The recent disclosures that Amazon copied and rigged search results to promote its own brands have triggered a firestorm of controversy. While Amazon denies copying any products, these documents reveal that it rigged search results in India to boost its own brands. These documents were reviewed by two top Amazon executives. In response to these findings, the company said it was committed to making sure that its own brand would appear high on search results.
Search seeding isn’t a sinister tool to boost ASINs
You might be wondering whether search seeding is a sinister method of boosting ASINs on Amazon. In fact, it is a legitimate technique used by Amazon to boost search rankings and direct customers to their products. While these practices benefit Amazon, they also hurt rival merchants’ sales. But does search seeding hurt competitors’ sales? Let’s take a closer look.
Search sparkle is a digital technique to direct customers to certain products
If you’re trying to increase sales on Amazon, you’ve probably heard about Search Sparkle. This digital technique uses the SERP to direct customers to specific products on Amazon. It works much like Google’s search function, and the first window a user has into a piece of content is the product preview. Search sparkle helps you boost click-through rates, encourage customers to add a product to their cart, and ultimately increase sales.
Amazon denies copying products
While Amazon has repeatedly denied allegations that it copied products or rigged search results, the revelations that it systematically copied third-party seller data and used that information to increase the prominence of its own products are troubling. Legislators have given Amazon until November 1 to produce proof to prove they’re not doing so. They also accused the company of misleading them with false information. Reuters and The Markup have cited internal documents to back up their claims.
In response to the allegations, Amazon denied copying and rigging search results in the US and other countries. The company has also denied the accusations and stated that it does not use seller-specific data for its search results. In a congressional hearing in the US, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos told lawmakers that the company does not alter search results. But the allegations are still under investigation.
The documents also suggest that Amazon used data from third-party sellers to bolster its own private brand products. In addition to using proprietary information from third-party sellers to boost sales, Amazon employees were leveraging that information to create a strategy for selling its own private brands in the US and the UK. These employees planned to duplicate the products in the same quality as the reference product. It was a shady strategy to steal their customers’ market share.
A Reuters investigation into the practices of Amazon’s India operations has found that the company copied other sellers’ products and rigged search results. The Reuters report suggests that two top executives were involved in reviewing the strategy. Two of those executives, Russell Grandinetti and Diego Piacentini, left the company. A spokesperson for Amazon has said that Bezos was not aware of the document.
It rigged search results to favor its own products
Reuters has published a report detailing how Amazon ripped off third-party sellers and rigged search results to favor its own product. The company’s president, Jeff Bezos, testified before Congress that such practices do not occur. But the accusations were so serious that he has called for a government investigation. In the report, Reuters found evidence that Amazon’s senior executives were in on the search result manipulation.
The executives behind the investigation found that Amazon rigged search results to favor its own product. The company promoted its own product, Solimo, by displaying a’search sparkle’ on relevant searches. In other words, the results were rigged to favor Amazon. This resulted in sales of Solimo products. Despite this, the company is still thriving in India. In fact, the company’s India strategy is a model of unethical business practices.
It used proprietary data from third-party sellers to launch competing products
A new report claims that Amazon used data from third-party sellers to launch competing goods. The Wall Street Journal cites internal documents that show Amazon executives used data from vendors to find out which items were bestselling. Amazon executives allegedly used this data to make competing products, and they developed workarounds to circumvent internal restrictions. While the company has denied using third-party sellers’ data to make own-label products, the report claims that Amazon executives “went over the fence” in their decision-making.
Despite the fact that Amazon prohibits using third-party sellers’ data to launch competing products, it has still been found that employees of private-label businesses have been using this information to create in-house products. This includes data on third-party seller sales, their marketing costs, and their share of sales. This information has allowed executives to determine how best to launch competing products and how to improve Amazon’s business.
In addition to launching competing products, Amazon has manipulated its third-party marketplace policy in order to boost its own sales. This tactic can bankrupt small businesses, cause them to close down, and reduce competition in the marketplace. Despite the fact that Bezos has defended Amazon’s practice, it is crucial to keep the law in mind when judging the company’s business practices.
The allegations of competition violations in the Amazon marketplace have led to antitrust investigations in the United States and Europe. The company is currently facing an investigation in the European Union over its alleged misuse of seller-specific data. Despite the recent findings, Amazon has not yet responded to our requests for comment. The company is currently investigating the allegations in several countries, including the European Union and India. A lawsuit could be filed against Amazon to determine whether the company has violated its antitrust laws.