跳到正文
Ethan Mollick· @emollick · X·· 2 小时前AI 评分62
AI 导读

Ethan Mollick 引用分析称 Amazon 关闭消费级 Agent 接入(Muse 和 Instinct)虽有其商业理由,如广告占其约 10% 营收但贡献约 50-60% 运营利润,但可能是短视之举。Mollick 指出 Walmart 则更愿意在 Agent 商务上充当创新者,一方面吸取了 2000 年代初电商布局迟缓的教训,另一方面其商业模式复杂度低于 Amazon。

正文

In contrast with Amazon, it is interesting how much Walmart is willing to be the innovator on agentic commerce, both because it learned a lesson from its delays in ecommerce in the early 2000s and because its business model has less complexities than Amazon's.

引用Olivia Moore@omooretweets
Amazon shutting down consumer agent access (now both Muse and Instinct) is both completely rational and a big mistake They have plausible reasons: 1. Advertising accounts for ~10% of Amazon revenue, but an estimated 50-60% of operating profit because it's so high margin. People purchasing via agents = fewer consumer eyeballs to monetize 2. Amazon knows from experience how dangerous it is to give another platform a lever to ramp up / down your distribution 👀 They've done this to many retailers themselves 3. They are in a very good spot re: near-term defensibility - with ~250M Prime subs (who are habituated to buying on Amazon) + a massive logistics and distribution network that you can't vibe code However, this logic is short-sighted (IMO). Agents are inevitable, especially for the kind of purchases people make on Amazon (low consideration, frequent, fairly urgent or recurring). I don't think Amazon is going to come out with a first-class consumer agent on their own...and in the meantime, why anger your valuable users and make them even consider alternatives? It's almost never a good idea to be on the wrong side of innovation. I'd much rather see them continue to greenlight agent traffic (it's pretty minimal now!) and work on adjusting to an agent-first world in the meantime.
在 X 查看被引用的帖子

来源:Ethan Mollick · x.com