[WSJ] Inside Amazon’s Secret Operation to Gather Intel on Rivals

Staff went undercover on Walmart, eBay and other marketplaces as a third-party seller called ‘Big River.’ The mission: to scoop up information on pricing, logistics and other business practices.

By Dana Mattioli and Sarah Nassauer

For nearly a decade, workers in a warehouse in Seattle’s Denny Triangle neighborhood have shipped boxes of shoes, beach chairs, Marvel T-shirts and other items to online retail customers across the U.S.

The operation, called Big River Services International, sells around $1 million a year of goods through e-commerce marketplaces including eBay, Shopify, Walmart and Amazon AMZN -1.11%decrease; red down pointing triangle.com under brand names such as Rapid Cascade and Svea Bliss. “We are entrepreneurs, thinkers, marketers and creators,” Big River says on its website. “We have a passion for customers and aren’t afraid to experiment.”

What the website doesn’t say is that Big River is an arm of Amazon that surreptitiously gathers intelligence on the tech giant’s competitors.

Born out of a 2015 plan code named “Project Curiosity,” Big River uses its sales across multiple countries to obtain pricing data, logistics information and other details about rival e-commerce marketplaces, logistics operations and payments services, according to people familiar with Big River and corporate documents viewed by The Wall Street Journal. The team then shared that information with Amazon to incorporate into decisions about its own business.

Amazon is the largest U.S. e-commerce company, accounting for nearly 40% of all online goods sold in the U.S., according to research firm eMarketer. It often says that it pays little attention to competitors, instead focusing all its energies on being “customer obsessed.” It is currently battling antitrust charges brought last year by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and 17 states, which accused Amazon of a range of behavior that harms sellers on its marketplace, including using anti-discounting measures that punished merchants for offering lower prices elsewhere.

The story of Big River offers new insight into Amazon’s elaborate efforts to stay ahead of rivals. Team members attended their rivals’ seller conferences and met with competitors identifying themselves only as employees of Big River Services, instead of disclosing that they worked for Amazon.

They were given non-Amazon email addresses to use externally—in emails with people at Amazon, they used Amazon email addresses—and took other extraordinary measures to keep the project secret. They disseminated their reports to Amazon executives using printed, numbered copies rather than email. Those who worked on the project weren’t even supposed to discuss the relationship internally with most teams at Amazon.

An internal crisis-management paper gave advice on what to say if discovered. The response to questions should be: “We make a variety of products available to customers through a number of subsidiaries and online channels.” In conversations, in the event of a leak they were told to focus on the group being formed to improve the seller experience on Amazon, and say that such research is normal, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Senior Amazon executives, including Doug Herrington, Amazon’s current CEO of Worldwide Amazon Stores, were regularly briefed on the Project Curiosity team’s work, according to one of the people familiar with Big River.

Some aspects were more Maxwell Smart than James Bond. The Big River website contains a glaring typo, and a so-called Japanese streetwear brand that the team concocted lists a Seattle address on its contacts page. Big River’s team members list Amazon as their employer on LinkedIn—potentially blowing their cover.

The LinkedIn page of Max Kless, a former eBay executive who led Big River in Germany before moving to a senior role on the team in the U.S., says that he “developed and led a research subsidiary for Amazon in Germany that prototyped and researched new experiences for Small Business sellers and developers.” Kless didn’t respond to requests for comment.

“Benchmarking is a common practice in business. Amazon, like many other retailers, has benchmarking and customer experience teams that conduct research into the experiences of customers, including our selling partners, in order to improve their experiences working with us,” an Amazon spokeswoman said. Amazon believes its rivals also carry out research on Amazon by selling on Amazon’s site, she said.

Focus on Walmart

Virtually all companies research their competitors, reading public documents for information, buying their products or shopping their stores. Lawyers say there is a difference between such corporate intelligence gathering of publicly available information, and what is known as corporate or industrial espionage.

