1 day ago
A “modern leather” array lamp, listed online astatine Walmart, changeable up from $24.99 to $39.
The value of an aerial fryer connected a unit tract called Newegg went from $84.99 to $149.99.
An electrical ice-cream shaper was listed astatine conscionable $17.99 astatine Amazon and Best Buy. Then it became unavailable astatine Best Buy, and much than tripled successful value to $59.99 astatine Amazon.
The value hikes and nan merchandise disappearances were not nan blips of proviso and request – they were nan results of behind-the-scenes unit by Amazon, according to soul emails reviewed by nan Guardian and tribunal claims against nan world’s largest company.
For years, arsenic galore Americans person felt squeezed by nan costs of basal user goods, Amazon has deployed a assortment of techniques that person incentivized suppliers to push for higher merchandise prices connected different retailers’ sites, California authorities declare successful court.
In immoderate soul emails, Amazon labor person flagged debased merchandise prices connected rival retailers’ sites arsenic threats to Amazon’s ain profitability, and informed nan products’ suppliers that their income connected Amazon.com person been trim – aliases mightiness soon beryllium trim – going forward.
Other emails picture Amazon slashing its merchandise prices to lucifer unit rivals for illustration Walmart and Home Depot, past pushing suppliers to compensate it for nan gross mislaid owed to these little prices.
To flight this financial pressure, immoderate suppliers person responded pinch a accelerated and inexpensive alternative: making judge nan prices of their products are higher pinch Amazon’s rivals, aliases pulling their products from those rivals altogether, according to soul records cited successful litigation.
Over nan past decade, Amazon has suppressed nan income of immoderate suppliers’ products aliases demanded millions of dollars successful compensation from them because of nan debased prices of Amazon’s unit rivals, according to a trove of soul institution emails, presentations and notes reviewed by nan Guardian, arsenic good arsenic interviews pinch 15 existent aliases erstwhile Amazon supplier representatives, institution labor and authorities and national rule enforcers.
The wide of soul Amazon records were obtained from Amazon by California’s lawyer wide arsenic portion of a suit that alleges nan institution has engaged successful wide value fixing, which is defined arsenic arrangements among companies that activity to raise aliases different power nan prices of products aliases services.
The Guardian examined those records, arsenic good arsenic hundreds of pages of deposition grounds of existent and erstwhile labor of Amazon and supplier companies. Most of nan documents and depositions – which were partially unsealed successful caller months – person ne'er been publically reported on.
The California lawyer general, Rob Bonta, alleges that Amazon’s strategies person coerced suppliers into raising nan prices of their products pinch its rivals.
In nan lawsuit of nan ice-cream maker, Bonta’s agency points to emails that opportunity Amazon temporarily took “down” nan supplier’s inventory disconnected its level – a move that prompted its manufacturer, a patient called Maxi-Matic, to scramble to propulsion its inventory from Best Buy, eliminating Amazon’s value title from nan electronics retailer.
By nan extremity of that day, Amazon had put Maxi-Matic’s merchandise “back live” connected Amazon.com and much than tripled its price, nan records show.
In nan lawsuit of nan aerial fryer, Amazon “suppressed” nan product’s income connected its level and told its supplier that it would extremity ordering respective of its products for Amazon.com – unless nan supplier agreed to reimburse Amazon for revenues nan online retailer had mislaid owed to its believe of copying competitors’ little prices, according to emails revealed done nan lawyer general’s lawsuit.
This spurred nan supplier, a room appliance patient called Chefman, to move to unafraid a value summation for nan aerial fryer astatine Target and an online retailer called Newegg arsenic it hashed retired an statement to reimburse Amazon $100,000 connected apical of nan $400,000 it had already fixed back, according to nan emails.
Asked astir nan aerial fryer’s value jump, Mark Friedman, Chefman’s elder vice-president of world sales, told nan Guardian: “I can’t talk to you because I still do business pinch Amazon and I don’t want to wound nan manus that feeds me.”
Amazon’s written responses to nan Guardian did not respond to questions astir these circumstantial incidents. The institution accuses nan California lawyer wide of “distorting a fistful of emails” retired of “nearly 1 cardinal vendor communications” to “suggest a far-reaching conspiracy among unspecified thousands of vendors and retailers”.
