Peak Design has been making camera bags and accessories for a dozen years, relying on Amazon for the bulk of its sales. Last year, founder and CEO Peter Dering discovered Amazon was selling a bag that looked strikingly similar to Peak’s top-selling product, the Everyday Sling Bag.
“They copied the general shape, they copied the access points, they copied the charcoal color, and they copied the trapezoidal logo badge,” Dering told CNBC. “But none of the fine details that make it a Peak Design bag were things that they could port over because those things take a lot more effort and cost.”
Amazon even snagged the name, calling its own product the Everyday Sling.
What Amazon lacked in originality and quality it made up for in price. While Peak’s bag currently costs almost $90 on Amazon, the knockoff version from Amazon’s homegrown AmazonBasics brand was selling for about two-thirds less.
That motivated Dering’s team to respond with a snarky video, poking fun at Amazon’s questionable methods.
“You don’t have to pay for all those needless bells and whistles, like years of research and development, recycled bluesign-approved materials, a lifetime warranty, fairly paid factory workers and total carbon neutrality,” a man’s voice said in the video. “Instead, you just get a bag designed by the crack team at the AmazonBasics Department.”
The video went viral and in June was featured by HBO’s John Oliver in a segment on tech monopolies. Amazon later stopped selling its version of the bag, after Peak Design fans pummeled its ratings with a flurry of negative reviews.
Peak Design CEO Peter Dering compares his company’s Everyday Sling Bag to the Amazon private label version at his San Francisco headquarters on September 6, 2022.
Katie Schoolov
For Amazon, whose expansive marketplace is in the crosshairs of regulators that are cracking down on Big Tech, stories like these from its private-labels division have caused added headaches. In 2020, the European Commission charged Amazon with using its size, power and data to push its own products and gain an unfair advantage over rival merchants that also use its platform. Earlier this year, Amazon said it would limit its use of marketplace seller data.
But while Amazon may be pushing the boundaries of what’s acceptable in private labeling, there’s nothing illegal about copying brand-name products. It’s a business practice that, in some capacity, is widely used by most major retailers.
A selection of some of Amazon’s 118+ private label brands as of October, 2022.
Mallory Brangan
‘Low price’ and ‘acceptable quality’
A private label is just like a store brand. A retailer finds a manufacturer to make an affordable “white label” version of a branded product. The manufacturer puts the retailer’s own brand on the packaging, and it then sells for an average of 25%-40% less than the national brand-name product, according to Kusum Ailawadi, a marketing professor at Dartmouth College who’s been researching private labels for 25 years.
“The history of private label, in the U.S. anyway, is very much a perception of low price and at best acceptable quality,” said Ailawadi, adding that the model dates as far back as the 1950s.
Retailers more recently have tried to change the view of store brands by focusing on something that captures a consumer’s interest. For example, Safeway has an O Organics brand and Kroger offers a line of baby products called Comforts.
Others put most of their products under store brands, such as Walmart‘s Great Value and Sam’s Choice lines or Costco‘s Kirkland Signature. In other cases, store names double as brand names, such as CVS and Trader Joe’s. Many such products are copycats.
“They will put it next to the national brand with whom they are trying to compete, with a me-too packaging, a similar look and then even have a big sign that says, ‘Buy basically the same product or better at 30% lower price,'” Ailawadi said. “Some of the practices around private label that are now under scrutiny by Congress and other people have not only been around a long time, they are perfectly acceptable practices.”
But Amazon is doing something different, according to Stacy Mitchell, co-executive director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, an activist group that fights big corporations. She said Amazon brings a powerful data engine to the table.
“Amazon has developed a lot of these private labels by gathering data, essentially spying on the companies that have to rely on its website in order to reach consumers,” Mitchell said. “They also know what search terms people are using, what they’re clicking on, how long their mouse is hovering in a certain place. And so they are able to analyze all of that data for a level of insights that simply are not available to your typical chain retailer.”
Amazon also has more power to steer shoppers to particular products than a typical brick-and-mortar retailer.
Amazon has the “ability to take one particular product and shove it on page 10 of the search results while giving another product, say, their own product, lots of space right there on the first page of search results,” Mitchell said. “We know that really alters and steers buying behavior.”
In 2020, Congress questioned Amazon founder and then-CEO Jeff Bezos about whether his company uses third-party seller data in making business decisions.
“We have a policy against using seller specific data to aid our private-label business,” Bezos said. “But I can’t guarantee you that policy has never been violated.”
An Amazon spokesperson told CNBC in September, “We do not use data about individual sellers that isn’t public to determine which private brand products to launch, and we have a policy to protect seller data that goes further than any other retailer we know of.”
How private labels are made is often shrouded in mystery, leading to speculation around certain products. For instance, Grey Goose has had to dispel rumors that it makes Costco’s Kirkland Signature vodka.
Ailawadi said some private labels are made by national brand manufacturers, who use their excess capacity to make products for others. Then there are specialty firms that only do private labels, and some store brands have their own devoted manufacturing facilities. Although Amazon released a list of more than 100 suppliers in 2019, it didn’t respond to questions about who makes its private labels today.
AmazonBasics batteries are shown on September 29, 2022.
Andrew Evers
Amazon first entered the private-label business around 2009, with its AmazonBasics brand of staple goods such as discount batteries. It now has at least 118 private-label brands, according to data from e-commerce analyst company DataWeave. Some of its brands carry the Amazon name or logo, such as Happy Belly snacks, Amazon Collection jewelry and Amazon Essentials clothing. Others such as Solimo home products and clothing lines Lark & Ro and Goodthreads give little indication they’re Amazon brands.
