To: spal who wrote (93390 ) 2/11/2000 2:28:00 PM From: Bearded One Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
God, what a snow job! Let's go through this point by point:The turnaround started on Jan. 21, when Amazon announced the latest in a series of deals to rent some of its Web-site space to other e-tailers--in return for a stunning $606.5 million in cash. Except that all the e-tailers are internet startups with uncertain revenues. Also, Amazon invested in the startups, a-la the Boston Chicken model. Then, on Feb. 2, it announced that its original books business is profitable--a sign that its core e-tailing model might just have legs after all. Except that they used accounting tricks to make their 'profitability' claim, to the extent that they said anything at all. They also didn't say how profitable it was, even after all their shenanigans.The kicker: Some analysts now think Amazon will be profitable in 2002, a year earlier than expected. The same analysts who thought Amazon would be profitable by now.Over the holidays, hundreds of administrative workers had to help out in distribution centers and customer service to keep up with demand, raising the specter of execution snafus as Amazon keeps growing. That problem will not go away. And if the stock doesn't keep jumping, employees will start to be loath about giving up their holidays for free.When you reach a certain critical mass of customers, you very quickly have a long line of people who want to associate with you.' In other words, people who give you boatloads of money for nothing more than a few square centimeters of your Web page. Except that that hasn't happened. Amazon gives the companys investment money. And the return money isn't upfront, and the companies promising it are far from stable.Gross margins fell by more than a third, to 13%, thanks largely to the inventory writedown Oh, oops. The most important fact in the whole article, and it gets buried in the middle.Actually, the costs never were that much relative to traditional retailers, whose biggest expenses by far are building and staffing stores. Amazon's fixed assets, such as warehouses, for instance, on average produce double the sales of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Barnes & Noble stores Except that this is another accounting trick. Barnes & Noble stores don't have to ship their books to the consumer, the consumer does the work himself. Ultimately, the proof is that Barnes and Noble bookstores are profitable. Amazon is not.As a result, Amazon's marketing cost to acquire a customer is only $19, less than any other e-tailer. Even if the acquiring cost is zero, it doesn't mean profitability. Gross margins have to be high, and they keep dropping. Ultimately, the real story about Amazon is that gross margins are too low in its core businesses. Amazon has offered no path to increase them excluding revenue-transferring schemes with other companies which may increase gross margins but only at the cost of the investment Amazon makes.