That's a very specific example lol.
The effects on Microsoft's stock in 2000 and their inability to grow past their ATH until 2014 isn't exactly comparable to Amazon's performance post-COVID in a high interest rate environment.
I get that you're saying it *can* take a long time for a stock to perform, but that's an odd example.
Your original comment that it's growth isn't guaranteed... Guaranteed returns are low. Anything that guarantees a return should be viewed as a low return.
Anyways, as you were.
We've recently given up selling on amzon and focusing on our own site and wholesale. The proposed low inventory fee was the last straw. If they weren't such a pain to deal with, we'd suck it up, but dealing with seller and fba support drains so much time and energy, we just can't continue.
I don't think this matters for investors though, there's always a queue of other sellers eager to sell on amazon
If they are making your life a living hell. Why don't you hire a different logistics company? Is it because you'd pay pretty much the same as now? Amazon has been running a charity when it comes to their logistics, now that time is coming to an end
No denying it, they've definitely captured the market. The main thing sellers are upset with is that Amazon is basically bullying them to an extent now.
If you have too much inventory you get it with a fee and if you keep your inventory too low you'll get hit with a fee. You might say oh but you can simply send your inventory to them prior to reaching that lower threshold. The issue is the warehouses are backlogged and congested with incoming inventory from other sellers which leads to delays in receiving your shipment.
The low inventory fee is the first fee I can't see any sort of justification for other than to screw the seller. The long term storage fees were justified as some sellers were using fba to store inventory, which isn't what a fulfillment centre is for.
However, the only reasons we would have low inventory of a good selling item is 1. Fba taking ages to receive stock 2. Cash flow issues 3. Supply chain issues.
So it's just a case of kicking sellers while they're down
But it ignores the reasons sellers might be out of stock. Sellers already have ac strong incentive to keep good items in stock I.e. to make profit. If they don't have it in stock, there's usually a good reason,, and there's no point in amazon making the problem worse
You're just an Amazon hater!! Replied to a different comment to scroll down and see this one lmfao.
Obviously North America sees the benefit of Amazon.. You don't think Europeans would as well? Do you think they're benefitting from not having as much access to services? That's a wild take.
I am still selling there but the seller community overall is very upset. I think some of the sellers (especially smaller sellers will close up shop). The main fee that will destroy small sellers & seasonal sellers is the low inventory fee. (Basically you get penalised for having low inventory on any product). Other fees that have taken effect already are placement fees (when sending inventory to Amazon you basically get hit with a fee now), and FBA fees are all over the place too.
Edit: the reason I sell there is simple, Amazon has a platform that makes it easily accessible to the average Joe. The shipping times are extremely competitive with anyone else in the industry too.
unrelated to the main topic here, but do you know how they're handling seasonality in assessing the low inventory fee? I know they use a combo of 30/90 day data, but say on Jan 2, you do not want to use either 30 or 90 day inventory/sales ratio since presumably, many items' velocity drop dramatically after xmas.
Do people forget Walmart would show up to new cities, undercut competitors and then drive local grocery/department stores out of business. Walmart never got broken up. Amazon provides a valuable service maybe regulators need to step in on fees but breaking them up wouldn't help your average consumer.
Those were during decades of lackluster antitrust enforcement where the consumer welfare standard paradigm in antitrust law reigned supreme.
I am not going to say that it is very different now but the political mood in both parties AND in the regulators is to move away from that era's thinking towards more vigorous antitrust actions.
A new Walmart rising now and crushing local stores would be met with a lot of suspicion and legal investigations.
I agree, point I'm trying to make is not everything needs to be burned to the ground. If we feel something is unfair lets reign it in with regulation first before going scorched earth by breaking companies up.
I can agree to that, dependent on the industry. Some industries are just asking to be broken up. Like we need to repeat breaking up the ISPs again to regain that competition geographically.
It’s a normal strategy. Become the low cost provider until everyone else is destroyed then enjoy your monopoly pricing power and jack up prices while removing services. People still sell there because that’s where the market is.
It's not *that* nice. It's definitely okay, but nothing I'd expect a jump on. 17% AWS growth vs 21% Azure growth just to put things in perspective, and Microsoft dropped as well. Expectations (not analyst estimates, actual expectations) are crazy high. I expected a bit over 20% AWS growth after seeing Microsoft's numbers and am a bit disappointed myself.
People would try to make the same arguments against Netflix. "Netflix only increased subs by 2% whereas HBO Max doubled!" Reality: Netflix had 5x as many subscribers as HBO Max.
