首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

亚马逊卖家称其业务正面临灭顶之灾

JASON DEL REY
2024-03-29

对许多现有卖家来说,亚马逊这个赖以生存的星球的气候可能再也无法一如既往地支持他们的生活了。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

图片来源:CLASSICSTOCK/GETTY IMAGES

在过去几周里,《财富》杂志与20多位美国亚马逊长期卖家通过电话和短信进行了交流,他们都反复强调:这次不同以往。

“这次”指的是亚马逊向卖家征收最新一类费用。亚马逊在全球销售的商品中,超过60%是由这些中小企业提供的,而且亚马逊在处理商家商品的仓储和运送时,已经从每笔交易中平均抽取至少50%的佣金。

据《财富》报道,由于数项附加费用,商家向亚马逊支付的费用可能会进一步增加,这一事件很快就引起了争议,美国联邦贸易委员会(Federal Trade Commission)开始对其展开调查。长期以来,冷静明智的卖家相互分享的一致信息是什么?在亚马逊上销售商品可能很快就会难以为继。

因此,这些企业主中的许多人都预测,亚马逊卖家将面临灭顶之灾。一般的第三方卖家不会消失——一些适应力强的类型和新兴品种总会适应并生存下来——但对许多现有卖家来说,亚马逊这个赖以生存的星球的气候可能再也无法一如既往地支持他们的生活了。唯一的问题是,哪种类型的卖家会首先被淘汰出局(或至少被挤出亚马逊)?

会是那些不精打细算、难以预测新可变成本会如何影响其业务的卖家吗?如果该卖家维持低价,他可能直到为时已晚才会意识到这种变化对其财务状况造成的损害。

或者考虑一下精打细算的卖家的困境,他们明白即将发生什么,却发现自己陷入了困境。精打细算的卖家可能想要提高价格,以支付亚马逊的附加费。但是,如果该卖家的竞争对手保持低价,那么提高价格就无法实现。原因在于该卖家的竞争对手要么缺乏经验,不了解这些费用对盈亏底线的影响,要么总部在中国,因此利用亚马逊的跨境供应链服务,这可能使他们避免支付新的附加费用。

无论哪种情况,事情都可能变得很糟糕。

伯尼·汤普森(Bernie Thompson)说:“人们会倾向于压低价格,这只会侵蚀所有卖家的利润,将会有一大批卖家破产。”汤普森自2009年以来一直在亚马逊上销售产品,是亚马逊最畅销的USB电子产品品牌Plugable的创始人。

亚马逊表示,与其他主要物流服务公司宣布的费用变化相比,亚马逊的费用变化幅度要小得多,许多卖家平均每售出一件商品支付给亚马逊的费用将会减少。

亚马逊发言人米拉·迪克斯(Mira Dix)告诉《财富》杂志,费用变化“允许卖家选择在哪些地点让亚马逊承担不同层面的配送工作,以及在哪些地点自己进行配送。”

亚马逊的双赢局面

许多接受《财富》杂志采访的卖家都了解至少一项费用的基本原理,即所谓的“入站放置服务费”,但对收费的实施和可变性持不同意见。过去,亚马逊的卖家可以将一批商品从自己的仓库(或者基本上是他们租用的仓库)运送到亚马逊的仓库,然后亚马逊可能会将这些库存分开,运送到美国各地的配送中心,以便更接近亚马逊的客户。在这种情况下,亚马逊将承担在自己的配送中心之间运输这些货物的费用。

现在,随着亚马逊在削减自身成本的同时,推动在美国更多地区存储商品,以便更接近亚马逊的客户,因此,亚马逊希望卖家开始自己买单。如果卖家不支付将库存配送到至少四个亚马逊配送中心的费用,亚马逊将额外向卖家收取每件商品的“入站放置服务费”。(对于那些销量不足以在四个配送中心之间进行分配的规模较小的卖家来说,这意味着他们很可能无论如何都要支付某种形式的放置服务费)。

卖家向越多的仓库运送商品,费用就越低。但每件商品的费用将根据亚马逊为卖家提供的仓库数量以及仓库位置而变化。只有当卖家创建运送订单,亚马逊方显示费用时,企业主才能计算出向不同仓库运送的成本,从而选择最划算的方案。

在亚马逊自己的卖家论坛上,一位卖家的评论表达了对新出现的复杂情况的不满。

“唉——我认为你得攻读博士学位才能算出费用。”

