Amazon has pushed back against allegations suggesting its dominance in Mexico’s e-commerce landscape poses a threat to fair competition. The controversy emerged following a report by Mexico’s antitrust regulator, Cofece, which implicated both Amazon and its rival Mercado Libre in potentially stifling market entry for smaller players.
Cofece’s preliminary findings, unveiled on Tuesday, underscored the alarming reality that Amazon and Mercado Libre collectively command over 85% of transactions and sales within Mexico’s burgeoning e-commerce sector. This concentration, as highlighted by the regulator, could erect significant barriers for new entrants seeking to gain a foothold in the market.
Read more: AI Adoption Surges in Europe, Accelerating Digital Transformation
Amazon swiftly responded to these assertions, affirming its cooperation with Cofece while vehemently defending its business practices. Fernanda Ramo, Legal Director of Amazon Mexico, emphasized the company’s commitment to fostering competition and innovation in the Mexican retail landscape. Ramo asserted in an emailed statement that Amazon’s presence in Mexico has catalyzed enhanced selection, competitive pricing, and expedited delivery services, benefitting both consumers and sellers nationwide.
Similarly, Mercado Libre expressed its willingness to engage with Cofece, assuring that any formal resolution by the regulatory body would not entail economic sanctions. The company underscored that no investigation into monopolistic behavior has been initiated.
The entry of the U.S. e-commerce giant Amazon into Mexico dates back to 2013, with the launch of its marketplace following two years later. Meanwhile, Mercado Libre, a formidable competitor operating in the Latin American region since 1999, has established its presence in Mexico, further intensifying competition within the market.
Source: XM
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand