TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

AWS’s Share of Amazon’s Profit

234 点作者 nurbel将近 5 年前

7 条评论

rexreed将近 5 年前
He&#x27;s overly simplifying the contribution to profit by not understanding the contribution to expenses. It&#x27;s not his fault because Amazon doesn&#x27;t break it out that way. They don&#x27;t allocate certain expenses to AWS and other expenses to other branches.<p>While there&#x27;s no doubt that AWS is very profitable, to say it contributes a certain percentage to overall profits probably misses the mark tremendously.<p>It&#x27;s probably and most likely very difficult to extricate costs of server farms that support the retail operation from server farms that host client services from overall operating costs. You&#x27;d need far more detail on gross margins and tight definitions for contribution of revenue. For example, do people who order things on Alexa get revenue counted for non-AWS while the Alexa infrastructure is counted as AWS expense? These are not easy questions. This is why it&#x27;s not broken out as you&#x27;d like.<p>I&#x27;d wager that the contribution to profits is not as suggested here, but it&#x27;s hard to know just how far off the calculation is. And it might not matter.
评论 #23535757 未加载
评论 #23540193 未加载
评论 #23537414 未加载
评论 #23535810 未加载
mbesto将近 5 年前
Profit can be a really weird number, especially when it comes to data centers. So looking at pure earning statements numbers is likely going to be misleading no matter how you try to look at (unless you actually look at bank statements, you can create as many interpretations as you want).<p>First, data centers require A LOT of upfront capital. This capital is then capitalized over years, which is how it ultimately affects &quot;profit&quot;. So depending on the capitalization schedule, how much they are investing in future growth, etc. will all affect this number. It&#x27;s why, in short, Bezo&#x27;s doesn&#x27;t ever look at these numbers, but instead free cash flow (FCF).<p>“Percentage margins are not one of the things we are seeking to optimize. It’s the absolute dollar free cash flow per share that you want to maximize, and if you can do that by lowering margins, we would do that. So if you could take the free cash flow, that’s something that investors can spend. Investors can’t spend percentage margins.”[0]<p>So, the real metric to look at is the FCF&#x2F;DCF generated by AWS. If we had that number, I think you could basically conclude that it&#x27;s &quot;printing money&quot;.<p>[0] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;25iq.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;04&#x2F;26&#x2F;a-dozen-things-i-have-learned-from-jeff-bezos&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;25iq.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;04&#x2F;26&#x2F;a-dozen-things-i-have-learned-fr...</a>
评论 #23535164 未加载
评论 #23535895 未加载
评论 #23540236 未加载
评论 #23535156 未加载
swyx将近 5 年前
I&#x27;m not sure if this helps or hurts Tim&#x27;s assertions (not mentioned in this piece, but from context he wants AWS to be spun off into a separate company). if AWS&#x27; share is so high, would AMZN shareholders approve a spinoff? does it matter since they get ownership of new-AWS anyway? unclear<p>whatever it is I think Tim has a research agenda here and we shouldn&#x27;t be surprised to see him come up with a more forceful blogpost on the topic soon.
评论 #23536762 未加载
评论 #23536391 未加载
orf将近 5 年前
&gt; So, if this graph is right, then over the last couple of years, somewhere between 50% and 80% of Amazon’s profit has been due to AWS.
评论 #23534341 未加载
评论 #23533986 未加载
评论 #23534226 未加载
julianeon将近 5 年前
50 years from now, historians will say...<p>Amazon&#x27;s online store was basically an incubator that allowed the company to pivot to its real profit center: virtualized online services for startups and companies seeking to move to the cloud.
评论 #23534594 未加载
askjdlkasdjsd将近 5 年前
To anyone who wants to learn more I highly recommend <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.profgalloway.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.profgalloway.com</a> - Basically a bunch of idealogy around why the big four need to be broken up.
legitster将近 5 年前
This drives me mad. I have no idea why Amazon even bothers with the retail side. It barely pays for itself, they are already the biggest player by a mile, and there is no horizon in which economies of scale start paying off (the uptick of demand from Covid probably <i>lost</i> them money!)<p>The only thing that makes sense to me is some political long play. The Amazon retail operation employs a lot more people in a lot more places than just the coast. I think leadership has realized they need to be seen as a job creator by politicians in order to join the &quot;big boy industry&quot; club. Which is why Amazon doesn&#x27;t mind paying their warehouse workers more than all the other guys.<p>To that end, the Amazon.com is just a giant, self-funded employment program designed to make Amazon a bigger company.
评论 #23534468 未加载
评论 #23534596 未加载
评论 #23534555 未加载
评论 #23534477 未加载
评论 #23534489 未加载
评论 #23535703 未加载
评论 #23535065 未加载
评论 #23534604 未加载
评论 #23534563 未加载
评论 #23534661 未加载