图片来源:JENS BÜTTNER/PICTURE ALLIANCE VIA GETTY IMAGES

一些卖家同样对亚马逊新收取的“低库存水平”费用感到不满,如果卖家在亚马逊的仓库里没有足够的库存,亚马逊将向卖家收取费用,尤其是考虑到如果在亚马逊的仓库里存储过多的库存,亚马逊也会收取费用的情况。对于那些销售有保质期商品(因此不应存储太久)的商家,或者那些销售季节性商品的商家来说,这也在很大程度上造成混乱局面。

诚然,这两项新收费的问题在于,有一种简单的方法可以绕过它们:向亚马逊支付一项名为亚马逊仓储和配送(Amazon Warehousing and Distribution,简称AWD)的新型仓储服务费,以存储长期库存。注册使用亚马逊仓储和配送服务,这样,“入站放置服务费”和“低库存水平”费用就基本上不存在了。正如一位卖家所说的那样,这是一种非常明确的软硬兼施的方式,如果你不太善于外交辞令,也可以称之为“杀鸡用牛刀”的方式。

一些卖家告诉《财富》杂志,他们觉得亚马逊仓储和配送服务是一种合适的替代方案,但许多类型的卖家即使想改用亚马逊仓储和配送服务也无法实现。例如,尺寸过大的产品或有保质期的产品不能用亚马逊仓储和配送存储。更重要的是,一些卖家已经拥有或租赁了仓库用于长期存储,或者与第三方物流公司签订了长期协议,由第三方物流公司为他们管理存储设施。对他们来说,短期内转用亚马逊仓储和配送服务并不现实。

从表面上看,新收费对亚马逊来说似乎是一个双赢的局面——亚马逊可以通过新收费来抵消部分成本,或者在卖家选择亚马逊仓储和配送服务时获得对供应链的更大控制权。卖家的负担越来越重,很多人可能会选择退出。但是对于成千上万的卖家来说,在亚马逊和购物体验出现任何问题之前,会有很多卖家破产。

作为一名记者,在过去的十年里,我每周都与亚马逊卖家交谈,我从未遇到过这种程度的愤怒和绝望。许多中小型企业——这些成功的中小型企业通常不吝啬对亚马逊的赞美之词——但现在他们怒火中烧……而且极其绝望。亚马逊会倾听他们的请求吗?(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

在过去几周里,《财富》杂志与20多位美国亚马逊长期卖家通过电话和短信进行了交流,他们都反复强调:这次不同以往。

“这次”指的是亚马逊向卖家征收最新一类费用。亚马逊在全球销售的商品中,超过60%是由这些中小企业提供的,而且亚马逊在处理商家商品的仓储和运送时,已经从每笔交易中平均抽取至少50%的佣金。

据《财富》报道,由于数项附加费用,商家向亚马逊支付的费用可能会进一步增加,这一事件很快就引起了争议,美国联邦贸易委员会(Federal Trade Commission)开始对其展开调查。长期以来,冷静明智的卖家相互分享的一致信息是什么?在亚马逊上销售商品可能很快就会难以为继。

因此,这些企业主中的许多人都预测,亚马逊卖家将面临灭顶之灾。一般的第三方卖家不会消失——一些适应力强的类型和新兴品种总会适应并生存下来——但对许多现有卖家来说,亚马逊这个赖以生存的星球的气候可能再也无法一如既往地支持他们的生活了。唯一的问题是,哪种类型的卖家会首先被淘汰出局(或至少被挤出亚马逊)?

会是那些不精打细算、难以预测新可变成本会如何影响其业务的卖家吗?如果该卖家维持低价,他可能直到为时已晚才会意识到这种变化对其财务状况造成的损害。

或者考虑一下精打细算的卖家的困境,他们明白即将发生什么,却发现自己陷入了困境。精打细算的卖家可能想要提高价格,以支付亚马逊的附加费。但是,如果该卖家的竞争对手保持低价,那么提高价格就无法实现。原因在于该卖家的竞争对手要么缺乏经验,不了解这些费用对盈亏底线的影响,要么总部在中国,因此利用亚马逊的跨境供应链服务,这可能使他们避免支付新的附加费用。

无论哪种情况,事情都可能变得很糟糕。

伯尼·汤普森(Bernie Thompson)说:“人们会倾向于压低价格,这只会侵蚀所有卖家的利润,将会有一大批卖家破产。”汤普森自2009年以来一直在亚马逊上销售产品,是亚马逊最畅销的USB电子产品品牌Plugable的创始人。

亚马逊表示,与其他主要物流服务公司宣布的费用变化相比,亚马逊的费用变化幅度要小得多,许多卖家平均每售出一件商品支付给亚马逊的费用将会减少。

亚马逊发言人米拉·迪克斯(Mira Dix)告诉《财富》杂志,费用变化“允许卖家选择在哪些地点让亚马逊承担不同层面的配送工作,以及在哪些地点自己进行配送。”