Amazon says it useful difficult to protect customers from “paying excessively much” and to discuss economical position that let it “to connection products astatine nan competitory prices” that “customers expect from Amazon”. It besides says nan California lawyer general’s suit is “asking nan tribunal to forestall Amazon from negotiating pinch its vendors to little prices, apt starring to higher prices for Amazon’s customers”.
The incident involving nan value hike for nan leather array lamp, for example, was portion of a broader speech astir dozens of products connected Amazon.com originated from a New Jersey based supplier called All The Rages.
The email speech shows that Amazon negotiated for costs decreases for galore of nan supplier’s different products, ensuring little prices for consumers connected Amazon.com.
But nan messages besides mention to raising nan prices of different items sold by Amazon’s competitors.
After Amazon reached out, an All The Rages worker named Joseph Martin replied that his institution had “contacted” various unnamed retailers “to hole nan retail” and had seen an summation successful unit prices “for a batch of nan items already”.
Two days later, Martin told Amazon that nan lamp value astatine Walmart had accrued from $24.99 to $39. “We should beryllium bully now,” he said.
Martin told nan Guardian that nan lamp’s value alteration “reflected nan correction of a pricing error”.
“Any determination regarding unit pricing was made by Walmart and Amazon, truthful you would person to inquire them astir their pricing decisions,” said Martin, who added that his institution believes nan California lawyer general’s claims “are without merit”.
Amazon and Walmart declined to supply statements astir this circumstantial incident.
‘It seemed for illustration he knew what was happening’
While specified strategies tin make savings for Amazon consumers, they tin besides raise prices for consumers shopping elsewhere, an effect that institution labor connected nan crushed were good alert of, according to supplier representatives arsenic good arsenic erstwhile Amazon labor who said to nan Guardian connected nan information of anonymity.
One erstwhile vendor manager, who worked astatine Amazon from 2022 to 2024 earlier getting laid off, said that connected telephone calls pinch suppliers he tried to beryllium upfront astir nan truth that raising prices pinch Amazon’s competitors could thief them debar demands that they compensate Amazon for lower-than-anticipated profit margins.
“Hey, if you tin make judge this merchandise doesn’t proceed to beryllium sold astatine this little value point, past we don’t person to support revisiting this chat astir margin,” nan erstwhile Amazon vendor head recalled telling suppliers.
A erstwhile Amazon “customer success” head said that Amazon unit had “very black-and-white conversations” pinch suppliers astir nan imaginable of raising prices pinch Amazon’s competitors.
“They’d say, ‘You request to spell to Target. You request to spell talk to Walmart to get them to raise their price,’” he recalled.
The erstwhile customer occurrence head told nan Guardian that higher ups instructed Amazon labor to person definite conversations pinch suppliers complete nan telephone successful bid to debar a integer way of imaginable price-fixing allegations.
“The only norm was, ‘Do not person this successful writing’,” he recalled.
The erstwhile employees’ accounts echo respective Amazon emails and presentations relied connected successful tribunal by California’s lawyer general. One from 2022 reminds unit to “not usage email” for definite conversations pinch suppliers. Another email from 2020 reminds unit to “keep successful mind it is often champion to person these conversations complete nan phone”.
Amazon did not straight respond to questions astir these sources’ statements and those presentations cited successful tribunal by nan lawyer general. But successful ineligible filings, nan institution has pointed to different instructions it disseminated to unit barring them from making agreements pinch vendors aliases competitors connected pricing.
Ryan Turano, main exertion serviceman of a fertilizer institution called AgroThrive, told nan Guardian that erstwhile Amazon’s profitability was threatened owed to its value matching, an Amazon vendor head would scope retired to him and sometimes database disconnected businesses for illustration Walmart aliases Home Depot for him to contact.
“He’d go, ‘Home Depot is astir apt causing nan problem, talk to your vendor head location to spot what you could do,’” recalled Turano. “It seemed for illustration he knew what was happening.”
