<p>根據週一加利福尼亞州新公佈的法庭文件，亞馬遜被指控通過供應商提高競爭零售商（包括沃爾瑪和塔吉特）的產品價格。</p>
<p>未編輯的證據主要基於電子郵件通信，包括與利維斯、漢斯、新威爾品牌等供應商品牌提高價格的實例。</p>
<p>加利福尼亞州檢察長羅伯·邦塔週一首次公開了該州對這家電子商務巨頭提起訴訟的證據。該訴訟於 2022 年首次提起，聲稱亞馬遜扼殺了競爭，導致全州價格上漲。</p>
<p>文件概述了多個實例，詳細説明了亞馬遜如何被指控監控競爭對手的定價，利用供應商作為中介在其他地方提高價格，然後與新提高的價格進行匹配。</p>
<p>在某些情況下，亞馬遜的商品列表被壓制，購買框被放棄，供應商在競爭對手處移除庫存，直到達到亞馬遜所尋求的提高價格。</p>
<p>在一個被指控的實例中，亞馬遜向利維斯發送了兩個 “關注款式” 的鏈接，因沃爾瑪網站上的價格較低，並表示希望這些問題能在幾天內 “得到解決”。利維斯回應稱，它與沃爾瑪進行了溝通，“他們已與我們合作” 立即提高一款卡其色款式的價格，並提供了現在已提高的沃爾瑪價格鏈接。</p>
<p>利維斯在文件中重申：“沃爾瑪與 [我們] 合作，將此作為市場最佳利益的測試進行更新。”</p>
<p>亞馬遜還被指控向漢斯發送了沃爾瑪和塔吉特網站的鏈接，顯示價格低於亞馬遜的價格。漢斯回應稱，它 “已聯繫沃爾瑪和塔吉特以提高價格。”</p>
<p>此外，亞馬遜還被指控詢問家居用品和裝飾供應商 Linon 是否有任何措施可以確保競爭對手的價格下降問題得到永久解決，並不會再次發生。作為回應，Linon 同意從競爭對手處移除庫存。</p>
<p>新威爾品牌（Rubbermaid 和 Paper Mate 的擁有者）提醒亞馬遜，它生產的一款標籤機面臨 “因造成高干擾而被關閉” 的風險。亞馬遜回應同意 “暫時放棄購買框”，以 “給沃爾瑪和塔吉特提高價格的時間，然後我們將進行匹配。”</p>
<p>在另一個實例中，亞馬遜被指控告訴供應商 Armen Living，如果定價問題未能解決，它將在接下來的幾天內 “從 [亞馬遜的] 網站上移除所有四款 [產品]”，這正好是在黑色星期五和網絡星期一購物活動之前。</p>
<p>邦塔檢察長在 2 月份提交了初步禁令請求，要求舊金山高等法院在訴訟進行期間暫停亞馬遜的一些行為。</p>
<p>在回應 Retail Dive 的評論請求時，亞馬遜表示邦塔的動議案是一個薄弱的案例，並稱該公司 “始終被認為是美國最低價的在線零售商。”</p>
<p>亞馬遜沒有立即回應 Retail Dive 的後續問題，詢問該公司是否通常要求供應商在競爭對手網站上提高價格。</p>
<p>未編輯的文件還指控亞馬遜培訓員工掩蓋價格操控行為的書面證據。亞馬遜的價格培訓告訴員工，如果 “需要提及具體例子、在談判增量價格匹配資金時，或突出渠道中的活動”，則 “不要使用電子郵件”。</p>
<p>“如此多的大型零售商被捲入這一計劃，應該讓這個經濟中的每個參與者都感到警惕，” 美國經濟自由項目的高級法律顧問李·赫普納告訴 Retail Dive。“我們通常談論亞馬遜對平台上成千上萬的小型第三方賣家的不利影響，但當你看到亞馬遜的行為正在強迫包括利維斯和漢斯在內的非常大型零售商時，這為亞馬遜的危害增添了新的維度。”</p>
<p>塔吉特和利維斯沒有回應 Retail Dive 的評論請求。</p>
<p>沃爾瑪告訴 Retail Dive，它不 “對我們不是當事方的訴訟發表評論”，並補充説它 “將始終努力為我們的客户保持低價。”</p>
<p>初步禁令動議的聽證會定於 7 月 23 日，案件預計將在 1 月進行審判。</p>

