Amazon, Facebook and the Modern Trust [the ET Zeitgeist]

3+

Every morning, we run the Narrative Machine on the past 24 hours worth of financial media to find the most on-narrative (i.e. interconnected and central) stories in financial media. It’s not a list of best articles or articles we think are most interesting … often far from it.

But for whatever reason these are articles that are representative of some sort of chord that has been struck in Narrative-world.


Amazon.com’s Ad Prices Could Soar Next Year [Fox Business]

There’s even an opportunity for Amazon to develop its own ad optimization tools like Facebook or Google.

As advertisers see improved return on investment from their optimization efforts, they’ll be willing to spend more per impression or click.

This is a story that I’ve heard Howard Lindzon (@howardlindzon) tell a dozen times …

Back in the olden days, and by that I mean 2012 or thereabouts, Facebook didn’t charge nearly enough for its ad inventory. With a pretty modest budget, a start-up company with a mass-appeal product or service (LifeLock, for example) could get a stellar reach into a crazy number of households.

Those days are long gone. Today you can still get a good reach into whatever number of households you want by advertising on Facebook, but there are no more bargains to be had. Want a crazy number of households? Then it’s going to cost you a crazy amount of money.

From a narrative perspective, what I find interesting is how Facebook’s price increases were implemented under the narrative of “optimization”, as if Facebook were doing you a favor by raising their prices so much.

Sure, the ads today are more targeted and (maybe) more effective, but the price increases and supply decreases are FAR GREATER than the (maybe) improved efficacy. That’s what it means to have pricing power, and that’s what it means – in the modern sense of the word – to have narrative power.

To date, Facebook has been really good at understanding narrative power from the perspective of intellectual property.

But also to date, Facebook has been really terrible at understanding narrative power from the perspective of government and the regulatory State.

Now Amazon is following in Facebook’s footsteps, both in its utilization of the narrative power of “optimization” and in its utilization of the raw pricing power of a monopoly.

Both Facebook and Amazon are smiley-face monopolists, claiming a narrative of efficiency and competition when nothing could be further from the truth. The only difference is that I suspect Amazon will be really good at the regulatory-compliant narrative, too.

No matter.

Time to break up the trusts. Again.


3+

To receive a free full-text email of The Zeitgeist whenever we publish to the website, please sign up here. You'll get two or three of these emails every week, and your email will not be shared with anyone. Ever. It's our effort to spread the word about what we're doing, and allow you to read more Epsilon Theory!

Notify of
3 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Peter
1 year ago

It helps to own WaPo to help with (design?) the narrative
Start by forcing Amazon to divest a propaganda tool geared to influence legislators in DC

John
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter

Way too much Fiat News influence here.. Bezos owns WaPo not Amazon. Debate the merits of both entities, but way too wide of brush to just lump them as a single company with a singular focus. In fact, I don’t think it’s too far of reach to say that many (left leaning) reporters at WaPo don’t like everything about Amazon’s business or their affects it’s had on Mom & Pop stores

Peter
1 year ago
Reply to  John

My prediction for articles critical of Amazon by WaPo over the next 5 years is -0-

The Daily Zeitgeist

The Zeitgeist – May 7, 2021

By Ben Hunt | May 7, 2021 | 8 Comments

Our weekly digest on what we’re working on …

Including this article from the WSJ: Millions Are Unemployed. Why Can’t Companies Find Workers?

I dunno, if only there were some mechanism by which companies could entice people to work for them. Weird.

Read more

The Zeitgeist – April 30, 2021

By Ben Hunt | April 30, 2021 | 3 Comments

Here’s what we’re reading and working on this week at Epsilon Theory.

Read more

The Zeitgeist – April 19, 2021

By Ben Hunt | April 19, 2021 | 6 Comments

Here’s what we’re reading and working on this week at Epsilon Theory.

Read more

Hot and Cold

By Rusty Guinn | March 23, 2021 | 26 Comments

Most of us are under the impression that a protracted conflict within China will increase national unity.

Not this time.

Read more

A Change in the Water

By Ben Hunt | March 3, 2021 | 3 Comments

Increasingly, the common knowledge of our investment world – what everyone knows that everyone knows – is that inflation is a problem and you should be focused on it.

Read more

Danish Food-Safety Expertise for the Win

By Ben Hunt | February 10, 2021 | 23 Comments

WHO leadership continues to be necessary part of the Chinese narrative machine.

It’s more than a disgrace. It’s more than a humiliation of the people who do good and important work through WHO.

It’s a betrayal of the entire world.

Read more

DISCLOSURES

This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.