[Lazamataz]

Well then, looks like they (Amazon) are seeking their own demise.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Amazon thinks this is to their advantage. I can't imagine retailers have much legal recourse under their agreements with Amazon. Of course, if it turns out not to be to Amazon's advantage, they can always change their policy again.

[mountainbunny]

Well then, looks like they (Amazon) are seeking their own demise.

In certain clothing categories, there are so many false results that it is very difficult to find what you want. Customers are unwilling to sort through hundreds of dubious results, and this is how they are trying to curb the problem.

I went to buy a hooded animal scarf for my daughter before Christmas, looking for a specific brand. There were literally hundreds of results, only a few of which were the brand I specifically searched for. Part of the problem seems to be that the vendors add popular keywords to items that only sort of fit the description in hopes that you'll see and buy their product.

I suppose that Amazon could police keywords, but then they'd end up arguing with vendors over the definition of what "is" is. This seems like a more even-handed way to fix the problem.

Customers won't stick around if it takes them hours to find a product.

[catfish1957]

Good point Laz. Our system has excellent ways of pulling up the slack. 2 or 3 new competitors will waitin in the wings to rush right in. Come 2016 or so, Amazon will have to explain to investors why revenues and profits are flat/down.