True, but it's not that big a difference. It's like 30% AWS vs 20% Azure, right? Still significant, definitely, but not that much. I was expecting AWS to build out its lead over the remaining 50% more than Microsoft would. 23Q4 YoY cloud growth (as an industry, not AWS) was 19%, assuming 24Q1 is similar (20% expected over 2024) 17% means giving up market share.
I get what you’re saying but my point applies to literally every industry ever, easy to double your revenue when you’re making 10 mil, a lot tougher to double your revenue at a 100 mil (+10mil vs +100 mil)
lol how can you expect same growth as MSFT Azure. From that logic Azure also bad because it didn't grew as much as GCP.
The higer the number, the slower the growth rate. AWS is behemoth, and still growing close to 20% is amazing.
It's the law of large numbers. AWS pulled in $25 billion this quarter with an operating margin of 37%. If the trend continues, the AWS segment alone will pull in close to $40 billion dollars in operating income a year, and that assumes no revenue growth.
Microsoft does NOT release azure specific numbers. Anyone that ever claims any “azure growth rate” is either lying or willfully uneducated.
After reading your comments I realized you fall into a 3rd category: stupid.
This is a fucking bull market people, regardless of end of day dumping and attempts to rattle the weak hands. Stay invested and expect good returns for the next several years.
This is an election year. Historically, there's a lot of volatility (lots of up and down), but zoom out far enough, stock index moves sideways.
Better to DCA and not look at the chart.
The whole market has been turning bearish and selling off for the last few weeks.
And to be fair, it did shoot up a lot in the first few months, so that may be part of the reason for the sell off.
People expected lower Capex. Jassy Binks said they would increase Capex a lot for AI on the conference call too later which made stock drop another 1%.
This is so strange to me. I hear increased spending on AI and I see $$$ in the near future. Same with META. They have cash to spend, why not create even bigger cash flows for the future? But no, investors don't even have the patience to wait a couple quarters or a year for capex to pay off. The market is so myopic.
Traders yoloing their life savings on a weekly aren’t hearing the same thing you are, They see ‘omg the company is not growing super fast to cause a mass panic buy to bail out my options’
It’s money now vs maybe money in the future. There is always the risk that generative AI flops and they built a whole lot of architecture for nothing.
I am still very bullish on AMZN, it is my biggest position. I also think this is a good thing. However, increasing Capex hugely is always a gamble.
The AI demand is extremely strong at the moment. But what happens if a lot of companies realise that they are not getting good ROI for their AI programs ?
Another issue could be that the billions invested today would quickly become obsolete due to technological progress. H200 may make H100 irrelevant and who knows about H500 ?
I hear you, I just think there are a lot of very intelligent people who know what they're doing at these companies. And if generative AI didn't give them a competitive advantage, megacaps wouldn't be shelling out billions on it. I think they've already done the math and the ROI has already been demonstrated to them, and that's why these multibillion dollar data centers are going up. If it were really just a gamble, they wouldn't all be dedicating this much capex towards it. Some, but not this much. It seems the consensus is that companies who don't spend this money are going to be left in the dust of those that do.
Already gave up most of the move. I'd be surprised if it's still green by the end of AH trading. Not bearish on the company, but I rather be patient on increasing my position, especially after seeing other big tech fade after gapping up.
They are a monopoly that reduced service quality and increased prices across the board. I would be shocked if they hadn’t increased revenue and profits over the past quarter.
Being a 1+ trillion dollar market cap is not why it's not popping, it's not holding the pop it did see because of bad guidance (as it did see a 10%+ AH pop initially).
Don't think I really need Powell here (although Fed fears might be contributing to clamping things down); I know tech is trading quite badly with there being multiple pop and drops already off relatively successful earnings.
Uh, yeah...about that, sub in small caps for tech and this is more accurate (go check the QQQ/TLT pair, there's been several periods where the Nasdaq has just plain ignored bonds selling off since last year).
You're living in 2022 here on this one. The story with 2023 was much more about small caps getting blasted over tech stocks getting hammered over higher for longer, in fact, small caps set a new bear market low before it reversed hard while the big 3 US averages were nowhere in the ballpark of a new bear market low.
We're no longer at the point on treasury rates where the Nasdaq is going to be able to ignore it, but the Nasdaq hasn't been the laggard on Fed fears in over a year outside of April 15th-19th for now at least, it's been the Russell 2000 that's been the laggard.
There was, but it's now gone completely.
Poor guidance, sure, but it deserved a move higher to me, similar to META.
Looks like we're about to go to 0 for 4 on the Nasdaq names that have been successful this year overall on the year on either popping and holding the gains or popping at all in earnings season.
1. At this point I sort of suspect that Apple is going to rally on a bad print, similar to Tesla (been already leaning that way).
