亚马逊税：平台搜索广告的隐性成本
亚马逊税：平台经济下的隐性成本
You have unread updates 0
您有0条未读更新
Search
搜索
Search for:
搜索：
Or try my new AI-powered search bot
或尝试我的新AI驱动搜索机器人
Subscribe
订阅
Email Terms & Privacy
电子邮件条款与隐私
Get the weekly digest
获取每周摘要
Type your email…
输入您的邮箱…
Subscribe
订阅
Learn
学习
- Which workshop?
- The LinkedIn Learning Courses
- Udemy Courses
- The Akimbo Podcast
- 哪个工作坊？
- LinkedIn学习课程
- Udemy课程
- Akimbo播客
Connect
联系
- News and updates
- Social Media
- 新闻与更新
- 社交媒体
Best of the blog
博客精选
- Story of the Week
- Seth’s Top 100
- Popular Posts
- Archive
- 本周故事
- Seth的百佳
- 热门文章
- 归档
More Seth
更多Seth
- Books, videos, and speaking (oh my!)
- Free content
- About Seth Godin
- Find all the books at seths.store
- 书籍、视频和演讲（哦，我的！）
- 免费内容
- 关于 Seth Godin
- 在 seths.store 找到所有书籍
Welcome back.
欢迎回来。
Have you thought about subscribing? It's free.
你考虑过订阅吗？这是免费的。
seths.blog/subscribe
seths.blog/subscribe
The Amazon tax
亚马逊税
It’s not technically a tax. Taxes produce valuable public benefits, like medical research and parks. This is simply legal theft.
严格来说，这并非税收。税收能带来宝贵的公共福利，如医学研究和公园。这纯粹是合法的掠夺。
Amazon makes nearly a billion dollars in profit from search ads. Every week. Each week, they sell merchants and publishers enough search-distorting ads to capture a billion dollars in revenue. Amazon makes enough in search ad revenue to give every single one of their employees a $35,000 cash bonus and still have change left over.
亚马逊每周从搜索广告中获利近十亿美元。每周，他们向商家和出版商出售足够扭曲搜索结果的广告，以获取十亿美元的收入。亚马逊的搜索广告收入足以给每位员工发放 35,000 美元的现金奖金，并且还有剩余。
My publisher is terrific, and they’re working hard to introduce people to my new book. Last week, they began buying search ads on Amazon.
我的出版商非常出色，他们正努力向人们介绍我的新书。上周，他们开始在亚马逊上购买搜索广告。
At first glance, this is compelling. Someone who isn’t sure what they’re looking for, who is looking for a book or a kitchen appliance, might find one if the right ad showed up at the right time.
乍一看，这很有吸引力。一个不确定自己在找什么的人，无论是找书还是厨房电器，如果合适的广告在合适的时间出现，可能会找到想要的东西。
But of course, that’s not what yields, or what most of the ads you see on Amazon do.
但当然，这不是广告的最终效果，也不是你在亚马逊上看到的大多数广告的作用。
If you’re searching for an air fryer, Amazon already knows quite a bit. They know the best-reviewed, least-returned, best-priced model. The only purpose of the ads is to get you to pick an air fryer that isn’t that one (or for the best air fryer, to keep you on track to buy the one you wanted in the first place). The ads make the search worse. [Cory wrote about this three years ago, and the scale has already doubled.]
如果你在搜索空气炸锅，亚马逊已经了解很多信息。他们知道评价最好、退货最少、价格最优的型号。广告的唯一目的是让你选择一个不是那个最佳型号的空气炸锅（或者对于最佳空气炸锅，让你继续购买你最初想要的那款）。广告让搜索结果变得更糟。[Cory 三年前就写过这个问题，而规模已经翻倍了。]
When there are plenty of ads, the maker of the best air fryer now has to bid on ads as well, if only to protect the sales they were entitled to in the first place. Businesses continue to buy the ads—not because they’re dumb, but because the system has created a situation with few options. Folklore implies that buying the ads somehow shifts how search responds in the long run, even after the ads stop running, but there’s little data to confirm this.
