7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

The Amazon API key discrimination

by CyberSEO
6 replies
Many newbie Amazon affiliate associates are frustrated about the strange Amazon rule: do 3 sales to get the API key... to sell. Do you guys and gals also think that's a bit abnormal requirement to provide an API key to sell only to those who already sold the products without the API key?

A quote:
To request for access to PA API you must:
  • X Have completed 3 qualifying sales in 180 days.
  • X Have an approved associate account.
  • X Comply with the associates program Operating Agreement.
#amazon #api #descrimination #key
Avatar of Unregistered
  • Profile picture of the author DABK
    I do not think it is abnormal. I do think Amazon is discriminating against affiliates that don't help it.


    When Amazon started, it figured it could use all the help it could get, so it let anyone be an affiliate.


    Then, it grew big enough, known enough that it could be selective.


    So, now, you have to prove that you can make a certain number of sales consistently to benefit from amazon. Having affiliates costs. Amazon's come to the conclusion that affiliates who cannot make 3 sales in 180 days cost most too much. It also figured out that many start and almost as many give up, so why invest any resources in beginners, why not do it only once they prove themselves?


    Used to be that you could have a website with little content of your own, you'd stick amazon carousel's and your site looked good.


    Amazon no longer wants affiliates who do that. Why? Doing that is like creating a mini-Amazon.com (in other words, the driving force behind the sales is Amazon, not the affiliate, except Amazon has to pay for it.


    I expected it. I do not mean the specific 3 sales to get the API but that Amazon will eventually restrict access to people that ride on its coattails and do not make sales Amazon would not have made anyway.


    Originally Posted by CyberSEO View Post

    Many newbie Amazon affiliate associates are frustrated about the strange Amazon rule: do 3 sales to get the API key... to sell. Do you guys and gals also think that's a bit abnormal requirement to provide an API key to sell only to those who already sold the products without the API key?

    A quote:
    To request for access to PA API you must:
    • X Have completed 3 qualifying sales in 180 days.
    • X Have an approved associate account.
    • X Comply with the associates program Operating Agreement.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699813].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author savidge4
    Originally Posted by CyberSEO View Post

    Many newbie Amazon affiliate associates are frustrated about the strange Amazon rule: do 3 sales to get the API key... to sell. Do you guys and gals also think that's a bit abnormal requirement to provide an API key to sell only to those who already sold the products without the API key?

    A quote:
    To request for access to PA API you must:
    • X Have completed 3 qualifying sales in 180 days.
    • X Have an approved associate account.
    • X Comply with the associates program Operating Agreement.
    You have to understand... BANDWIDTH costs money... so every API call ='s bandwidth that in turn ='s money. so they are validating that they are not wasting their bandwidth / money on a bunch of API calls that result in a net loss overall.

    Just to make this idea a bit clearer. look at website hosting... the more traffic you generate, the more your hosting is going to cost... you are paying for BANDWIDTH.

    So Amazon ensuring you have at least 3 sales - which is a very low benchmark makes total sense.
    Signature
    Success is an ACT not an idea
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699860].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
      Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

      You have to understand... BANDWIDTH costs money... so every API call ='s bandwidth that in turn ='s money. so they are validating that they are not wasting their bandwidth / money on a bunch of API calls that result in a net loss overall.

      Just to make this idea a bit clearer. look at website hosting... the more traffic you generate, the more your hosting is going to cost... you are paying for BANDWIDTH.

      So Amazon ensuring you have at least 3 sales - which is a very low benchmark makes total sense.

      The cost of traffic generated on an API call is about... zero. I mean the Amazon API of course. For example, YouTube traffic is million times more extensive (an expensive), but you don't need to sell anything to use their API.
      Signature
      CyberSEO Pro - the ultimate AI autoblogging and RSS, XML, HTML, JSON and CSV import plugin for WordPress with support for OpenAI o1, Claude, Gemini, Llama 3, Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion and more.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699866].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author savidge4
        Originally Posted by CyberSEO View Post

        The cost of traffic generated on an API call is about... zero. I mean the Amazon API of course. For example, YouTube traffic is million times more extensive (an expensive), but you don't need to sell anything to use their API.
        A very mute example... Amazon's business is based on sales... and YouTube is based on views IE ad views. It is in YouTubes BEST interest to get as many views as it can - that is how they get paid

        If you pay attention to traffic analysis at its core... Amazon the website is #4 behind Google, YouTube, and Facebook. and that is before AWS is thrown into the equation. AWS is the largest consumer of bandwidth in the United States... they ( AWS ) are actually the largest PROVIDER of bandwidth in the United States - second is Google.

        Understanding this you then realize that Amazon and Google ( minus YouTube )_ are net zero ish in terms of bandwidth, and a service such as YouTube becomes a bandwidth hog - right in line with Netflix or the like. Throw Microsoft into the picture and they are Net Positive, in relation to providing bandwidth vs using bandwidth.

        And when I am talking about Providing Bandwidth, you have to understand that the big 3 Google Amazon and Microsoft ( in no particular order ) actually provide backbone infrastructure to the United States ( and abroad ) NET... meaning it is their servers that allow for traffic and hosting etc ALL 3 are invested in ISP related services.

        There are actually agreements between the big 3. As an example, AWS ( Amazon ) gives preference to Google traffic over their own. Understanding this, you can get Google hosting that uses AWS calls and get better response times on your site. The reason it works this way... Google PAYS AWS for its bandwidth usage... Revenue takes priority over Cost. an all AWS site is literally slower than a Google / AWS site.
        Signature
        Success is an ACT not an idea
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699873].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
          Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

          A very mute example... Amazon's business is based on sales... and YouTube is based on views IE ad views.

          For real? I'll tell you a secret. YouTube business is also based on sales. The sales from ads they show in videos. Amazon makes money on ads as well, but w/o videos. It uses affiliate sites the same way as YouTube use videos = to show ads. More ad shows = more money.
          Signature
          CyberSEO Pro - the ultimate AI autoblogging and RSS, XML, HTML, JSON and CSV import plugin for WordPress with support for OpenAI o1, Claude, Gemini, Llama 3, Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion and more.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699886].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author savidge4
            Originally Posted by CyberSEO View Post

            For real? I'll tell you a secret. YouTube business is also based on sales. The sales from ads they show in videos. Amazon makes money on ads as well, but w/o videos. It uses affiliate sites the same way as YouTube use videos = to show ads. More ad shows = more money.
            Again... far from the same thing... Youtube with each and every video is producing income. Amazon on the other hand? I am going to be generous and say that 10% of Amazon affiliate sites ever make a sale.

            I have Amazon affiliate sites, I use the API to auto input the product, availability, and pricing. No where is there an "Ad" that Amazon places on my site. If someone comes to my site and doesnt click to buy something, Amazon makes no money - its that simple.

            Multiply that out ( sites not making sales ) to 90% of the sites created by Amazon Affiliates - the only data i can find on this is in 2018 there was 100,000 affiliate sites, I am sure at this point the number is 10 fold at a minimum - that ends up being a kick ton of API calls in a day - a Ton... I personally pull in the hundreds of megabytes in the course of a day.
            Signature
            Success is an ACT not an idea
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11699896].message }}
Avatar of Unregistered

Trending Topics