Target’s Divorce From Amazon Says More About Differentiation Than Maturation

Written by Evan Schuman
August 13th, 2009

When Target announced (Aug. 7) that it was taking its E-Commerce operation back from Amazon, speculation ranged from “this means E-Commerce is maturing” to “Target now wants to compete more directly against Amazon.” Although both thoughts are true to varying degrees, the reason for the split—which follows similar moves away from Amazon by Borders and Toys R Us–has more to do with Target wanting to create a unique identity.

At a practical level, there were various specific capabilities that Target wanted to add that Amazon either couldn’t deliver (unlikely) or wouldn’t deliver (more likely) or (most likely) that Amazon could deliver but at an unacceptable price.

Target spokesperson Kelly Basgen said areas that Target wanted to improve once the Amazon divorce is final in August 2011 were search, checkout, cart features, better branding control and differentiated experiences within different categories. She gave an example—while stressing that it was only a hypothetical example—that Target might want a consumer’s experience within apparel pages to be very different than within home goods.

Economics played a minor—but definite—role in the divorce, with one Target financial person saying that the original contract provided a wide range of costs to Target, well beyond a commission on sales generated because of the large number of services Amazon was offering. That Amazon contract—signed back in 2001—also had a confidentiality restriction as to its terms.

Although Target wouldn’t detail numbers, it’s clear that the Amazon deal allowed Target to have a dramatically smaller E-Commerce headcount compared with its similarly-sized rivals. In the two years it has before the divorce is complete, Target is “going to staff up by moving people around” within the company as well as hiring. “We’re looking at financial benefits in the long term following a significant short-term investment,” Basgen said.

There are several reasons that did not play a significant role in the divorce. Competing with Amazon, for example, existed before the 2001 partnership began and has continued throughout. Although Target would like to have more freedom to compete, Amazon is not that direct a rival and it was already competing with them in a handful of areas. That wasn’t a key cause.

A couple of years ago, there might have been the fear that Amazon could host true Target rivals, which could be uncomfortable. But today, Amazon has lost several major retail partners, with only the U.K.’s Marks & Spencer mentioned as a major retailer still using Amazon’s E-Commerce service. (Note: Amazon hasn’t announced all its customers so it’s unclear if any major retailers are still quietly being hosted by Amazon.) Amazon still hosts some consumer goods manufacturers who dabble in E-Commerce, including Timex, Bebe, Lacoste and Sony, said Amazon spokesperson Andrew Herdener.

That all said, Target might be concerned about sharing with anyone the vast amount of internal information that Amazon has had access to. There’s no telling who Amazon might partner with down the road and Target would have stronger control of its internal E-Commerce details.

Amazon also could only offer limited customization and if Target wanted to get creative, it’s easier to deliver on its own.

But this is not likely a move that foreshadows a dramatic Target repositioning. A two-year transition is a slow one and an awful lot in E-Commerce can change in 24 months. If Target was truly unhappy with Amazon, it’s reasonable to assume that a much faster breakup would have been arranged.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.