Companies can get into legal trouble for actions such as hiring a rival’s former employee to obtain trade secrets or hacking a rival. Misrepresenting themselves to competitors to gain proprietary information can lead to suits on trade secret misappropriation, said Elizabeth Rowe, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who specializes in trade secret law.

Amazon for years has had what it calls a benchmarking team that sizes up rivals to ensure the best experience for people who shop on its site. The team has placed orders on websites such as Walmart.com for delivery around the U.S. to test things such as how long it takes competitors to ship. Other companies also have teams to compare themselves to rivals.

In late 2015, Amazon’s benchmarking team proposed a different sort of project. The business of hosting other merchants to sell their products on Amazon’s platform was becoming increasingly important. So-called third-party sellers on Amazon’s Marketplace, which the company started in 2000, surpassed half of the company’s total merchandise sales that year, and rival retailers had started similar marketplaces.

Amazon wanted to better understand and improve the experiences of those outside vendors. The team decided to create some brands to sell on Amazon to see what the pain points were for sellers—and to sell items on rival marketplaces to compare the experiences, according to the people familiar with the effort.

The benchmarking team pitched “Project Curiosity” to senior management and got the approval to buy inventory, use a shell company and find warehouses in the U.S., Germany, England, India and Japan so they could pose as sellers on competitors’ websites.

The benchmarking team reported into the chief financial officer, Brian Olsavsky, for years, but this year changed to report to Herrington, the consumer chief. Olsavsky and Herrington didn’t respond to requests for comment made through Amazon.

Once launched, the focus of the project quickly started shifting to gathering information about rivals, the people said.

In the U.S., the Big River team started by scooping up merchandise from Seattle retailers holding “going out of business” sales. Some of its first products were Saucony sneakers from a local retailer that was closing. The company registered for a licensing agreement with the popular Marvel superhero franchise to sell Marvel-branded items, and bought items including Tommy Bahama beach chairs from Costco to resell.

In the pitch, Project Curiosity leaders identified online marketplaces that they wanted to sell on, including Best Buy and Overstock.

The top goal was Walmart, Amazon’s biggest rival. But Walmart had a high bar for sellers on its marketplace, accepting only vendors who sold large volumes on other marketplaces first. Big River initially couldn’t qualify to be a Walmart Marketplace seller, but it did sell on Jet.com, which Walmart acquired in 2016 and later closed in 2020. And in India, it sold on Flipkart, the giant Indian e-commerce marketplace in which Walmart owned a majority stake.

In order to meet Walmart’s revenue threshold, the Big River team focused on pumping products through Amazon.com to bolster its overall revenue, some of the people said. Big River’s goal wasn’t to do massive amounts of volume on the competing platforms, but to simply get on them and gain access, they said.

The Amazon spokeswoman said that in 2023, 69% of Big River revenue worldwide was on Amazon.com.

In 2019, Big River finally got onto Walmart’s website. This month, Big River had around 15 products listed on Walmart.com under the seller name Atlantic Lot, including Tommy Bahama beach chairs, cooking woks and industrial-size food containers. In 2023, Big River had more than $125,000 in revenue on Walmart.com alone, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Walmart wasn’t aware that Amazon ran the seller accounts on the Walmart and Flipkart sites before the Journal told it, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Rivals’ logistics services

Atlantic Lot is listed as a “Pro Seller”—a distinction Walmart says is for “top-performing Walmart Marketplace sellers.” Listings show that Walmart Logistics, another Amazon rival, handles storage and shipping for it.

Amazon at the time also was building up its logistics business to store and ship items for sellers for a fee to compete with FedEx and United Parcel Service. The business has boomed over the past decade. Amazon’s total revenue from what it calls third-party seller services has grown nearly twelvefold since 2014 to $140 billion last year, accounting for nearly a quarter of Amazon’s total.

To get information about rival logistics services, the Big River team stored inventory with companies including FedEx. Other targets, according to an internal document, included UPS, DHL, Deliverr and German logistics company Linther Spedition.