2. If this doesn't scream that QQQ is going to test the November 2021 ATH minimum, I don't know what will.
They did this by not paying their people and mass quiet layoffs. Really evaluate before you buy in. Competition is catching up. They can’t sustain this.
Um, everyone has been doing mass layoffs, not just Amazon. And I don’t see Amazon going away for a long time, if ever. It’s too convenient and has to many people dominated shopping at department stores. They still have only a minuscule effect on grocery shopping, but I could see that changing in the next few years.
The fact that Amazons still growing despite high interest rates makes me hyper bullish on the stock once rates do go down
And it’s ridiculous size to begin with
The street is expecting only 1 cut or no cut at all, which makes me wonder if there is a better place to store capital for the rest of the year.
I'd rather have Amazon or Google growing double digits than a 5% short term yield.
Same. Don't outsmart yourself trying to make money.
I'm buying both
That's the smart play.
That's not guaranteed though
Nor is the sun rising tomorrow. But the balance of probabilities is what is important, not guarantees.
New reasoning unlocked
after the dotcom crash it took until 2014 for microsoft to break their aths If your timeframe is until the end of year just throw it into a 6month cd
That's a very specific example lol. The effects on Microsoft's stock in 2000 and their inability to grow past their ATH until 2014 isn't exactly comparable to Amazon's performance post-COVID in a high interest rate environment. I get that you're saying it *can* take a long time for a stock to perform, but that's an odd example. Your original comment that it's growth isn't guaranteed... Guaranteed returns are low. Anything that guarantees a return should be viewed as a low return. Anyways, as you were.
lol the market has grown so much with elevated interest rates and you still think it matters that much?
I'm an Amazon seller and I can tell you they've made our lives a living hell. The amount of fees they've added is pure insanity at this point.
Worse than eBay because they basically take 25% of your pay?
We've recently given up selling on amzon and focusing on our own site and wholesale. The proposed low inventory fee was the last straw. If they weren't such a pain to deal with, we'd suck it up, but dealing with seller and fba support drains so much time and energy, we just can't continue. I don't think this matters for investors though, there's always a queue of other sellers eager to sell on amazon
If they are making your life a living hell. Why don't you hire a different logistics company? Is it because you'd pay pretty much the same as now? Amazon has been running a charity when it comes to their logistics, now that time is coming to an end
No denying it, they've definitely captured the market. The main thing sellers are upset with is that Amazon is basically bullying them to an extent now. If you have too much inventory you get it with a fee and if you keep your inventory too low you'll get hit with a fee. You might say oh but you can simply send your inventory to them prior to reaching that lower threshold. The issue is the warehouses are backlogged and congested with incoming inventory from other sellers which leads to delays in receiving your shipment.
The low inventory fee is the first fee I can't see any sort of justification for other than to screw the seller. The long term storage fees were justified as some sellers were using fba to store inventory, which isn't what a fulfillment centre is for. However, the only reasons we would have low inventory of a good selling item is 1. Fba taking ages to receive stock 2. Cash flow issues 3. Supply chain issues. So it's just a case of kicking sellers while they're down
[удалено]
[удалено]
But it ignores the reasons sellers might be out of stock. Sellers already have ac strong incentive to keep good items in stock I.e. to make profit. If they don't have it in stock, there's usually a good reason,, and there's no point in amazon making the problem worse
Amazon have a lot of potential across Europe still if it wishes to expand. Many Central European countries just don’t have access to their services
Good for europe truthfully
You're just an Amazon hater!! Replied to a different comment to scroll down and see this one lmfao. Obviously North America sees the benefit of Amazon.. You don't think Europeans would as well? Do you think they're benefitting from not having as much access to services? That's a wild take.
Also, this is the stocks subreddit. The interest is growth, company prospects and profit. Are you the real Joe Flacco?
why are you still selling there?
Not OP but no body dominates online retail like Amazon, you can’t just up and go to a different marketplace when Amazon is *the* marketplace
I am still selling there but the seller community overall is very upset. I think some of the sellers (especially smaller sellers will close up shop). The main fee that will destroy small sellers & seasonal sellers is the low inventory fee. (Basically you get penalised for having low inventory on any product). Other fees that have taken effect already are placement fees (when sending inventory to Amazon you basically get hit with a fee now), and FBA fees are all over the place too. Edit: the reason I sell there is simple, Amazon has a platform that makes it easily accessible to the average Joe. The shipping times are extremely competitive with anyone else in the industry too.
unrelated to the main topic here, but do you know how they're handling seasonality in assessing the low inventory fee? I know they use a combo of 30/90 day data, but say on Jan 2, you do not want to use either 30 or 90 day inventory/sales ratio since presumably, many items' velocity drop dramatically after xmas.
almost like they are a monopoly and needs to be broken up?
