🛑🛑✋⏱Boycott List⏱✋ 🛑🛑

[Dirty_habiT]

I'll update with legit entries. 
 

It's time to stop.

 

Coca Cola

Budweiser

Walmart

Amazon

Nestlè

Monsanto

PayPal

FedEx

 

[Dark_Knight]

Wal mart and amazon

[Dark_Knight]

We should boycott fast food and any food or drink that links to inflammatory bowel syndrome while also regulating dietary requirements of all food to eliminate illness and combat obesity that has been brought upon us through the greed of large food distributors.

 

Also Obama likes them or something I bet so we can keep this political.

[Mercer]

A corporation would really have to fuck up big time before I'll boycott them. I'm going for highest quality, lowest price, and if I'm going to ignore my own needs, I'll need details. Like clear reasons why, and not marxist reinterpretations of "because they're wildly successful" type of bullshit. I need examples of actual NAP violations before I'll sacrifice.

[Dirty_habiT]

Haven't ordered from Amazon in months now. This has done a few good things for me. 
 

* keeps me from frivolously buying. 
* keeps me from supporting Amazon's shitty

 - products

 - business practices. 

 

Walmart sucks. It's just brick and mortar Amazon. Sucks to suck and have a book seller come wreck your whole shit. Both companies are Chinese in regards to their business practices and partners. 
 

 

 

[Dark_Knight]

Free beer is tight

[Dark_Knight]

Both wal mart and Amazon allow you to sell your product at their stores. They will allow proof of concept, and if your product is successful, they will make an identical product and sell it for a lower price. They’ll take a loss on the product since they have such large capital. The goal is to drive you out of business and steal your product. They are thieves.

[Dirty_habiT]

That is a good reason to not do business with them. I have heard stories of non English speaking Chinese people showing up at the SEMA auto show in Las Vegas with calipers and note pads..... recording and measuring dimensions of brand new turbochargers and that kind of thing. 
 

No customer actually cares about these things. Most competitors would purchase a turbo to reverse engineer it. This measuring is lower than low in terms of just shitting all over R&D costs other companies have spent to develop products. 

[Mercer]

 

5 hours ago, Dark_Knight said:

Both wal mart and Amazon allow you to sell your product at their stores. They will allow proof of concept, and if your product is successful, they will make an identical product and sell it for a lower price. They’ll take a loss on the product since they have such large capital. The goal is to drive you out of business and steal your product. They are thieves.

 

You do know that everyone is doing this exact same thing right? Like the vast majority of manufacturer's aren't making a product that only they make, and they're in competition with no assurances somebody else can't do what they do better. That's why when you go to a grocery store in a free market you might find dozens of types/brands of peanut butter. If enough of a product is sold, the store makes it's own generic version of it. This sounds like you don't want Amazon to be able to do what everyone else is doing. Imagine having a great idea for a product like a car, or a pair of shoes, but not making it because somebody else already makes a similar product. Imagine if henry ford's methods of mass production weren't adopted by others. Competition is a good thing, especially for the consumer. The goal isn't to put anyone else out of business, it's profit, and everyone shares this same common goal.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Mercer

[LUGR]

27 minutes ago, Mercer said:

 

 

You do know that everyone is doing this exact same thing right? Like the vast majority of manufacturer's aren't making a product that only they make, and they're in competition with no assurances somebody else can't do what they do better. That's why when you go to a grocery store in a free market you might find dozens of types/brands of peanut butter. If enough of a product is sold, the store makes it's own generic version of it. This sounds like you don't want Amazon to be able to do what everyone else is doing. Imagine having a great idea for a product like a car, or a pair of shoes, but not making it because somebody else already makes a similar product. Imagine if henry ford's methods of mass production weren't adopted by others. Competition is a good thing, especially for the consumer. The goal isn't to put anyone else out of business, it's profit, and everyone shares this same common goal.

 

[KILZ FILLZ]

58 minutes ago, Mercer said:

 

 

You do know that everyone is doing this exact same thing right? Like the vast majority of manufacturer's aren't making a product that only they make, and they're in competition with no assurances somebody else can't do what they do better. That's why when you go to a grocery store in a free market you might find dozens of types/brands of peanut butter. If enough of a product is sold, the store makes it's own generic version of it. This sounds like you don't want Amazon to be able to do what everyone else is doing. Imagine having a great idea for a product like a car, or a pair of shoes, but not making it because somebody else already makes a similar product. Imagine if henry ford's methods of mass production weren't adopted by others. Competition is a good thing, especially for the consumer. The goal isn't to put anyone else out of business, it's profit, and everyone shares this same common goal.

