Copyright yourstory
Suppose you’ve searched for something as mundane as a desktop mic or AA batteries on Amazon lately. In that case, you’ve probably noticed a familiar pattern: a “Featured from our brands” block at the very top, followed by a wall of Sponsored listings—only then do the organic results begin. In my own A/B tests (Amazon Basics vs rival products), the “Basics” pick was often good enough—but not always the best value once you scroll. That’s not a conspiracy theory; multiple investigations and lawsuits now allege that Amazon’s search experience increasingly prioritises the company’s interests over pure shopper utility. When “featured from our brands” quietly beats relevance Independent analyses have shown that Amazon gives its house brands a privileged perch. The Markup found that Amazon’s brands and exclusives (despite being a small share of the catalogue) captured the #1 spot disproportionately often—and many of those top placements appeared inside the search-results grid under a label like “featured from our brands,” which Amazon says is a merchandising placement, not an ad. However, code inspection suggested those modules behaved like sponsored results. Translation: what looks “organic” to you can be something else under the hood. In 2025, regulators are still paying attention to how Amazon sells visibility. The U.S. FTC’s ongoing antitrust case says Amazon has “degraded” search by replacing relevant results with paid ads—pressuring sellers to buy visibility and leaving shoppers to sort through more promotions than ever. A fresh FTC probe this September is also examining how Amazon runs its ad auctions. Private labels, privileged data—and copycat controversies Amazon has long said its goal is customer obsession, not brand favouritism. But allegations that the company used non-public seller data to guide private-label bets have persisted. In Europe, Amazon offered binding commitments in 2022 not to use marketplace sellers’ data for its retail arm, and to adjust Buy Box and Prime criteria—moves that ended an antitrust case there. In India, Reuters reported internal documents describing a programme to copy top-selling items (under labels like AmazonBasics and Solimo) and tweak search to surface them. Amazon disputed the report, but the documents triggered scrutiny of how its private labels compete against third-party sellers. You may remember the Peak Design “Everyday Sling” saga, where a viral video accused Amazon of cloning its premium bag with a cheaper Amazon Basics version—even sharing the “Everyday Sling” name before Amazon renamed it. Beyond the meme, it captured a reality of the marketplace: when Amazon enters a commodity-like category with low brand loyalty, it can shape the shelf. The ad-tax that sellers pay—and why Basics can undercut Here’s the economic engine most shoppers never see. Sellers pay Amazon a monthly fee (Professional plan: $39.99) and referral fees on every sale—commonly around 8–15% of item price (as high as 45% in certain categories like Amazon device accessories). On top of that, many sellers must buy Amazon Ads just to be visible near the top of the page. That “pay-to-play” dynamic is central to the FTC’s case. Amazon, of course, doesn’t pay itself referral fees on its own retail items, and it can place very large manufacturing orders—two structural advantages that help Basics hit lower price points. Even then, Amazon’s private-label push has had mixed results; the company has trimmed or rebranded many house labels since 2022, while keeping stalwarts like Amazon Basics and Amazon Essentials. Reality check: Are basics “bad”? Not really—just rarely best In my own comparisons, the Basics mic sounded fine, but a cheaper rival bundled a pop filter, adjustable stand, and RGB—a better kit per rupee. A basic gaming monitor was serviceable; a discounted ASUS alternative looked brighter with richer colour and a sturdier stand. And for everyday accessories (USB-C cables, microSD cards), brand-name picks often beat Basics on speed, longevity, or warranty when discounted. That doesn’t make Basics a scam—just “good enough” products that the interface reliably puts in your way first. The trick is that badges—Amazon’s Choice or Overall Pick—signal quality and price–availability, but they still sit within a page architecture saturated with ads and Amazon’s own merchandising. Shoppers can read these as trust cues; regulators read them in the context of who controls the shelf. The shopper’s playbook for 2025 (so you don’t overpay) Scroll past the first screen. The top of the SERP is often a mix of Amazon’s own placements and ads. The better-value item is frequently a few rows lower. Compare like-for-like specs. On storage (e.g., microSD), check rated speed, capacity, and included adapters—not just price. Check review depth, not just stars. A 4.5★ product with 100k reviews signals durability and support. Weigh warranty and return friction. Third-party brands like SanDisk, Anker, ASUS, etc., often bundle multi-year warranties that outlast a budget Basics bet. Use filters & sort by price–to–value. Toggle “Top rated” or “Avg. customer review,” then sanity-check with price drops. Know the fees shaping your shelf. If you’re seeing wall-to-wall “Sponsored,” that’s retail media at work—not necessarily the best deal for you. Big picture: why this keeps happening Amazon’s marketplace is now also a colossal ad business. When more of the page is sold to the highest bidder and when the platform can “merchandise” its own brands at the very top, algorithmic shelf space becomes a profit centre. That’s good for Amazon’s unit economics and ad revenue; it’s exhausting for sellers; and it makes shopping feel like navigating a retail media maze for the rest of us. The EU has forced specific guardrails on data use and Buy Box access, and the U.S. antitrust case could further reshape how ads and house brands show up in results. For now, smart shopping starts with a scroll—and a little scepticism.