亚马逊的双赢局面

许多接受《财富》杂志采访的卖家都了解至少一项费用的基本原理,即所谓的“入站放置服务费”,但对收费的实施和可变性持不同意见。过去,亚马逊的卖家可以将一批商品从自己的仓库(或者基本上是他们租用的仓库)运送到亚马逊的仓库,然后亚马逊可能会将这些库存分开,运送到美国各地的配送中心,以便更接近亚马逊的客户。在这种情况下,亚马逊将承担在自己的配送中心之间运输这些货物的费用。

现在,随着亚马逊在削减自身成本的同时,推动在美国更多地区存储商品,以便更接近亚马逊的客户,因此,亚马逊希望卖家开始自己买单。如果卖家不支付将库存配送到至少四个亚马逊配送中心的费用,亚马逊将额外向卖家收取每件商品的“入站放置服务费”。(对于那些销量不足以在四个配送中心之间进行分配的规模较小的卖家来说,这意味着他们很可能无论如何都要支付某种形式的放置服务费)。

卖家向越多的仓库运送商品,费用就越低。但每件商品的费用将根据亚马逊为卖家提供的仓库数量以及仓库位置而变化。只有当卖家创建运送订单,亚马逊方显示费用时,企业主才能计算出向不同仓库运送的成本,从而选择最划算的方案。

在亚马逊自己的卖家论坛上,一位卖家的评论表达了对新出现的复杂情况的不满。

“唉——我认为你得攻读博士学位才能算出费用。”

一些卖家同样对亚马逊新收取的“低库存水平”费用感到不满,如果卖家在亚马逊的仓库里没有足够的库存,亚马逊将向卖家收取费用,尤其是考虑到如果在亚马逊的仓库里存储过多的库存,亚马逊也会收取费用的情况。对于那些销售有保质期商品(因此不应存储太久)的商家,或者那些销售季节性商品的商家来说,这也在很大程度上造成混乱局面。

诚然,这两项新收费的问题在于,有一种简单的方法可以绕过它们:向亚马逊支付一项名为亚马逊仓储和配送(Amazon Warehousing and Distribution,简称AWD)的新型仓储服务费,以存储长期库存。注册使用亚马逊仓储和配送服务,这样,“入站放置服务费”和“低库存水平”费用就基本上不存在了。正如一位卖家所说的那样,这是一种非常明确的软硬兼施的方式,如果你不太善于外交辞令,也可以称之为“杀鸡用牛刀”的方式。

一些卖家告诉《财富》杂志,他们觉得亚马逊仓储和配送服务是一种合适的替代方案,但许多类型的卖家即使想改用亚马逊仓储和配送服务也无法实现。例如,尺寸过大的产品或有保质期的产品不能用亚马逊仓储和配送存储。更重要的是,一些卖家已经拥有或租赁了仓库用于长期存储,或者与第三方物流公司签订了长期协议,由第三方物流公司为他们管理存储设施。对他们来说,短期内转用亚马逊仓储和配送服务并不现实。

从表面上看,新收费对亚马逊来说似乎是一个双赢的局面——亚马逊可以通过新收费来抵消部分成本,或者在卖家选择亚马逊仓储和配送服务时获得对供应链的更大控制权。卖家的负担越来越重,很多人可能会选择退出。但是对于成千上万的卖家来说,在亚马逊和购物体验出现任何问题之前,会有很多卖家破产。

作为一名记者,在过去的十年里,我每周都与亚马逊卖家交谈,我从未遇到过这种程度的愤怒和绝望。许多中小型企业——这些成功的中小型企业通常不吝啬对亚马逊的赞美之词——但现在他们怒火中烧……而且极其绝望。亚马逊会倾听他们的请求吗?(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

In phone and text conversations with more than 20 longtime US-based Amazon sellers over the last several weeks, that was the common refrain Fortune heard again and again: this time is different.

“This time” refers to the latest class of fees levied on sellers by Amazon. More than 60% of the goods that Amazon sells across the globe are supplied by these small and mid-sized businesses, and Amazon already takes a cut of at least 50% on average from every sale when it handles the storage and shipping of a merchant’s goods.

Now the amount that merchants fork over to Amazon is likely to grow even more thanks to a couple of additional fees that have quickly become controversial enough that the Federal Trade Commission has begun probing them, as Fortune reported exclusively last week. The consistent message that long-time, level-headed sellers are sharing with each other? Selling on Amazon may soon be untenable.