当广告泛滥时，最佳空气炸锅的制造商也不得不参与广告竞价，哪怕只是为了保护他们本应获得的销量。企业继续购买广告——不是因为他们愚蠢，而是因为这个系统创造了一个几乎没有选择的情况。传统观念认为，购买广告在长期内会以某种方式改变搜索的响应，即使广告停止投放后也是如此，但几乎没有数据证实这一点。
Traditional ads increase demand. We see something that’s clearly an ad, it might spark desire, and sales go up. But zero-sum search ads aren’t like that–the total sales in the category stay the same, and merchants are merely competing for a share of a static pie. This study argues that an ecommerce site with search ads actually sells fewer items than the same site without ads.
传统广告能增加需求。我们看到明显是广告的内容，可能会激发欲望，销量随之上升。但零和搜索广告并非如此——该类别的总销量保持不变，商家只是在争夺一个固定蛋糕的份额。这项研究认为，一个有搜索广告的电商网站实际上比没有广告的同类网站卖出的商品更少。
The highest-yielding ad my publisher has tested so far is the search “Seth Godin The Knot“. It costs about a dollar per click. My publisher is paying Amazon a dollar to show you an ad for the book you went to buy in the first place.
我的出版商目前测试过的最高收益广告是搜索“Seth Godin The Knot”。每次点击大约花费一美元。我的出版商付给亚马逊一美元，向你展示你本来就要去购买的那本书的广告。
Who ends up paying the more than $50 billion a year spent on these ads? It’s not the sellers. Sellers can’t make heartfelt donations for long. It’s you. By making the marketing of products significantly less efficient, Amazon’s theft makes products more expensive or sucks the energy out of the development of new products.
每年花费在这些广告上的超过500亿美元，最终由谁买单？不是卖家。卖家无法长期进行真诚的捐赠。是你。通过使产品营销效率大幅降低，亚马逊的盗窃行为使产品更昂贵，或吸走了新产品开发的能量。
It leads to two perverse side effects. First, producers realize that if brand reputation matters less than a budget for clicks, they will shift to shoddy and cheap versions of their products so they have a bigger budget for clicks. And second, Amazon (and Google before it) have an incentive to make their organic search results worse–giving producers more incentive to buy more ads.
这导致了两个反常的副作用。首先，生产者意识到，如果品牌声誉不如点击预算重要，他们就会转向生产劣质廉价版本的产品，以便有更大的点击预算。其次，亚马逊（以及之前的谷歌）有动机使其自然搜索结果变得更差——给生产者更多购买广告的动机。
For decades, Amazon created value for consumers by lowering the price of just about everything. And they opened the doors to merchants who didn’t have sufficient distribution. They claimed to be customer-centric, and they were.
几十年来，亚马逊通过降低几乎所有商品的价格为消费者创造价值。他们为没有足够分销渠道的商家打开了大门。他们声称以客户为中心，而且他们确实如此。
I don’t think they can claim this any longer. The ad system they built isn’t illegal, but it’s pretty clear who it’s for.
我认为他们不能再这样声称了。他们建立的广告系统并不违法，但很明显它是为谁服务的。
Amazon is stealing from the customers they said they were here to serve.
亚马逊正在从他们声称要服务的客户那里偷窃。
August 18, 2026
2026年8月18日
back
返回
random
随机
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
隐私与Cookies：本网站使用cookies。继续使用本网站即表示您同意其使用。
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
要了解更多信息，包括如何控制cookies，请参见此处：Cookie政策
Share This
分享此内容
Share on Mastodon
在Mastodon上分享
Enter your Mastodon instance URL (optional) Share
输入您的Mastodon实例URL（可选）分享
更进一步：量化金融体系
看懂新闻只是起点——沿量化金融路径，把它变成能交付的工程能力