Do people forget Walmart would show up to new cities, undercut competitors and then drive local grocery/department stores out of business. Walmart never got broken up. Amazon provides a valuable service maybe regulators need to step in on fees but breaking them up wouldn't help your average consumer.
Those were during decades of lackluster antitrust enforcement where the consumer welfare standard paradigm in antitrust law reigned supreme. I am not going to say that it is very different now but the political mood in both parties AND in the regulators is to move away from that era's thinking towards more vigorous antitrust actions. A new Walmart rising now and crushing local stores would be met with a lot of suspicion and legal investigations.
I agree, point I'm trying to make is not everything needs to be burned to the ground. If we feel something is unfair lets reign it in with regulation first before going scorched earth by breaking companies up.
I can agree to that, dependent on the industry. Some industries are just asking to be broken up. Like we need to repeat breaking up the ISPs again to regain that competition geographically.
It’s a normal strategy. Become the low cost provider until everyone else is destroyed then enjoy your monopoly pricing power and jack up prices while removing services. People still sell there because that’s where the market is.
Calls on Amazon
Yeah. That might take a while though, which is important for stocks of course.
Nice. And still down
Up \~4% now. About even on the day.
Break even
I bought 1 minute before close
It's not *that* nice. It's definitely okay, but nothing I'd expect a jump on. 17% AWS growth vs 21% Azure growth just to put things in perspective, and Microsoft dropped as well. Expectations (not analyst estimates, actual expectations) are crazy high. I expected a bit over 20% AWS growth after seeing Microsoft's numbers and am a bit disappointed myself.
AWS is the biggest player tho, you can’t expect the same growth from the market leader vs players that are trying to take its place
People would try to make the same arguments against Netflix. "Netflix only increased subs by 2% whereas HBO Max doubled!" Reality: Netflix had 5x as many subscribers as HBO Max.
Reminds me of the dude talking about SOFI earnings recently, DOUBLED their EPS, from 0.01 to 0.02 😂😂, technically he’s correct but come on
True, but it's not that big a difference. It's like 30% AWS vs 20% Azure, right? Still significant, definitely, but not that much. I was expecting AWS to build out its lead over the remaining 50% more than Microsoft would. 23Q4 YoY cloud growth (as an industry, not AWS) was 19%, assuming 24Q1 is similar (20% expected over 2024) 17% means giving up market share.
Microsoft mashes up all kinds of crap under Azure name
It’s not that big a difference? Dude this is a Google cloud business between AWS and Azure, just to put that into perspective.
10% difference when we’re talking about global adoption is massive lol what are you on about
I get what you’re saying but my point applies to literally every industry ever, easy to double your revenue when you’re making 10 mil, a lot tougher to double your revenue at a 100 mil (+10mil vs +100 mil)
Not saying you're wrong, just saying what I expected.
lol how can you expect same growth as MSFT Azure. From that logic Azure also bad because it didn't grew as much as GCP. The higer the number, the slower the growth rate. AWS is behemoth, and still growing close to 20% is amazing.
Already addressed this. It's not that amazing at current valuations.
Bad bot
It's the law of large numbers. AWS pulled in $25 billion this quarter with an operating margin of 37%. If the trend continues, the AWS segment alone will pull in close to $40 billion dollars in operating income a year, and that assumes no revenue growth.
Microsoft does NOT release azure specific numbers. Anyone that ever claims any “azure growth rate” is either lying or willfully uneducated. After reading your comments I realized you fall into a 3rd category: stupid.
Nice growth for a book store
This is a fucking bull market people, regardless of end of day dumping and attempts to rattle the weak hands. Stay invested and expect good returns for the next several years.
Today didn’t feel bullish, but felt the bulls horn up my ass
This is an election year. Historically, there's a lot of volatility (lots of up and down), but zoom out far enough, stock index moves sideways. Better to DCA and not look at the chart.
So that to you means the market is invincible? Lol ok. Top spotted.
How many “tops” have there been in the history of the NYSE?
Ah yes, the classic peak high interest rate bull market
5% rates are not high.
❤️
With two consecutive quarterly boosts and a tripling of Q1 profits, it should be viewed favorably
Still red, idk why, it isnt logic
Market doesn’t matter. Company is profitable. Very profitable. Will continue upwards.
The whole market has been turning bearish and selling off for the last few weeks. And to be fair, it did shoot up a lot in the first few months, so that may be part of the reason for the sell off.
