[citation][nom]welshmousepk[/nom]I find it hilarious that people don't expect this. If you are being undercut by a competitor, you need to find as way to become more competitive. having a hissy fit and refusing to sell their stock won't help.global commerce is a tough business, and if you can't keep up, you're doomed.[/citation]
Well, it might be that so few were selling due to Amazon under pricing them, it was not economical to keep selling them. Amazon may have been using Target as a showroom, and getting more online purchases that way. Because it sells for only $200, there's no margin on the device, so I can't imagine Amazon would be letting Target have it inexpensively.
The writing of the article is sensationalist and poor, but there is some truth in it. When a manufacturer is also a competitor, its very important to have a cooperative relationship with them. Amazon enticing customers to look somewhere else, and then buy at Amazon is not effectively balancing that sensitive role.
They'll have to figure it out. They normally sell stuff other people make, and having others sell stuff they make is pretty new to them. They're going to learn the hard way, it would seem, by suffering reactions like this from retailers. But they will learn, or simple be unsuccessful. Arrogant companies that make one-sided deals learn that they aren't quite as important, and their position not quite as unassailable, as they thought. It happens all the time.