 

not sure if you’re alluding to the illusion of choice, but that’s what I took from it. 
 

 

 

 

edit: Apex tool group owns a ton of proprietary aerospace tooling according to this infographic. Get you st0nks on yall

[Mercer]

@KILZ FILLZI was referring to a retailer that decides to manufacture the products that do well in their stores, competing with their own vendors. That's actually creating an additional choice for consumers, not taking one away. First Amazon sells brand X widget, then Amazon sells brand X widget, and the Amazon alternative to Brand X widget. So no, that's sort of the opposite thing you're referencing.

 

The only similarity between what I was discussing, and this so called "illusion of choice" is the knee jerk reaction of "Big Company Bad" even when that big company is helping you get more for your money. 

 

Let's say Amazon buys the exact same product, from the exact same factory for the sake of argument.  Nobody is buying it, unless it's either cheaper, or higher quality. Even if it's the exact same product repackaged, and rebranded it's still a win win for consumers trying to save money. Competition is always a good thing for everyone as long as the playing field is free from interference, like a government tilting the playing field for the larger, or even smaller firm. Granting one firm a monopoly on a product just because they sold it first,  ultimately hurts consumers in the end.

 

Hopefully that explains what I was trying to say better.

[Dirty_habiT]

I agree with buying the company, licensing the patent, or buying products from the company. Undercutting the price with inferior products combined with dishonest product reviews (gamed) doesn't seem like the American way to me. 
 

 

[Dark_Knight]

It all started with NAFTA and I guess everyone has their own ideas of ethical business. For me that’s dirty. Wal mart was on of the first to do it large scale with consumer products. Amazon does it now. It’s bully tactics and they hide behind the law to protect themselves. If you want to steal a product from someone ok but that person should be able to kill you for taking bread off their table. It’s a cowards act of monopolizing.

[Mercer]

44 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

I agree with buying the company, licensing the patent, or buying products from the company. Undercutting the price with inferior products combined with dishonest product reviews (gamed) doesn't seem like the American way to me. 
 

 

 

Undercutting the price with cheap shit is still good, sometimes people prefer to loose a little quality if they can save money. As to planting fake reviews, that's a goal post shift but let's go anyway. Planting fake reviews is fraud, AKA a NAP violation so obviously I'm 100% against it. Not sure if Amazon would even need to do this, and if the risk to them is worth whatever reward or not but, this isn't an Amazon thing, or a reason to hate Amazon specifically. Everyone fudges reviews on Amazon, sends free product to reviewers, or in some cases straight up buy 1000 reviews from companies savvy enough to do so.  Some of these are NAP violations, some aren't. My point still stands, Amazon isn't doing anything more harmful than normal, or at least harmful enough to ever fuck myself over by intentionally limiting my choices.

[ndv]

25 minutes ago, Dark_Knight said:

It all started with NAFTA and I guess everyone has their own ideas of ethical business. For me that’s dirty. Wal mart was on of the first to do it large scale with consumer products. Amazon does it now. It’s bully tactics and they hide behind the law to protect themselves. If you want to steal a product from someone ok but that person should be able to kill you for taking bread off their table. It’s a cowards act of monopolizing.

 

This reminds me of the Documentary  Super Size Me 2: Holy Chicken. 

[Mercer]

35 minutes ago, Dark_Knight said:

It all started with NAFTA and I guess everyone has their own ideas of ethical business. For me that’s dirty. Wal mart was on of the first to do it large scale with consumer products. Amazon does it now. It’s bully tactics and they hide behind the law to protect themselves. If you want to steal a product from someone ok but that person should be able to kill you for taking bread off their table. It’s a cowards act of monopolizing.

 

What you're advocating for is Monopolization, and less market competition. You're implying it's somehow immoral for a company to compete with another one. That's the very definition anti competitive.

 

Following this line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, we'd only have 1 manufacturer per product granted a monopoly because they made it first. They wouldn't earn market share because they make a product better, or because they can deliver it cheaper, they'd have a monopoly just because they made it first. You ignoring how shitty everything would be for consumers if they weren't able to be given more choices.

 

It's like maybe I should kill anyone else in my profession because they're competing with me. That's backwards/emotional based thinking under any context. 

Edited April 21, 2021 by Mercer

[Dark_Knight]

Amazon isnt a monopoly? That argument only works in a vague context. I’m not saying that one company should control everything. NAFTA opened up companies with large capital to bully small businesses into a corner. It is ethically wrong. They can rig everything in their favor. Law included. Take losses on shit just to make sure the corner markets. It’s all grimey.

