xylophone no dice

but if I wanted one of those shitty crosley radio's or a can of brasso ... shit they didnt even have a fucking can of brasso, glass polish, plastic polish granite polish, stainless steel polish but no fucking brasso!

waste of time

Re: Target heh

[datavirtue]

You hit the nail on the head. Target is a bad retailer. They offer little in the way of service to people. They have some type of marketing gimmikry in place that make women buy shit they don't need, but that is it.

resist the Amazon Hegemony

[turkeydance]

yeah, it's a thing

Re:resist the Amazon Hegemony

[Anonymous Coward]

hegemony (n). Antiquated verbiage utilized to provide an alternate description for the simpler terminology "market leader."

Beating Amazon is easy

[irrational_design]

Just offer the same things as Amazon at the same price with 2 day shipping and not yearly Prime membership.

Re:Beating Amazon is easy

[DogDude]

Just offer the same things as Amazon at the same price with 2 day shipping and not yearly Prime membership.

That's called "losing money". Not every company is so keen on losing money.

Re:Beating Amazon is easy

[irrational_design]

So... it's unlikely that anyone will unseat Amazon.

Not voice

[vanyel]

The first thing I did when I got my Echo was disable voice ordering - that is just begging and shouting for disaster.

Amazon shines in two places:

1. You can get just about anything there, without having to check a bazillion places to find something.
2. It's very easy to use.

Manage both of those features and you'll be competitive.

End days when

[bobstreo]

Google and Wal-Mart form an alliance.

Re:End days when

[JohnFen]

They already did. Wal-Mart joined this "alliance" a while back.

Re: Jewgle built their own destruction

[Reverend Green]

How's the weather in
Mountain View today?

narcississm in its true glory

[Anonymous Coward]

Target is like K-mart for me,

Here's the situation the last time I went to Target

if I wanted one of those shitty crosley radio's

no fucking brasso!

you are the only consumer, shit you are the only human being on the planet, your needs are all that matters

Re:narcississm in its true glory

[Osgeld]

well considering I was one out of 3 people shopping in that warehouse... and it wasn't like I went at a screwball time, it should have been prime time, the stores around it were packed

That's fine

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm against both of them anyways.

Re:Why do JEWS try hide this? Ashamed?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's their insane delusions JustAnotherOldGuy a jew proves https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11228639&cid=55361525/ exposed as subhuman scum thieves banned country to country for 1,000's of years. They never learn. Your post and videos prove it and they must hide it. This is what caused it for them before. Exile and death.

Google vs Amazon

[taustin]

Gee, do I want to be sent to a Siberian Gulag or a Nazi concentration camp?

In some movies, there are no good guys, or even so-so guys. There are only evil masterminds intent on genetically modifying human beings into the perfect slaves.

it won't last..

[Anonymous Coward]

target broke up with amazon a few years ago (they used to power target's online commerce). target will also tire of google dictating terms and will leave this 'alliance' within three years.

Re:Jewgle built their own destruction

[Anonymous Coward]

Alexa, type me up some old anti-semitic bullshit to throw up on Slashdot today.

If only

[datavirtue]

If only Google was relevant in this space.....and Target, you missed the boat on "innovative." What a hack.

Target sucks!

[MoarSauce123]

Bought a watch there and for the longest time they adjusted the armband and swapped the battery for free. One fine day they told me they no longer offer that service. That was the last time I was in a Target store. With that attitude towards customers they can NEVER compete with Amazon.

Re:JEWgle built their own destruction

[Anonymous Coward]

More proof is this deluded psychopath jew JustAnotherOldGuy saying this https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11228639&cid=55361525/