Do you seriously think that, if Amazon could snuff out the problem in days or weeks by hiring some people, they wouldn't do it?
Yes, I do. Because that is the choice they have actually made.
What i suggested is SOP for Amazon's competitors and indeed the retail market as a whole due to product liability laws in the US and UK. Not hiring QC is therefore a deliberate choice.
My guess would be that if you could actually solve the counterfeit problem given a budget of a $1B, Amazon would do it without a second thought.
Strongly disagree, because that's a far bigger budget then they would actually need to spend on QC staff and they still haven't done it. (They could hire over 25000 qc staffers for 1 billion. They don't need that many, a few hundred will suffice based on SOP qc processes.)
> They could hire over 25000 qc staffers for 1 billion. They don't need that many, a few hundred will suffice based on SOP qc processes
How exactly would you do this? In the last year 3.4 billion items were sold by American SMBs alone on Amazon. That is 110 items per second. If you hired 25000 QC staffers working at perfect efficiency, they would need to each handle over 1 item per minute. And ensuring that something, often inside of packaging, is not counterfeit is not exactly trivial work that can be pumped out like this. Or you could approach it from the supply side. 45 new sellers join Amazon every minute, and many of those packages never even go through Amazon's hands. And catching a fraudulent seller does not solve the problem - they will just rebrand and reenter the platform.
Comparable marketplaces like eBay have the exact same problem. You are applying principles from a completely different business model - retail - to any online marketplace and pretending they are the same when they are absolutely not.
Please, show me how a few hundred QC people are going to solve this problem. If you have a real solution, Amazon will pay hand over first for it - but actually want to dig into the details of the problem is so much harder than standing on your soapbox and yelling about how Amazon is crippled by greed and stupidity.
Yes, I do. Because that is the choice they have actually made.
What i suggested is SOP for Amazon's competitors and indeed the retail market as a whole due to product liability laws in the US and UK. Not hiring QC is therefore a deliberate choice.
My guess would be that if you could actually solve the counterfeit problem given a budget of a $1B, Amazon would do it without a second thought.
Strongly disagree, because that's a far bigger budget then they would actually need to spend on QC staff and they still haven't done it. (They could hire over 25000 qc staffers for 1 billion. They don't need that many, a few hundred will suffice based on SOP qc processes.)