Image: ©Anirudh/Unsplash
Executive takeaway
- Amazon cannot be managed with traditional marketing or DTC frameworks.
- Attribution, branding, and pricing behave differently because Amazon operates as a closed, algorithmic system.
- What looks like incremental growth often reflects redistribution within Amazon’s own ecosystem.
- CMOs who apply classic marketing logic to Amazon systematically misread performance and risk margin erosion.
Amazon is neither DTC nor retail
Most organizations still try to classify Amazon using familiar categories.
Some treat it as a digital sales channel.
Others as a retail partner.
More recently, many approach it as a media platform.
All three perspectives are incomplete.
Amazon is not a channel layered onto an existing go-to-market model.
It is an integrated system that combines discovery, transaction, fulfillment, pricing, and media under a single algorithmic authority.
This distinction matters because marketing logic depends on the structure of the system it operates in.
The assumptions that hold for DTC or traditional retail do not hold on Amazon.
Why DTC logic fails on Amazon
In a DTC environment, brands control four critical levers: traffic, pricing, experience, and data.
Incrementality can be approximated because brands can observe demand creation and demand capture separately.
On Amazon, none of these levers are fully controlled.
Traffic is mediated by search and recommendation algorithms.
Pricing is continuously benchmarked and constrained.
The customer relationship belongs to Amazon.
Data is partial and purposefully framed.
As a result, performance signals that look familiar—conversion rate, ROAS, CAC—do not carry the same meaning.
They describe efficiency inside Amazon’s ecosystem, not necessarily value creation for the brand.
Why retail logic fails on Amazon
Traditional retail logic assumes a separation between shelf placement, promotion, and media.
Trade spend, promotions, and in-store visibility are negotiated, time-bound, and partially controllable.
Amazon collapses these layers.
Search rank, Buy Box eligibility, pricing, availability, and advertising are tightly coupled.
A decision in one area immediately affects the others.
This coupling means that “activation” on Amazon is never isolated.
Every campaign simultaneously influences demand capture, cost structure, and algorithmic preference.
Retail playbooks that rely on static negotiations or periodic resets break down in a continuously optimized environment.
Why attribution behaves differently on Amazon
Marketing attribution traditionally attempts to answer a simple question: did this investment create demand, or did it merely capture existing demand?
On Amazon, this distinction becomes blurred.
A large share of traffic originates from high-intent searches within the platform.
Advertising often accelerates conversion rather than creates new demand.
The system rewards presence and consistency, not necessarily incrementality.
As spend increases, performance may appear stable while true incremental contribution declines.
This is why brands can see “healthy” ROAS alongside deteriorating margins.
Branding inside a closed system
Amazon supports brand-building formats, but brand meaning is constrained by the interface.
Comparison is frictionless.
Substitution is one click away.
Price anchoring is constant.
Brand equity on Amazon expresses itself less through storytelling and more through resilience:
the ability to sustain conversion, pricing, and visibility under competitive pressure.
This shifts the role of brand investment.
Outside Amazon, brand creates future demand.
Inside Amazon, brand primarily protects margin and reduces algorithmic vulnerability.
Confusing these roles leads to misallocated budgets.
How Amazon silently redefines incrementality
Incrementality on Amazon is rarely binary.
It is not a question of “with ads versus without ads.”
It is a question of how spend redistributes demand across:
- organic versus paid placements
- your own portfolio versus competitors
- short-term conversion versus long-term margin
Because Amazon optimizes for customer experience and platform revenue, not brand profitability,
the system naturally pushes brands toward higher participation.
Opting out is punished.
Opting in without rules is expensive.
This is the core paradox: Amazon growth often feels non-optional, but unmanaged growth erodes control.
The strategic implication for CMOs
Amazon should not be managed as a growth lever to maximize.
It should be managed as a constrained profit system to govern.
The first step is not better optimization.
It is accepting that Amazon follows a different logic—and therefore requires different decision rules.
In the next article, we will examine how Amazon’s internal flywheel turns advertising, pricing, Buy Box, and inventory into a single margin equation—and why many brands unknowingly optimize themselves into a trap.