I think the deeper issue is that Amazon may have designed a pricing tool that compares the number, but not the real price.

A price is not only the physical value of the product.

It also includes logistics cost, labour cost, storage cost, fulfilment route, inflation, tax, delivery speed, stock risk, return risk, and whether the offer is actually sustainable.

If an ASIN has a price history going back 10 or 15 years, the system should not treat an old number as equal to a current market price. Timestamp matters.

A £5 price from 2010 is not the same economic price as £5 in 2026.

The same applies to external comparisons. If another retailer is selling at a loss, clearing old stock, liquidating, or using the product as a temporary promotion, that should not automatically become the “correct” price for every seller on Amazon.

A seller should still be able to sell at a healthy, sustainable price.

Then buyers can make their own judgement.

If the buyer chooses the cheaper external retailer, the Amazon seller loses the sale. That is normal competition.

But if Amazon removes Featured Offer eligibility because of an opaque comparator, the seller may lose visibility, sales and business access without knowing what evidence was used.

That is the difference.

The issue is not whether Amazon should stop price gouging.

The issue is whether an automated system is reducing price to a single number, while ignoring time, cost, availability, fulfilment, market context and sustainability.

I have received an email from Amazon, it is titled:

"Eliminate Listing Friction: Gain Authorized Reseller status through supply-chain audit"

Forgive me for being sceptical but the following email sounds like a way for Amazon to easily identify who the main dealer for high volume product are so that they can swoop in and get accounts with a view to effectively steal the products from the sellers who have worked so hard to build the product listing.

------------------------------------------------

Dear Seller,

We’re offering you access to a new program that can help you reduce listing friction across your catalog.

What is this?

The Authorized Reseller program grants trusted resellers “Authorized Reseller” roles for brands they legitimately sell. To verify that your products are legitimately sourced we will conduct an audit on your supply chain.

You can request the role for multiple brands, and you will be audited on all/some of them, with possible expansion of these benefits to other brands in your catalog, such as those you have previously listed or attempted to list in the past.

The goal of the program is reducing friction for compliant resellers while maintaining brand protection standards.

Benefits of an Authorised Reseller role:

• Better experience when managing listings in some brands

• Potential allowance to list new products or add offers into existing ASINs from some brands on which today you don’t have the direct permission from Amazon or the Rights Owner

• Access brand-building tools (e.g. A+ Content)

How does it work?

This is a simplified process designed to minimize effort on your side:

Step 1: Respond to this e-mail proposing a list of 10 brand names (not more, not less) you require the Authorized Reseller status for and on which you can prove that you are sourcing the products legitimately.

Step 2: Our audit team will reach out directly over email to verify your authorization for the brands you selected.

Timeline: The entire process will take approximately 3-4 weeks from your submission until role addition. Please consider that receiving this email or going through the audit does not automatically guarantee getting the role.

What we need from you:

To move forward, I'll need you to select any 10 brands from your current portfolio where you can provide proof of legitimacy.

I've attached a complete list of brands associated with your account to make your selection easier.

Please respond to this e-mail proposing a list of 10 brand names you require the Authorized Reseller status for and for which you can prove that you are sourcing the products legitimately. During audit, you will be asked to provide documents proving the authenticity of sold products (e.g. invoices/supplier details).

The mail outreach from the audit team will be sent directly to your accounts connected main email address. To send the information asked during the audit, please also use your accounts connected main email address. Please make sure the address is updated.

Please respond by the End of this Week if you’d like to participate.

Hello @Seller_Udi0JNbTrsmUV

Case ID: 12467959572 - Work in progress

I'm extra charged for Evri parcels ,, Adjustments,, between 26/04/2026 and 29/04/2026. These new charges have now affected a total of 347 parcels and have caused financial losses of £1,028.88.

Thank you for any help

Anna

Full time 7 Figure Amazon seller here, been on this platform off and on with different businesses for 10 odd years. NOPE, dont ever ever touch this platform, the support is horrific.

Ebay is a far better or more stable platform, albeit less sales than amazon.. would encourage looking at vinted, ticktock, or others. I know personally 3-4 people banned including an ex business partner over a lipstick in which he couldnt verifty authenticity because the invoice was over 12 months old. Comical i know...

He got it from Shure cosmetics, one of the stronger uk DIstributers that supply makeup to the masses but becaose of this error section 3 and jog on basically ...

Also I lost 40k when my business shut for 6 weeks for a section 3 which was fixed eventually.. almost bankrupted me, still dealing with the damage, still trying to get my credit back on track.

Currently in the process of moving all my products and stock away from this platform so my advice is probably tinged with despair

I would imagine our experience is similar to many other sellers in that return rates on Amazon are extremely high, which also seems difficult to reconcile with Amazon’s environmental and sustainability messaging.

One issue we are struggling to understand is the inconsistency in the returns process. When customers open a return request, the majority are provided with a prepaid return label, while others are only provided with a return address label — even when the products are identical. We would appreciate clarification as to why this happens.

More concerningly, a customer recently opened an A-to-z claim after being provided with only an address label by Amazon. Within a few hours, we supplied the customer with a prepaid return label ourselves in order to resolve the matter promptly. Despite this, Amazon issued the customer with a full refund without requiring the item to be returned.

We are trying to understand whether there is something incorrect within our return settings or processes, or whether this is now simply standard Amazon policy and procedure in 2026.