And as a result, many of these same business owners are forecasting something of an extinction event for Amazon sellers. The general category of third-party sellers won’t vanish—some hardy types and emergent breeds will always adapt and survive—but for a great many existing sellers, the view is that the climate on planet Amazon may no longer be able to support life as they’ve known it. The only question is which type of seller will be forced out of business (or at least, off of Amazon) first?

Will it be the unsophisticated seller, struggling to predict how the new variable costs will affect its business? If this seller keeps its prices low, it might not realize the damage caused to its financials until it’s too late.

Or consider the plight of the sophisticated seller, who understands what’s coming but finds itself in a bind. This seller may want to raise prices to account for Amazon’s added fees. But that might not be possible if the seller is competing against rivals keeping prices low because they’re either A. too inexperienced to understand the impact of the fees to their bottom lines, or B. based in China, and therefore utilizing Amazon cross-border supply chain services which may help them avoid the new fees.

In either scenario, things could get ugly.

“People are going to tend to underprice and just erode everyone’s margins,” said Bernie Thompson, who has been selling on Amazon since 2009 and is the founder of a top Amazon seller, the USB electronics brand Plugable. “There are going to be a bunch of bankruptcies.”

Amazon has said that the fee changes are significantly less than those announced by other major fulfillment services, and that many sellers will see a decrease in the average fees paid to Amazon per unit sold.

The fee changes “allow sellers to choose where they want to have Amazon take on different aspects of fulfillment and where they want to do the work themselves,” Amazon spokesperson Mira Dix told Fortune last week.

A win-win for Amazon

Many of the sellers who spoke to Fortune understand the rationale of at least one of the fees, known as the “inbound placement fee,” but disagree with the implementation and variability of the fees. In the past, Amazon sellers could ship a selection of their goods from their own warehouse – or one they essentially rent space in – to a single Amazon facility, and then Amazon might split up that inventory and ship to various facilities across the U.S. to get closer to Amazon customers. In these scenarios, Amazon would foot the bill to transport those goods between its own fulfillment centers.

Now, as Amazon pushes to store more goods closer to customers in more U.S. regions while cutting its own costs, Amazon wants sellers to start footing the bill themselves. Amazon will charge sellers a new “inbound placement fee” per item if the seller won’t pay to send their inventory to at least four Amazon facilities. (For smaller sellers who don’t sell enough to even split between four facilities, it means they will likely pay some type of placement fee no matter what.)

The more warehouses a seller will ship to, the lower the fee. But the per-unit fee will change depending on how many warehouses Amazon makes available to a seller and where those warehouses are located. And only when a seller goes to create a shipment and Amazon displays the fees, can the business owner figure out the cost of shipping to the various warehouses locations to try to select the least expensive option for them.

One comment from a seller on Amazon’s own seller forum captured some of the frustrations with the new complexities.

“Arghh — I think you need a phD to be able to figure out the fees.”

Some sellers are equally frustrated with a new “low inventory” fee Amazon will charge sellers if they aren’t stocking enough inventory in Amazon warehouses, especially considering Amazon also charges fees if you are storing too much stock in an Amazon facility. Substantial confusion also remains for merchants that sell goods that expire, and thus shouldn’t be stocked too long, or for those that sell seasonal items.

The catch, of course, with both of the new fees is that there is one straightforward way around them: by paying Amazon for a new-ish warehouse service called Amazon Warehousing and Distribution (AWD) to store long-term inventory. Sign up to use AWD and – voila – the inbound placement and low-inventory fees basically disappear. A pretty clear carrot-and-stick approach, as one seller called it, or a crumb-and-sledgehammer one if you are feeling less diplomatic.

Some sellers told Fortune that they feel AWD is a suitable alternative, but many types of sellers couldn’t switch to AWD even if they want to. Oversized products, for example, or products with an expiration date, can’t be stored with AWD. What’s more, some sellers already own or lease their own warehouse for long term storage, or have long term commitments with a third party logistics company that manages a storage facility for them. For them, Switching to AWD anytime soon isn’t a realistic option.

On the surface, the new fees sure seem like a win-win for Amazon — the company can offset some of its costs through new fees or gain greater control of the supply chain when sellers opt for AWD. The increasing burden on sellers may be so much that many call it quits. But with hundreds of thousands of sellers, it will take a lot of seller failures before Amazon and its shopping experience feel any pain.

As a reporter who’s been talking to Amazon sellers on a weekly basis for the past decade, I’ve never before encountered this level of outrage and despair. Many of these small and mid-sized businesses – great SMB success stories who typically aren’t afraid to praise the company – are now furious…and desperate. Will Amazon hear their pleas?

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开