FedEx in 2017 launched FedEx Fulfillment, a competitor to Fulfillment by Amazon, for offering logistics to sellers. Big River was accepted into the FedEx Fulfillment program as an early customer, and the team received early details about pricing, rate cards and other terms as a result of the partnership, according to the people. FedEx had several phone calls and email exchanges with Big River team members who represented themselves as Big River employees and didn’t disclose their employment at Amazon, according to some of the people.

The team presented its findings from being part of the FedEx program to senior Amazon logistics leaders. They used the code name “OnTime Inc.” to refer to FedEx. Amazon made changes to its Fulfillment by Amazon service to make it more competitive with FedEx’s new product as a result of the information it learned from the partnership, according to one of the people.

For such meetings, the team avoided distributing presentations electronically to Amazon executives. Instead, they printed the presentations and numbered the documents. Executives could look at the reports and take notes, but at the end of the meeting, team members collected the papers to ensure that they had all copies, the people said.

Amazon took other measures to hide the connection with Big River. Staffers were instructed to use their second, non-Amazon email address—which had the domain @bigriverintl.com—when emailing other platforms to avoid outing their Amazon employment.

“We were encouraged to work off the grid as much as possible,” said one of the former team members, about using the outside email.

Amazon’s internal lawyers reminded Big River team members not to disclose their connection to Amazon in their conversations with FedEx, according to an email viewed by the Journal.

Staffers, who worked in private areas of Amazon offices, were told not to discuss their work with other Amazon employees who weren’t cleared to know about the project. In the early days, some Big River team members had to take time away from their Amazon desk jobs to go to the warehouses to fulfill orders and pack them in boxes to send out.

When gaining access to rival seller systems, Big River members were instructed to take screenshots of competitor pricing, ad systems, cataloging and listing pages, according to the people. They weren’t allowed to email the screenshots to Amazon employees, but instead showed the screenshots to the Amazon employees on the Marketplace side of the business in person so they didn’t create a paper trail, some of the people said. Amazon then made changes it believed improved the seller experience on its site based on the information.

The Amazon spokeswoman said the team was secretive so that it wouldn’t get any special treatment as a seller on Amazon.com.

Still, there were telltales. Registration documents filed with the Washington Office of the Secretary of State for Big River Services, while not mentioning Amazon, list a management team made up of current and former Amazon employees, including lawyers. The management team lists its address as 410 Terry Ave. in Seattle, which is Amazon’s headquarters.

Corporate filings for Big River in the United Kingdom and other foreign countries also named officials who are senior Amazon employees and lawyers. In one U.K. disclosure, Amazon is named as owning more than 75% of the company.

Amazon officials felt confident that competitors wouldn’t look up filings to see who was behind the company, some of the people said.

A Las Vegas conference

Some team members were uncomfortable with the work they were doing, according to some of the people.

Among the anxiety-inducing activities was representing themselves as employees of Big River in person while attending conferences thrown by rivals. For instance, team members attended eBay’s Las Vegas conference for sellers, according to some of the people. EBay describes the event as a way for sellers to meet with eBay management and learn of planned big changes coming for sellers and “exclusive information.”

Benchmarking-team leadership ordered up what Amazon calls a PRFAQ that would outline what to do if competitors or the press discovered the project. In the event of a leak, leadership was to say that the group was formed to improve the seller experience on Amazon.com, and that Amazon pays attention to competition but doesn’t “obsess” over it. They were also told to act like this was normal business behavior in the event of a leak, according to one of the people.

In 2017, Amazon formally changed the name of Project Curiosity to the Small Business Insights team to make it sound less cryptic, some of the people said.

The Big River team invented its own brands to sell on the competing sites, including “Torque Challenge” and “Crimson Knot.”

Teams often changed the brand name once they sold out its inventory, creating new brands when they received new products.

In India, Amazon gained access to e-commerce giant Flipkart in March 2018 with the Crimson Knot brand, around the time rumors of a Walmart acquisition swirled in local media. Walmart bought a majority stake in Flipkart in May of that year.

