They should do more for less, like magically store all 8 billion items they have in stock in the back of my car or something. Warehouses housing wares. How extravagant. Where's the innovation.
(And to answer my sarcastic comment, the innovation is "order from your suppliers and have them ship directly to the customer, then you don't need warehouses". But the reason people pay Amazon's prices is because the item shows up at their house the same day they buy it, which means that 1990s mail-order model doesn't work anymore. Investors shouldn't be allowed to invest until they've purchased at least one product from Amazon.)
> Investors shouldn't be allowed to invest until they've purchased at least one product from Amazon.
Seriously. My wife gets Amazon Prime for free through school. Within the first month I was looking for the best opportunity to buy stock. The service is quite literally amazing, and handing it out free to students is just damn genius. That's just one small thing on top of all the other things they do really well at.
I will second this. The free student prime has moved purchase of Amazon Prime from the "it seems cool but not worth category" to "must have" for me. You get things that you would normally have to run all over town to get with minimal effort. It's a huge time saver.
I've found myself ordering tiny stuff like a single pack of caffeine pills (we're talking 24 pills here, not exactly bulk buying) rather than walking 10 minutes to the nearest pharmacy... It's scary.
In all fairness, they did miss on revenue as well (albeit not by much). Given how highly valued Amazon is (something like 5x Walmart on a price/revs basis), exceeding estimates is expected. That's not to say they aren't an amazing company, but their valuation is extremely high.
Stock prices adjust to news. If this plunge was higher than expected, then it's news, and the stock price falls. It doesn't necessarily imply the investors disapprove of Amazon's management.