AMZW

零售業 ETF - VanEck Vectors

亞馬遜每日 2 倍做多 ETF - Direxion

電子商務 ETF - GlobalX

標普零售指數 ETF - SPDR

線上零售 ETF - Amplify

<p>亞馬遜在加利福尼亞州面臨一項訴訟，指控其施壓供應商提高在沃爾瑪和塔吉特等競爭零售商的價格。電子郵件溝通的證據顯示，亞馬遜監控競爭對手的定價，並利用供應商實施價格上漲。案例包括李維斯和漢斯與亞馬遜合作調整競爭對手的價格。加利福尼亞州檢察長尋求初步禁令，以在案件進行期間停止亞馬遜的做法。亞馬遜聲稱該訴訟缺乏依據，堅稱自己是價格最低的在線零售商。聽證會定於 7 月 23 日舉行，審判定於 1 月進行</p>

<p>Amazon allegedly worked through vendors to raise prices on products at competing retailers, including Walmart and Target, according to a newly unredacted court filing from California on Monday.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>根據週一加利福尼亞州新公佈的法庭文件，亞馬遜被指控通過供應商提高競爭零售商（包括沃爾瑪和塔吉特）的產品價格。</p>
</div><p>The unredacted evidence, largely based on email communications, includes instances of raising prices with vendor brands such as Levi’s, Hanes, Newell Brands and more.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>未編輯的證據主要基於電子郵件通信，包括與利維斯、漢斯、新威爾品牌等供應商品牌提高價格的實例。</p>
</div><p>California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday debuted the public release of evidence in a lawsuit the state has against the e-commerce giant. The lawsuit was first filed in 2022 and claims Amazon stifled competition, which led to increased prices across the state.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>加利福尼亞州檢察長羅伯·邦塔週一首次公開了該州對這家電子商務巨頭提起訴訟的證據。該訴訟於 2022 年首次提起，聲稱亞馬遜扼殺了競爭，導致全州價格上漲。</p>
</div><p>The filing outlines several instances that detail how Amazon allegedly monitors competitors’ pricing, using vendors as middlemen to raise prices elsewhere and then price match the newly heightened rate.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>文件概述了多個實例，詳細説明了亞馬遜如何被指控監控競爭對手的定價，利用供應商作為中介在其他地方提高價格，然後與新提高的價格進行匹配。</p>
</div><p>In some cases, listings were allegedly suppressed on Amazon, buy boxes were ceded, and vendors removed inventory at competitors until the heightened rates Amazon sought were achieved.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在某些情況下，亞馬遜的商品列表被壓制，購買框被放棄，供應商在競爭對手處移除庫存，直到達到亞馬遜所尋求的提高價格。</p>
</div><p>In one alleged instance, Amazon sent Levi’s links to two “styles of concern&#34; due to lower prices on Walmart's website, noting it hoped these can “get resolved” within a few days. Levi’s responded, saying it spoke to Walmart and “they have partnered with us to” raise the price on a khaki style immediately, providing links to the now increased Walmart price.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在一個被指控的實例中，亞馬遜向利維斯發送了兩個 “關注款式” 的鏈接，因沃爾瑪網站上的價格較低，並表示希望這些問題能在幾天內 “得到解決”。利維斯回應稱，它與沃爾瑪進行了溝通，“他們已與我們合作” 立即提高一款卡其色款式的價格，並提供了現在已提高的沃爾瑪價格鏈接。</p>
</div><p>“Walmart partnered with [us] to update this as a test for the best interest of the marketplace,” Levi’s reiterated to Amazon, according to the filing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>利維斯在文件中重申：“沃爾瑪與 [我們] 合作，將此作為市場最佳利益的測試進行更新。”</p>
</div><p>Amazon allegedly also sent Hanes links to Target and Walmart’s websites, showing lower prices than what was on Amazon. Hanes responded, saying it “reached out to Target and Walmart to have the prices increased.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>亞馬遜還被指控向漢斯發送了沃爾瑪和塔吉特網站的鏈接，顯示價格低於亞馬遜的價格。漢斯回應稱，它 “已聯繫沃爾瑪和塔吉特以提高價格。”</p>
</div><p>Additionally, Amazon allegedly asked home furnishings and decor vendor Linon if there was anything it could do to ensure a price drop at competitors was resolved permanently and wouldn’t happen again. In response, Linon agreed to remove inventory from the competitor.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>此外，亞馬遜還被指控詢問家居用品和裝飾供應商 Linon 是否有任何措施可以確保競爭對手的價格下降問題得到永久解決，並不會再次發生。作為回應，Linon 同意從競爭對手處移除庫存。</p>