 

 

[Mercer]

What exactly does Amazon have a "monopoly" on?

[Dark_Knight]

Ok an oligopoly for technicality. 

[Mercer]

They don't even have an oligopoly, and it's not just a technicality.

 

Bottom line, they're very successful. Consumer's buying choices are better because of them, or they'd be shopping someplace else. I've adequately demonstrated both your claims, one where they violate someone else's monopoly by competing with them, and the other claim that they're a monopoly are incorrect. If Amazon was conspiring to stop mail order/fulfillment with a couple of other firms I'd entertain that oligopoly claim but there's not any merit to that either.

 

The real reason you dislike Amazon is rooted in your subconscious, and boils down to an irrational disdain for their success in competition. Most people want to believe other people's, or companies success is nefarious, or feel like it's harmful to consumers somehow. Not sure why it's like Justin Bieber, Kardashian syndrome where everyone hates basically because they have more followers, or customers than anyone else. Most people harbor this type of irrationality I've noticed, so you'll probably make way more friends spouting unfounded negative claims about them, than defending them as I tend to do. I'd just rather have the right perspective, than the popular one. I just need a real reason, like something that involves logic if I'm going to wait in line at wal mart, and pay higher prices.

[Dark_Knight]

I like local business and don’t believe the cheapest product is always a good thing long term. Would definitely label them an oligopoly. Our economic viewpoints are different so what you see as good business, I see as ethically wrong. I don’t have stats at hand, but the amount of businesses that have been shut down due to wal mart and Amazon is high. My heart is always for the people and never for the business.

[Dirty_habiT]

10 hours ago, Mercer said:

 

Undercutting the price with cheap shit is still good, sometimes people prefer to loose a little quality if they can save money. As to planting fake reviews, that's a goal post shift but let's go anyway. Planting fake reviews is fraud, AKA a NAP violation so obviously I'm 100% against it. Not sure if Amazon would even need to do this, and if the risk to them is worth whatever reward or not but, this isn't an Amazon thing, or a reason to hate Amazon specifically. Everyone fudges reviews on Amazon, sends free product to reviewers, or in some cases straight up buy 1000 reviews from companies savvy enough to do so.  Some of these are NAP violations, some aren't. My point still stands, Amazon isn't doing anything more harmful than normal, or at least harmful enough to ever fuck myself over by intentionally limiting my choices.

Amazon profits off of dishonest reviews. You cannot sell on their platform without paying the Amazon tax (membership). You're vehemently against taxing sooooo....

 

With brick and mortar there was no gaming reviews at the same spot the purchases were made.  Lazy/ignorant consumers are the victims.  Society has a "just send it" and "I don't care because it works" attitude about all kinds of shit now. I'm sure some would even defend it. 
 

I don't buy cheap shit ever and I consider it a disservice to ignorant people to offer products that are vastly inferior copies of other products while simultaneously delisting products from competition. They don't even need to delist. They just need to put the products they don't want to sell on page three. 

[KILZ FILLZ]

8 hours ago, Mercer said:

They don't even have an oligopoly, and it's not just a technicality.

 

Bottom line, they're very successful. Consumer's buying choices are better because of them, or they'd be shopping someplace else. I've adequately demonstrated both your claims, one where they violate someone else's monopoly by competing with them, and the other claim that they're a monopoly are incorrect. If Amazon was conspiring to stop mail order/fulfillment with a couple of other firms I'd entertain that oligopoly claim but there's not any merit to that either.

 

The real reason you dislike Amazon is rooted in your subconscious, and boils down to an irrational disdain for their success in competition. Most people want to believe other people's, or companies success is nefarious, or feel like it's harmful to consumers somehow. Not sure why it's like Justin Bieber, Kardashian syndrome where everyone hates basically because they have more followers, or customers than anyone else. Most people harbor this type of irrationality I've noticed, so you'll probably make way more friends spouting unfounded negative claims about them, than defending them as I tend to do. I'd just rather have the right perspective, than the popular one. I just need a real reason, like something that involves logic if I'm going to wait in line at wal mart, and pay higher prices.

gotcha gotcha yeah opposite of what I was thinking 

[Mercer]

3 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Amazon profits off of dishonest reviews. You cannot sell on their platform without paying the Amazon tax (membership). You're vehemently against taxing sooooo....

 

With brick and mortar there was no gaming reviews at the same spot the purchases were made.  Lazy/ignorant consumers are the victims.  Society has a "just send it" and "I don't care because it works" attitude about all kinds of shit now. I'm sure some would even defend it. 
 