In 1 soul email, that Amazon head asked Turano for an “update connected nan value lucifer rumor we discussed”. Turano told him that he had “just sewage retired of a gathering pinch nan Home Depot manager,” who had “agreed to raise nan prices this time”.
Home Depot declined to remark connected nan email.
Turano blamed Amazon for nan unit that resulted successful value increases for illustration nan 1 he negotiated for pinch nan location betterment retailer.
“We were astatine their mercy. Because we didn’t person nan resources to push back,” Turano said.
“It was conscionable a nightmare. It didn’t consciousness good,” he added. “It’s almost understandable. Because they’re truthful large they tin do immoderate they want.”
Amazon – which precocious surpassed Walmart arsenic nan world’s biggest institution by gross – is presently facing aggregate tribunal cases alleging price-fixing.
Price-fixing lawsuits against Amazon being pursued by nan California lawyer wide and nan Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are some slated to spell to proceedings successful early 2027. The institution is besides battling akin claims successful a backstage people action suit successful national tribunal successful Seattle and a ineligible action pursued by Washington DC’s lawyer general, which was initially dismissed but revived connected appeal.
Amazon denies nan claims successful nan various tribunal actions and says its practices promote little prices, incentivize title and create greater merchandise action for consumers.
In nan California case, Amazon told nan Guardian that nan value fixing mentation asserted by nan lawyer wide is “legally untenable, pinch nan authorities offering nary grounds of immoderate connection betwixt Amazon and immoderate different retailer, overmuch little an statement among them to hole prices. The practices California challenges are communal successful nan unit manufacture and portion of nan pro-competitive give-and-take betwixt Amazon and its vendors.”
In 2022 Amazon agreed to salary $2.25m to resoluteness claims by Washington state’s lawyer wide that it forced immoderate merchants to raise prices for products they sold done nan company’s “Sold by Amazon” plan. The institution made nary admittance of liability and said it powerfully believed nan programme was legal.
The powerfulness of algorithms
Amazon has agelong prided itself connected offering Americans nan lowest prices online.
The institution points to studies showing that complete nan past 9 years, Amazon has consistently offered consumers nan lowest prices among awesome American retailers and world research suggesting that nan title betwixt online and accepted retailers has driven down merchandise prices and might person really tamped down connected ostentation successful years past. According to a 2025 study from nan analytics patient Profitero+, Amazon’s prices were connected mean 14% little than its starring competitors.
But nan FTC and California lawsuits allege nan company’s vaunted value floor is simply a mirage, obscuring its behind-the-scenes efforts to thrust up its competitors’ prices.
Throughout nan 2010s, Amazon systematically mapped nan prices of its main unit rivals crossed nan internet, according to grounds of existent and erstwhile Amazon labor successful depositions conducted by nan FTC and California authorities.
In 2011, Amazon had a squad of astir 200 to 250 group utilizing a hybrid operation of manual and automated methods to surveil competitors’ prices, Karthik Mitta, a erstwhile Amazon director, testified past twelvemonth successful a deposition successful nan FTC case. By 2019, Mitta testified, that squad had grown to astir 2,000 people, enabling nan institution to usage web crawlers to cod pricing accusation and show tens of thousands of competitor sites.
Harnessing this knowledge of pricing information crossed nan internet, Amazon adopted what 1 executive called a “game theory” attack to pricing which could thief it evade nan costs of a “perfectly competitory market”, according to nan FTC’s lawsuit.
Amazon developed an algorithm that quickly copied rivals’ value changes “to nan penny”, according to nan FTC. If unit rivals raised aliases lowered its price, nan FTC claimed, Amazon would do nan same.
The institution did not respond straight to questions regarding allegations astir its algorithm, but pointed nan Guardian to academic literature and industry reports noting really communal it is for retailers to way prices and for suppliers to effort to enforce minimum prices for their products.
Arjun Narayan, a erstwhile wide head for Amazon’s vendor program, told nan Guardian that nan company’s price-following strategies were designed to guarantee that nan institution continued to fulfill laminitis Jeff Bezos’s original mission: that it strive to thief customers find “anything they mightiness want to bargain online” astatine “the lowest imaginable prices”.
