Ethics In Marketing Research Paper Sample

One of the key issues surrounding the case is some of the unfair pricing models and practices adopted by Amazon. The Feud between a variety of retailers and Amazon sparked after Amazon began intensive competitive pricing strategies. The unfair pricing models used by Amazon were not only unfair to competitors, but also largely targeted the retailers who had one day helped contribute to the success of the retail giant. One of the key strategies that the organization employed involved comparing its prices with that of other retail stores, a move that ensured that Amazon made a few enemies.
The first feud between Amazon and Best Buy was seen when Amazon began a campaign requiring the customers to compare the competitive prices sold by Amazon to that sold by other retailers. Best Buy had moved to oppose the approach used by Amazon, as it directed wanted to drive all other retail outlets out of business and maintain a monopoly (Bowman, 2015). Besides protesting the move, Best Buy also innovatively integrated a new bar code system which was unique and non-readable by other organizations. This move not only led to a bitter relationship between Best Buy and Amazon, but also put Amazon in the limelight of the unfair competitive strategies.
feud was between Target and Amazon. Target and Amazon had a good relationship in which Amazon ran the Target online portal for some time before Target reclaimed control of the website after the dismal performance of the organization. Target dropped all Amazon products from their shelves, and further used a competitive approach, allowing zero shipping costs for goods with a minimum price of $25 as compared to Amazon’s limit, $35. Target and Amazon have been in a competitive rivalry for some time after their former partnering relationship turned sour. This competitiveness between the two retail giants has been fairer to target than Amazon.
Procter & Gamble, commonly known as P&G are one of the world’s largest makers of toiletries. In a move to cut on costs, Amazon and P&G made a partnership agreement which allowed Amazon to set up a delivery store in P&G’s warehouses, which enabled the e-tailer to ship products directly to customers from the P&G stores. However, other retailers selling P&G products were not happy with the move, which then resulted in a bitter rivalry, particularly from Target, but to date the relationship between both retailers is still going on strong. Additionally, Amazon and P&G have created a strong partnership which ensures that Amazon markets almost all P&G products.
Target’s approach to competing against Amazon is natural and justified. However, one of the approaches that the organization should have taken is to seek its competitive edge and capitalize on that. Currently, Target is on the losing end as it is trying to beat Amazon at its own game, without necessarily assessing what is at stake in the company. Regardless, Target’s rivalry is justified and healthy for the organization, as compared to some of the bold strategies adopted by several other individuals. Arguably, competitive pricing guided by morals compromises the existence of a free market altogether (Faure & Zhang, 2011). As such, such approaches ought to be controlled by the government, despite their rationality as the biggest winners from such competitive strategies are the consumers. The control and regulation of prices beat the logic of existing in a free market.

References

Bowman, J. (March 6, 2015). P&G Gets Caught in Rivalry Between Amazon and Target. Retrieved on April 1, 2015 from http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/03/06/pg-gets-caught-in-rivalry-between-amazon-and-targe.aspx
Faure, M., & Zhang, X. (2007). Competition Policy and Regulation: Recent Developments in China, the US and Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.