IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/83672.html

The Amazon Monopoly: Is Amazon’s Private Label Business the Tipping Point?

Author

Listed:
  • Faherty, Emily
  • Huang, Kevin
  • Land, Robert

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to consider if Amazon’s increase in private label brands is the tipping point for transforming the e-commerce giant into a monopoly. To lay the foundation, we initially explore the culture, leadership, and business practices which are unique to Amazon that enabled the company to become one of the U.S.’s largest and fastest growing e-commerce websites. Introduced in 2009, Amazon’s private label business has further propelled Amazon’s growth while creating a competitive advantage for the company by offering high quality products to their customers at low cost options. In considering whether private label brands affect Amazon’s status as a monopoly, we first examine exactly what a monopoly is and if Amazon can be classified as one in its current state. We then take a deep dive into Amazon’s private label strategy, analyzing past performance to make educated assumptions about the future. Our research provided evidence indicating that Amazon’s actions are threatening the cooperative nature of its Marketplace by creating substantial barriers to entry and increasing Amazon’s market share. With this knowledge we make predictions about Amazon’s future and whether it will ever be seen as a monopoly under the economic, legal, and/or social definitions. While Amazon’s case is unprecedented, this paper sources leading economists, journalists, and other academic research to support our theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Faherty, Emily & Huang, Kevin & Land, Robert, 2017. "The Amazon Monopoly: Is Amazon’s Private Label Business the Tipping Point?," MPRA Paper 83672, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:83672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/83672/1/MPRA_paper_83672.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard J. Gilbert, 2015. "E-Books: A Tale of Digital Disruption," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 165-184, Summer.
    2. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    3. Carlota Perez, 2010. "Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 185-202, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gala, Kaushik, 2024. "Digital Davids, global Goliaths, and the Web3 sling," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 5-17.
    2. Haris Kitsikopoulos, 2024. "Steam power diffusion in the British cotton and woolen industries, 1774–1800: the role of firm size," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 559-580, October.
    3. Jay Pil Choi & Kyungmin Kim & Arijit Mukherjee, 2025. "“Sherlocking” and Platform Information Policy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(11), pages 9812-9830, November.
    4. Marco Gallegati, 2019. "A system for dating long wave phases in economic development," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 803-822, July.
    5. Frédéric Marty & Thierry Warin, 2020. "Keystone Players and Complementors: An Innovation Perspective," Working Papers hal-03029748, HAL.
    6. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2022. "Top R&D investors, structural change and the R&D growth performance of young and old firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(1), pages 1-33, March.
    8. Verrier, Brunilde & Strachan, Neil, 2024. "Sunset and sunrise business strategies shaping national energy transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Ekaterina Prytkova, 2021. "ICT's Wide Web: a System-Level Analysis of ICT's Industrial Diffusion with Algorithmic Links," Jena Economics Research Papers 2021-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    10. Xuelin Chen & Dongmei Zhou & Ziying Zhan & Ruoyu Lu, 2023. "When Do You Enter? Entrepreneurial Firms’ Entry Timing and Product Performance in the Digital Platform Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Angela Garcia Calvo & Martin Kenney & John Zysman, 2023. "Understanding work in the online platform economy: the narrow, the broad, and the systemic perspectives," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(4), pages 795-814.
    12. Falch, Morten, 2021. "Surveillance capitalism – a new techno-economic paradigm?," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238019, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    13. Yulong Jie & Shuigen Hu & Siling Zhu & Lieen Weng, 2024. "How Digitalization and Its Context Affect the Urban–Rural Income Gap: A Configurational Analysis Based on 274 Prefecture-Level Administrative Regions in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-41, December.
    14. Satish Nambisan & Yadong Luo, 2021. "Toward a loose coupling view of digital globalization," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(8), pages 1646-1663, October.
    15. Fragkandreas, Thanos, 2025. "Case study research on innovation systems: Paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    16. Chad M. Baum, 2013. "Mass-Produced Food: the Rise and Fall of the Promise of Health and Safety," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2013-03, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    17. Mustafin, A., 2022. "Long cycles, the soviet authority and economists: From the history of discussions of the 1920s," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 57(5), pages 126-140.
    18. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    19. Yinliang (Ricky) Tan & Janice E. Carrillo, 2017. "Strategic Analysis of the Agency Model for Digital Goods," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 724-741, April.
    20. Rita Strohmaier & Marlies Schuetz & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "A systemic perspective on socioeconomic transformation in the digital age," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(3), pages 361-378, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D5 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:83672. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.