“If I fig retired that you’re really trading astatine a little value elsewhere, nan very committedness is defeated, right?” noted Narayan, who now advises brands pinch his ain firm, SalesDuo.
The FTC argues nan algorithm sought to instill different instruction among Amazon’s competitors: they could not compete pinch Amazon by offering little prices, truthful pinch nary amended options left, they whitethorn arsenic good raise their prices – increases that Amazon’s algorithm would past happily follow.
‘We will discontinue from your problematic competition’
In 2020, 3 days earlier Black Friday, Amazon informed Armen Living, a California based furnishings supplier, that it “had to suppress and remove” 1 of its agency chairs from its platform, according to emails released successful nan California lawsuit.
Amazon had bought nan chair, a minimalist curvy portion pinch a walnut wood exterior and a chrome-plated alloy base, for $79 a pop, and had planned to waste them connected its tract for $116.45.
But different retailer successful nan marketplace happened to beryllium trading nan aforesaid chair for conscionable $58.62, and Amazon had matched that price, which was truthful debased that Amazon was losing money connected each sale.
Following nan value reduction, Amazon made clear to Armen Living that if it wanted to person nan chair “back” up connected “the website soon”, it was up to nan furnishings marque to do thing astir nan financial compression caused by Amazon’s ain programmatic value matching.
In an email, Paige Nguyen, an Amazon vendor manager, laid retired 3 options that nan furnishings institution could take from to “help address” nan issue:
It could compensate Amazon for nan gross nonaccomplishment – paying Amazon $57.83 for each chair sold connected nan site.
It could slash nan magnitude it was trading nan chairs to Amazon, a early giveaway to nan unit colossus.
Or – apt nan slightest costly action – it could “manage” nan “other channels” wherever it sold nan chair, a euphemism pointing to nan Amazon competitors who were trading nan chair for less, according to nan California lawsuit.
Nguyen didn’t elaborate connected what managing these different “channels” meant, sticking to nan benignant of connection that Amazon uses erstwhile training unit connected really to talk pinch suppliers. The California lawyer wide alleges position for illustration “channel optimization” are a “naming gloss” for Amazon’s push to get suppliers to enforce minimum prices pinch aliases propulsion inventory from Amazon’s competitors.
Rather than paying compensation aliases offering a costs alteration to Amazon, Armen Living made clear it understood conscionable really it could negociate its channels to appease nan online retailer.
The institution promised it would “look further into nan imaginable offenders” successful nan marketplace offering debased prices and propulsion its inventory from those Amazon competitors if request be.
“Amazon is ever our apical priority,” noted an Armen Living trading analyst: “… If nan problematic unit does not hole by nan extremity of nan week, we will discontinue from your problematic title to guarantee that Amazon tin return to a patient authorities pinch these items.”
In nan end, Armen Living confirmed successful an email to Amazon that it had removed its inventory from nan “offenders sites”.
Nguyen, nan Amazon employee, thanked her for her action, but complained that nan prices of 2 different chairs, which she had besides flagged, had “dropped” and “still” not recovered “to nan original price”.
“Let maine cognize if you request much clip to set this,” Nguyen said.
Nguyen did not respond to requests for comment. Amazon and Armen Living did not respond to circumstantial questions astir this incident.
Martin Heubel, a advisor for e-commerce brands who antecedently worked arsenic an Amazon vendor manager, said Amazon’s compensation demands thief entrench its powerfulness successful nan market.
“It’s not truthful overmuch astir nan money that you recover. It’s much astir nan acquisition of your suppliers,” said Heubel, who said he was speaking arsenic a advisor who advises brands negotiating pinch Amazon and not from his acquisition arsenic a erstwhile Amazon employee.
“If you spell elsewhere, you will get punished … truthful deliberation doubly astir it whether you really do.”
Amazon has said successful ineligible pleadings that nan incidents cited successful nan California lawsuit are “alleged to person occurred galore years successful nan past” and impact “employees who deficiency pricing authority” and “a microscopic information of Amazon’s catalog of millions of products”.
Confidential presentations
The unit Amazon exerts connected its suppliers whitethorn only beryllium partially visible successful soul institution emails for illustration these because of Amazon’s efforts to train unit connected really to debar putting definite messages successful writing, according to a caller tribunal filing by nan California lawyer general.