Crimson Knot makes wooden home goods, with its website’s “About Us” page saying: “Based in a small wood workshop in Bangalore, our dedicated team of 8 skilled craftsmen work consistently to handcraft each piece from scratch, transforming them into stunning showstoppers.”

Crimson Knot still lists products on Flipkart and stores them with Flipkart’s logistics services.

The endeavor wasn’t designed to make money. In 2019, for instance, the Indian Big River team projected revenue of $165,000 while it expected costs of $463,000, according to an internal company document.

Each of the five countries operated a little differently to better test different programs. Globally, in total, Big River gained access to rival marketplaces including Alibaba, Etsy, Real.de, Wish and Rakuten, among many other platforms. In 2019, the team set a goal to get onto 13 additional new marketplaces, according to an internal company document.

The Amazon spokeswoman declined to comment on the number of rival websites Big River operates on.

The Japanese team went so far as to create a streetwear brand with its own website and custom-designed products. They called it Not So Ape, saying it was founded in Tokyo in 2017 and “inspired by the street style we see everyday.”

Not So Ape—which isn’t related to an upscale Japanese streetwear brand called A Bathing Ape—says on its website: “Our name stems from our belief that creative expression is what truly separates us from primates.” Not So Ape has Instagram and TikTok accounts, and its site continues to offer products such as $50 knit beanies and $95 hoodies.

Not So Ape is sold on Yahoo Japan’s marketplace, Zozotown, and uses rival payment services from Shopify, Google and Meta platforms. Its U.S. website is hosted by Shopify—which was the target of a previous effort by Amazon, code named “Project Santos,” to replicate parts of its business model, the Journal has reported.

Not So Ape’s English-language site’s terms of service says it is operated by Big River and lists a Seattle contact address of “2300 7th Ave, Ste B100, Back Entrance”—a building adjacent to a main Amazon campus.

9 Likes

And what about customer trust and transparency, especially for consumers trying to avoid shopping with Amazon? :flushed_face:

Now I’m suspicious of every Seller and third-party service provider with “river” in their name, even some forum accounts.

This goes way beyond “research” into misrepresentation and fraud, that directly affected consumers and competitors.

So these Amazon “benchmarking” brands…did their sales hurt 3P Sellers’ sales? Just to collect internal data?

As we say down south, “they knew they was wrong”.

This is gaslighting. Textbook. Super unethical.

None of this is “normal business behavior” and possibly illegal.

:grimacing: Amazon is a toxic workplace and culture. Yikes.

6 Likes

And I guess RA is totally cool on Amazon since Amazon itself does it. :eyes:

2 Likes

Kinda makes you roll your eyes a bit when Amazon talks about how many “bad actors” they stop every year. Amazon themselves are the bad actors.

5 Likes

Eh… Any business worth anything does exactly what Amazon did with their “spying”.

What law is broken with their secret project? None that I can think of. It’s just smart business to make sure the people who copied you aren’t doing something better that you can pivot to yourself.

Every business does what Amazon did / does.

Not a fan of what Amazon does in almost every instance but there’s nothing wrong with this IMHO.

1 Like

No, they don’t. And no matter who does, it’s not ok.

Let’s not normalize behavior like this, which might indeed have criminal implications.

3 Likes

We will agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As someone who worked for a company (Nature’s Bounty) that copied everything everyone did but did it better and now a business owner who has been copied no less than 65 times with our innovation on Amazon I can see it both ways.

Life isn’t fair, survival of the fittest. That’s just the way it is whether we like it or not.

Amazon created something spectacular and was knocked off. I personally see nothing wrong with them looking into what the knock off artists were doing in anyway they can that was lawful. I could be wrong but I don’t remember seeing anything in my Amazon or Walmart agreement that says I can’t participate elsewhere and talk to one or the other on how they do things.

It’s surely slimy, like everything else Amazon does but not sure it’s illegal.

2 Likes

I’m not sure that it’s all unquestionably ethical when they actually have to have their in house legal beagles tell them to NOT identify who they are and who they really work for.