I don't buy cheap shit ever and I consider it a disservice to ignorant people to offer products that are vastly inferior copies of other products while simultaneously delisting products from competition. They don't even need to delist. They just need to put the products they don't want to sell on page three. 

 

 

You know more about the web than I do, so you should know if Amazon wants to promote a product they just bump up that's product's prominence in search. Put that product in related items more often, etc. Very simple shit. Why would they risk legal action by intentionally allowing/making fake reviews? Just doesn't make sense, there's virtually no incentive since they have control over the entire site, as opposed to just reviews. A more accurate thing to say is Amazon profits from both the honest, and dishonest reviews on their site because while they can't be perfect 100% they really do help consumers make good decisions. Brick and mortar has zero review systems in place, you only get feedback/advice from the seller as opposed to other consumers.

 

Also "cheap shit" has been around long before Wal Mart, or Amazon were even in business. It's the consumers themselves that dictate what sells, not an overarching goal by Jeff Bezos to sell lower cost items which runs counter to their incentives economically.

[Dark_Knight]

I’d also argue that the popular opinion is Amazon is great, not the contrary. 

[Mercer]

10 minutes ago, Dark_Knight said:

I’d also argue that the popular opinion is Amazon is great, not the contrary. 

 

You can almost see the butthurt surging through people's veins when Amazon's quarterly reports show record profits, more so than any other company right now. Good company IMO, and with this pandemic we're lucky they were in the right place, at the right time to meet consumer consumption needs during quarantine. Yet people went straight to Amazon in this thread, for the easiest to debunk reasons I might add. Nobody has mentioned Nestle, or Monsanto, or companies that have truly immoral business practices in place.

[Dark_Knight]

You said it was the popular opinion to go against Amazon. But it’s not. Nestle and Monsanto are awful too btw. They go along with my food post in this thread.

[Mercer]

I didn't say that exactly. I was implying they're the most likely recipient of irrational hate, as evident by this thread. McDonalds was the first corporation I witnessed in this position. If you believed all the bullshit said about them you'd think they mowed the entire rainforest down in 1995.

 

Most people do not harbor these irrational feelings, or even care for that matter. Also, people have a tendency to talk shit about Amazon for that smug feeling you get when people agree with you, and still order shit from them on the DL.

 

There's this thing where most of your decisions are made by your sub conscious mind, and your  conscious mind acts mainly as your subconscious's press secretary, rationalizing the decisions you make. We basically rationalize our emotionally based decisions by convincing ourselves, and others the decision is based in logic, not only to other people, but we rationalize this to ourselves as well. Convincing yourself you've made a decision for practical reasons, when practicality had nothing to do with it.

 

This is a product of human evolution under an economic system. We consider ourselves 100% rational human beings, even when the facts don't really support that. Decisions are made for subconscious reasons, or a feeling we have. That's why addiction, crime, teen pregnancy, and obvious self destructive behavior is so commonplace. We're by default animals, acting on our neurological defaults, and the chemical reactions in our brains, and can only escape this by valuing a tangible framework for making decisions like logic.

[Dirty_habiT]

I don't pay as close attention to the earnings and tax statements or whatever as some people do. My decision to stop using Amazon was based solely upon the fact that they allow nefarious activities to exist on their platform under the guise of "we are just doing capitalist things."

I would bet they profit more off of selling products that are cheap copies from China than they do off of USA made products with 100% legit reviews. 100% is a difficult if not impossible number to achieve. 
 

So we could settle for 98% legit. There's a big huge difference between that and 15% legit human written reviews by humans that organically stumbled upon the product and decided to buy it AND then go review it. 
 

People, I think, for a large part are lazy enough to review rarely. This is based upon what I do and when I review something. I only review really excellent products or really terrible ones.  
 

You guys that would like to know a bit more about how ALL of this works, you say I know more about how the web works but it's all been figured out in terms of social engineering. 
 

Look up Net Promoter Score or NPS and you will open your eyes to a big world of why the commerce sites online are set up the way they are. This also ties heavily into the same types of ideas that drive SEO.  These systems are easily gamed when consumers believe in the five star rating. 

Five star even gives more fudge room than ten star if you look in terms promoter, neutral, and detractor.  So five star rating is a way of boondoggle and filangle the resolution of the "true score". What I'm saying is that even 5 star is NPS on some bullshit Amazon made up scale that, like everything else they do, greedily benefits them. 
 

I've added nestlè and Monsanto to the list.