The soul records obtained successful nan California suit see an in-house position from 2019. It instructs unit to nonstop screenshots of rivals’ merchandise listings to suppliers erstwhile making compensation requests, but to debar mentioning nan companies’ names.
double quotation markAvoid utilizing competitor name
The erstwhile Amazon vendor manager, who asked to speak anonymously, said that he would debar explicitly telling a supplier that Walmart had caused a price-drop, which Amazon’s algorithm had followed. Instead, he recalled, he would say, “There’s a retailer successful bluish that sells this product” – a reference to Walmart’s blue, yellowish and achromatic colour palette.
An Amazon position from 2022, besides revealed successful litigation, instructs unit that it is “not ok” to talk pinch suppliers astir “channel pricing”, an industry term referring to a supplier’s varying prices pinch different retailers.
double quotation markdo not usage email
The aforesaid slideshow, however, besides gives unit a seemingly contradictory instruction, noting that if they request to item “activities successful nan channel” affecting Amazon’s profitability aliases if they request to discuss compensation payments pinch suppliers, they should “not usage email”. It past reminds labor to travel nan antecedently mentioned rules against discussing “channel pricing”.
In an question and reply pinch nan Guardian, nan California lawyer general, Bonta, said Amazon’s usage of “code” words would not beryllium an capable defense successful court.
“Whatever euphemism it is, whether it beryllium ‘update pricing’ aliases ‘resolve an issue’ aliases ‘address a concern’ successful nan market, each that intends is: ‘Fix prices. Get your little value up to Amazon’s higher value aliases suffer nan consequences,’ and that’s illegal.”
The institution rejects that claim. It says nan behaviour nan authorities of California challenges consists of regular unit contracting and negotiating that “drives down prices for consumers”.
In court, Amazon has pointed to emails and unit presentations showing its compliance pinch laws protecting free marketplace competition.
In 1 unit position from 2021, for example, nan institution instructed unit that they should not “permit vendors to stock competitor pricing intentions pinch us”.
Likewise, an email from 2023 shows an Amazon worker telling a vendor typical that Amazon has “no liking successful being part” of discussions, “directly aliases indirectly” pinch different retailers astir their prices.
Despite Amazon’s guidance to staff, representatives for nan suppliers themselves said successful immoderate email exchanges that they would thief raise prices pinch Amazon’s competitors.
Documents disclosed successful litigation show that connected nan day of 17 February 2023, an Amazon vendor head named Kara King emailed Andrew Newell, past a head for an e-commerce institution that helped brands interface pinch Amazon. The Amazon worker wanted Newell to get an appliance institution he was representing called RugDoctor to motion a “guaranteed minimum margin” agreement.
The guarantee would guarantee it compensated Amazon for a pet-focused vacuum cleaner whose profitability had “been challenged” owed to “sales value compression/competitive matching” – a reference to Amazon’s believe of matching its competitors’ prices via algorithm.
But Newell responded that nan guarantee wouldn’t beryllium “necessary”. He said he was assured he could “get Walmart to raise nan value backmost up” truthful that Amazon could past lucifer it. “This would resoluteness nan separator issues,” he wrote.
In response, King, Newell’s counterpart astatine Amazon, continued to float nan anticipation of compensation funding, but suggested they not talk nan matter further complete email. “This is simply a delicate speech for galore reasons and astir apt champion suited for a telephone call/virtual meeting,” she said.
In an question and reply pinch nan Guardian, Newell said he did not callback nan particulars of nan incident but said nan incentives that Amazon had created for brands made raising prices pinch competitors an evident solution.
“It’s benignant of for illustration basal trading knowing and math,” he said.
King did not reply questions from nan Guardian astir nan exchange.
Newell noted that Amazon vendor managers would show him to schedule value increases pinch Walmart past scope backmost retired to them, truthful they could “flip” nan value backmost up “on nan aforesaid day”. Amazon staffers avoided putting specified messages successful email, he said.
“They cognize precisely what they’re doing,” he said, adding, “They’re really good coached. They wanna get you connected nan phone.”
Show more
