Toys “r” us had a very good argument. They paid 200 million dollars to be the only toy seller on their site. If this agreement had been upheld then both site would have made a lot of money. By violating this Amazon put Toys “r” us in a situation where they had to compete online for their business. This in most sites is normal but Toys “r” us paid a lot of money to be an exclusive toy dealer on their site.
On the other hand Amazon.com also had a good argument in that Toys “r” us didn’t keep the items they had on the site in stock and were not meeting they’re end of the deal in completing their orders in a timely fashion. This made Amazon.com also lose business which put them in a situation to have to offer other toys that were more reliable.
In my opinion the judgment was the right one made by the judge. Both companies were in the wrong in their own ways but I feel that Toys “r” us paid to be exclusive and should have been. 2.
The advantage Amazon must have considered is that they were paid millions of dollars to sign on exclusively. They were also paid a percentage of their sales. Disadvantages would be that they were not able to have any other retailers on their site so they lost some business perspectives. They would have equaled themselves out had both parties upheld their end of the deal to the best of their ability. 3.
I believe if Amazon had offered more money to Toys “r” us and agreed to not use other sites may have been more suitable for Toys “r” us. 4.
I think they should keep Zippos should continue as their own site. The site is professional and does well on its own. I do not see a reason to combine them.