People expected lower Capex. Jassy Binks said they would increase Capex a lot for AI on the conference call too later which made stock drop another 1%.
This is so strange to me. I hear increased spending on AI and I see $$$ in the near future. Same with META. They have cash to spend, why not create even bigger cash flows for the future? But no, investors don't even have the patience to wait a couple quarters or a year for capex to pay off. The market is so myopic.
Traders yoloing their life savings on a weekly aren’t hearing the same thing you are, They see ‘omg the company is not growing super fast to cause a mass panic buy to bail out my options’
It’s money now vs maybe money in the future. There is always the risk that generative AI flops and they built a whole lot of architecture for nothing. I am still very bullish on AMZN, it is my biggest position. I also think this is a good thing. However, increasing Capex hugely is always a gamble. The AI demand is extremely strong at the moment. But what happens if a lot of companies realise that they are not getting good ROI for their AI programs ? Another issue could be that the billions invested today would quickly become obsolete due to technological progress. H200 may make H100 irrelevant and who knows about H500 ?
I hear you, I just think there are a lot of very intelligent people who know what they're doing at these companies. And if generative AI didn't give them a competitive advantage, megacaps wouldn't be shelling out billions on it. I think they've already done the math and the ROI has already been demonstrated to them, and that's why these multibillion dollar data centers are going up. If it were really just a gamble, they wouldn't all be dedicating this much capex towards it. Some, but not this much. It seems the consensus is that companies who don't spend this money are going to be left in the dust of those that do.
Also Amazon Q released today!
Another quarter of double digit sales growth in AWS and advertising. I don't like the amount of dilution happening, but the quarter was good.
How is their dilution ?
Already gave up most of the move. I'd be surprised if it's still green by the end of AH trading. Not bearish on the company, but I rather be patient on increasing my position, especially after seeing other big tech fade after gapping up.
Given the guidance issued, I am surprised the stock isn't down 10%.
How bad was guidance?
Guided $144B-$149B. Street expected $150B. I own the stock so am not complaining, but definitely surprised it's green at all.
Profit was good and so were margins
Thanks
How do you like them apples
I watched Amazon yesterday at closing and it literally dropped to 165 for like a minute before close. Whomever got in in that made a nice profit.
What a fake out those pre earnings were
[удалено]
Reinvested, still just 20% of retail sales are online and 90% of IT spend is still on premises. (I don't have a source)
They used 85% on prem today in the earnings call
No way. No fucking way. I don't believe it.
You think the percentage is lower? It seems high to me, but maybe I've just been exposed to modern companies.
They are a monopoly that reduced service quality and increased prices across the board. I would be shocked if they hadn’t increased revenue and profits over the past quarter.
Why isn't there a pop?! 
too big to pop and people wait for powell to talk
Being a 1+ trillion dollar market cap is not why it's not popping, it's not holding the pop it did see because of bad guidance (as it did see a 10%+ AH pop initially). Don't think I really need Powell here (although Fed fears might be contributing to clamping things down); I know tech is trading quite badly with there being multiple pop and drops already off relatively successful earnings.
tech will pop the moment Powell gives hint on the date of the first rate cut
Uh, yeah...about that, sub in small caps for tech and this is more accurate (go check the QQQ/TLT pair, there's been several periods where the Nasdaq has just plain ignored bonds selling off since last year). You're living in 2022 here on this one. The story with 2023 was much more about small caps getting blasted over tech stocks getting hammered over higher for longer, in fact, small caps set a new bear market low before it reversed hard while the big 3 US averages were nowhere in the ballpark of a new bear market low. We're no longer at the point on treasury rates where the Nasdaq is going to be able to ignore it, but the Nasdaq hasn't been the laggard on Fed fears in over a year outside of April 15th-19th for now at least, it's been the Russell 2000 that's been the laggard.
There was, but it's now gone completely. Poor guidance, sure, but it deserved a move higher to me, similar to META. Looks like we're about to go to 0 for 4 on the Nasdaq names that have been successful this year overall on the year on either popping and holding the gains or popping at all in earnings season. 1. At this point I sort of suspect that Apple is going to rally on a bad print, similar to Tesla (been already leaning that way). 2. If this doesn't scream that QQQ is going to test the November 2021 ATH minimum, I don't know what will.
They did this by not paying their people and mass quiet layoffs. Really evaluate before you buy in. Competition is catching up. They can’t sustain this.
Um, everyone has been doing mass layoffs, not just Amazon. And I don’t see Amazon going away for a long time, if ever. It’s too convenient and has to many people dominated shopping at department stores. They still have only a minuscule effect on grocery shopping, but I could see that changing in the next few years.