</div><p>Newell Brands — owner of Rubbermaid and Paper Mate — alerted Amazon that a label maker it produces was at risk of “being shut off for Amazon as it’s causing high disruption.” Amazon responded by agreeing to “temporarily cede the buy box” to “give time for Walmart and Target to raise their prices, which we would then match.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>新威爾品牌（Rubbermaid 和 Paper Mate 的擁有者）提醒亞馬遜，它生產的一款標籤機面臨 “因造成高干擾而被關閉” 的風險。亞馬遜回應同意 “暫時放棄購買框”，以 “給沃爾瑪和塔吉特提高價格的時間，然後我們將進行匹配。”</p>
</div><p>In another instance, Amazon allegedly told a vendor, Armen Living, that it would “remove all four of [the products] from [Amazon’s] website in the next few days” if a pricing issue wasn’t resolved, which would have been just before the Black Friday and Cyber Monday shopping events.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在另一個實例中，亞馬遜被指控告訴供應商 Armen Living，如果定價問題未能解決，它將在接下來的幾天內 “從 [亞馬遜的] 網站上移除所有四款 [產品]”，這正好是在黑色星期五和網絡星期一購物活動之前。</p>
</div><p>Attorney General Bonta filed a request for a preliminary injunction in February, asking the San Francisco Superior Court to halt some of Amazon’s conduct while the lawsuit proceeds.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>邦塔檢察長在 2 月份提交了初步禁令請求，要求舊金山高等法院在訴訟進行期間暫停亞馬遜的一些行為。</p>
</div><p>In response to Retail Dive’s request for comment, Amazon said Bonta’s motion had a weak case and that the company is “consistently identified as America’s lowest-priced online retailer.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在回應 Retail Dive 的評論請求時，亞馬遜表示邦塔的動議案是一個薄弱的案例，並稱該公司 “始終被認為是美國最低價的在線零售商。”</p>
</div><p>Amazon did not immediately respond to Retail Dive’s follow-up question asking if it is standard practice for the company to ask vendors to work on raising prices at competitor sites.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>亞馬遜沒有立即回應 Retail Dive 的後續問題，詢問該公司是否通常要求供應商在競爭對手網站上提高價格。</p>
</div><p>The unredacted filing also alleges that Amazon trains employees to obscure written evidence of price-fixing efforts. An Amazon price training tells employees to “not use email” if “you need to refer to specific example, when negotiating incremental price match funding, or to highlight activities in the channel,” per the filing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>未編輯的文件還指控亞馬遜培訓員工掩蓋價格操控行為的書面證據。亞馬遜的價格培訓告訴員工，如果 “需要提及具體例子、在談判增量價格匹配資金時，或突出渠道中的活動”，則 “不要使用電子郵件”。</p>
</div><p>“The fact that so many major retailers were implicated in this scheme should give every participant in this economy pause,” Lee Hepner, senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, told Retail Dive. “We tend to talk about Amazon as having an adverse effect on thousands of smaller third-party sellers on the platform, but when you see that Amazon's conduct is coercing very large retailers, including Levi's and Hanes, that is a new dimension to the scale of Amazon's harm.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>“如此多的大型零售商被捲入這一計劃，應該讓這個經濟中的每個參與者都感到警惕，” 美國經濟自由項目的高級法律顧問李·赫普納告訴 Retail Dive。“我們通常談論亞馬遜對平台上成千上萬的小型第三方賣家的不利影響，但當你看到亞馬遜的行為正在強迫包括利維斯和漢斯在內的非常大型零售商時，這為亞馬遜的危害增添了新的維度。”</p>
</div><p>Target and Levi’s did not respond to requests for comment from Retail Dive.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>塔吉特和利維斯沒有回應 Retail Dive 的評論請求。</p>
</div><p>Walmart told Retail Dive it does not “comment on litigation in which we are not a party,” adding that it “will always work hard on behalf of our customers to keep our prices low.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>沃爾瑪告訴 Retail Dive，它不 “對我們不是當事方的訴訟發表評論”，並補充説它 “將始終努力為我們的客户保持低價。”</p>
</div><p>The hearing on the preliminary injunction motion is set for July 23, and the case is scheduled to go to trial in January.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>初步禁令動議的聽證會定於 7 月 23 日，案件預計將在 1 月進行審判。</p>
</div>

亞馬遜被指控推動供應商在 Target 和 Walmart 設定更高的價格