I dont know
Assignment 1
Amazon.com and Toy “R” Us lawsuit
1. In the lawsuit, Amazon.com and Toys “R” Us, there was a fairly good argument on both sides. Toys “R” Us had paid over 200 million dollars to Amazon.com to be the only toy seller on their site. If Amazon had upheld this agreement then both sites would have made a ton of money. By violating this agreement Amazon.com put Toys “R” Us in a difficult situation where they had to deal with competitors online for their business. Now in most sites this is normal, but Toys “r” us paid a ton of money to be an exclusive toy dealer on their site.
On the other hand Amazon made a well argument that Toy “r” us didn’t exactly keep the items they had on the site in stock which intern made it so amazon wasn’t meeting deadlines. This made Amazon lose some business, which made them sell toys from other companies to make up the deficient and make amazon a more reliable site.
I think that the judge made the right call. They were both in the wrong in their own ways. Toys “r”us paid to be exclusive and so they should have been.
2. The advantage Amazon must have considered is that they were paid millions of dollars to sign on exclusively to Toys “r” us. They were also paid a percentage of their sales. Disadvantages would be that they were not able to have any other retailers on their site so they lost some business that way. But it would have equaled out if they had both upheld their original agreement.
3. I believe if Amazon had offered more money to Toys “r” us and agreed to not use other sites it may have been more suitable for Toys “r” us. Or if they had came to Toys “r”us when they weren’t making the deadlines and said they would charge for every late order to make up for the loss.
4. I think that they should have Zippos keep their original website. It is effective and why fix what isn’t broken. I don’t think that they should combine them.
References:
(2012, 03). Toys "R" Us Lawsuit with
Amazon.com and Toy “R” Us lawsuit
1. In the lawsuit, Amazon.com and Toys “R” Us, there was a fairly good argument on both sides. Toys “R” Us had paid over 200 million dollars to Amazon.com to be the only toy seller on their site. If Amazon had upheld this agreement then both sites would have made a ton of money. By violating this agreement Amazon.com put Toys “R” Us in a difficult situation where they had to deal with competitors online for their business. Now in most sites this is normal, but Toys “r” us paid a ton of money to be an exclusive toy dealer on their site.
On the other hand Amazon made a well argument that Toy “r” us didn’t exactly keep the items they had on the site in stock which intern made it so amazon wasn’t meeting deadlines. This made Amazon lose some business, which made them sell toys from other companies to make up the deficient and make amazon a more reliable site.
I think that the judge made the right call. They were both in the wrong in their own ways. Toys “r”us paid to be exclusive and so they should have been.
2. The advantage Amazon must have considered is that they were paid millions of dollars to sign on exclusively to Toys “r” us. They were also paid a percentage of their sales. Disadvantages would be that they were not able to have any other retailers on their site so they lost some business that way. But it would have equaled out if they had both upheld their original agreement.
3. I believe if Amazon had offered more money to Toys “r” us and agreed to not use other sites it may have been more suitable for Toys “r” us. Or if they had came to Toys “r”us when they weren’t making the deadlines and said they would charge for every late order to make up for the loss.
4. I think that they should have Zippos keep their original website. It is effective and why fix what isn’t broken. I don’t think that they should combine them.
References:
(2012, 03). Toys "R" Us Lawsuit with
References: (2012, 03). Toys "R" Us Lawsuit with Amazon.Com. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 03, 2012, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Toys-r-Us-Lawsuit-With-Amazon-Com-954835.html