Do all companies try to find out what the competition is doing? Absolutely if they have half a brain, but this is a very fine line away from having your people hired by the competition and reporting back to HQ.

The amazing part is how on earth they didn’t hide all their spy attempts better. Social media, addresses, and more pretty much out in the open. I wonder if any heads rolled at the companies that they ‘infiltrated’ and the people that were supposed to be gate keepers missed it all.

Of course, given the number of things that Amazon misses with offshore sellers it is even worse there but I strongly suspect that is more of a willful blind eye for them.

5 Likes

This wasn’t basic, standard competitor research.

3 Likes

You’re right, it was cunning and strategic. It also wasn’t very nice. The most successful people on this planet and businesses are not very nice, kind, and gentle in how they do things.

That’s just the way it is. Wish it wasn’t, believe me.

If you want to survive in the this world, sometimes you need to do certain things or you will be stomped out.

2 Likes

Maybe–and believe me, in my actual career I’m well aware of both sociopathy and psychopathy stats in entrepreneurs and executives–but they are ALSO not all criminals.

2 Likes

I’m going to assume that Amazon Legal OKed this scheme. I don’t think an executive would risk their own skin by just doing this themselves. If they got the sign off from the legal dept then they covered their own ■■■.

The fact they used truthful information to register these shell companies (including disclosing the fact that Amazon.com was majority shareholder when they had to) makes me believe they were operating within the confines of the law. And they were right that the other companies wouldn’t scrutinize them. They were “just another seller” and scrutinizing every seller is basically impossible for any large marketplace. The fact that the information that Amazon was the real beneficial owner wasn’t well hidden works to their defense, as in court they can argue that they weren’t really hiding anything.

Information accessible to marketplace sellers is also public information. If they were bribing competitor insiders or hiring their workers and getting information that way (which btw, they are also accused of doing), that would be a bigger issue.

It is slimy, but most successful businesses did slimy things to get there.

1 Like

The other way to look at this is if someone (shell company / whatever) did the same thing. Amazon would shut them down and potentially take legal action because now that I think about it, I’m sure there is something in the seller agreement about disclosure.

ETA This thread is veering off course btw. Wasn’t me for a change :rofl:

3 Likes

Moved the posts to here

2 Likes

That’s one of the reasons they do the video verification (which they started doing WAY before the INFORM act), because people WERE hiding behind shell companies

1 Like

I read the article and couldn’t believe it. Amazon’s fake entity, Big River, didn’t have enough sales volume to make into Walmart’s platform, so they go to Costco and other retailers, buy products and sell via Amazon to inflate their sales figures, which is bad enough. But the products that Amazon was buying and selling through Big River violate their own policies.

We only learned about this “bad” behavior because Amazon is being reviewed for Monopoly practices via the Justice Department.

I wonder what FedEx, Walmart, eBay and others are thinking after reading this extensive article.

Unbelievable if Amazon can get away with this business conduct.

4 Likes

I’m sure that they had an exemption from getting suspended

2 Likes

I have no idea where they got this from. To sell on Walmart, all you need is an EIN and a pulse. It also doesn’t matter if you are here or in China.

EIN = a Walmart selling account. They will take anyone that meets the limited requirements above.

Just because Amazon got outed for what they did doesn’t mean every other big business doesn’t do the same.

Is what it is whether we like it or not.

2 Likes

It’s true that this is the current paradigm, but it was not always this way.

The entry bar has been greatly lowered since Amazon first spun up Big River.

4 Likes

WSJ writer and book author Mazzioli appeared on CNBC to discuss this. She called into question whether Amazon is even truly customer obsessed, calling the Marketplace an “unregulated bazaar” of mostly small business 3P Sellers that Amazon was as happy to exploit as they were their large competitors. The host asked many of the questions raised here, too.

Best part? It’s only 5 minutes :winking_face_with_tongue:

Amazon is not only customer-obsessed, but also competitor-obsessed: WSJ’s Dana Mattioli

2 Likes