Private labels make up just 3% of Amazon’s sales volume by dollar share in grocery, household and health and beauty categories, according to a recent study by Numerator. By comparison, private labels make up a whopping 77% of Aldi’s sales, followed by Trader Joe’s at 59% and Wegmans at 49%.
Amazon continues to invest in private labels
Numerator data also found that AmazonBasics came in third for fastest-growing private label. That comes after a Wall Street Journal report that found Amazon drastically reduced the number of private-label items on its site in the first half of this year. The Journal reported that executives had discussed exiting the private-label business entirely to ease antitrust scrutiny.
In a statement, Amazon disputed that notion.
“We never seriously considered closing our private label business, and we continue to invest in this area, just as our many retail competitors have done for decades and continue to do today,” the company said.
Private labels clearly represent a lucrative opportunity. Target told CNBC that 12 of its 48 “owned brands” are each worth at least $1 billion.
Although Amazon doesn’t share sales data on individual brands, seller consultant Jason Boyce from Avenue7Media said internal data from his firm shows that Amazon sells tens of millions of dollars in AmazonBasics batteries each month.
“I don’t think that there’s any credence to the fact that Amazon’s sunsetting AmazonBasics products that are doing well,” Boyce said. “Are they culling the herd for products that are doing not so well? Absolutely. And any good business would do that.”
Ailawadi says private-label goods bring in around 25% higher profit margins for retailers than national brands, because of savings on things such as packaging, marketing and promotion.
A variety of Amazon’s private label goods are shown on September 29, 2022.
Andrew Evers
“There is nothing anti-competitive about comparing one product with another and saying that these products are very similar, and I’m selling you one at a lower price,” Ailawadi said. “That is as competitive as it gets.”
Internally, Amazon has to skate a fine line between creating profitable products that consumers want and protecting third-party sellers, who have become the lifeblood of the retail business. Amazon says third-party merchants make up more than 60% of its ecommerce business, and those businesses pay Amazon for services such as fulfillment and shipping.
Boyce said that “45% of every dollar goes back to Amazon” when an outside merchant makes a sale on the platform. “Why would they bite the hand that feeds them in that way?”
Not all of Amazon’s private-label efforts succeed. The company no longer sells a pair of shoes called the Galen that look eerily similar to AllBirds’ wool running shoes. With the Everyday Sling Bag, Dering says Peak Design came out on top thanks to all the media attention.
Dering has also learned one key lesson from the Amazon drama. He now gets a design patent for every one of Peak Design’s products, which number over 200. Each patent costs about $1,000, he said.
“I really recommend that for anyone who’s bringing a product that they don’t want to be knocked off,” Dering said.
Spotify shares dropped about 4% Tuesday after the music streaming platform fell short of Wall Street’s expectations and posted weak guidance for the current quarter.
Here’s how the company did versus LSEG estimates:
Loss: Loss of .42 euros vs earnings of 1.90 euros per share expected
Revenue: 4.19 billion euros vs. 4.26 billion expected
The Sweden-based music platform’s revenues rose 10% from about 3.81 billion euros in the year-ago period. The company posted a net loss of 86 million euros, or a loss of .42 euros per share, down from net income of 225 million euros, or 1.10 euros per share a year ago.
Third-quarter guidance came up short of Wall Street’s forecast.
The company expects revenues to reach 4.2 billion euros, compared to a 4.47 billion euro estimate from StreetAccount. Spotify said the forecast accounts for a 490-basis-point headwind due to foreign exchange rates.
Read more CNBC tech news
Monthly active users on the platform jumped 11% to 696 million, while paying subscribers rose 12% from a year ago to 276 million.
For the current quarter, Spotify said it expects to reach 710 million monthly active users, with 14 million net adds. The company expects 5 million net new premium subscribers in the third quarter to reach 281 million subscriptions.
During the period, Spotify said it rolled out a request feature for its artificial intelligence DJ. The company said engagement with the offering has roughly doubled over the last year.
In 2024, Spotify posted its first full year of profitability. Shares are up 57% this year.
The Rebel-Quad is the second-generation product from Rebellions and is made up of four Rebel AI chips. Rebellions, a South Korean firm, is looking to rival companies like Nvidia in AI chips.
Rebellions
South Korean artificial intelligence chip startup Rebellions has raised money from tech giant Samsung and is targeting a funding round of up to $200 million ahead of a public listing, the company’s management told CNBC on Tuesday.
Last year, Rebellions merged with another startup in South Korea called Sapeon, creating a firm that is being positioned as one of the country’s promising rivals to Nvidia.
Rebellions is currently raising money and is targeting funding of between $150 million and $200 million, Sungkyue Shin, chief financial officer of the startup, told CNBC on Tuesday.
Samsung’s investment in Rebellions last week was part of that, Shin said, though he declined to say how much the tech giant poured in.
Since its founding in 2020, Rebellions has raised $220 million, Shin added.
The current funding round is ongoing and Shin said Rebellions is talking to its current investors as well as investors in Korea and globally to participate in the capital raise. Rebellions has some big investors, including South Korean chip giant SK Hynix, telecommunication firms SK Telecom and Korea Telecom, and Saudi Arabian oil giant Aramco.
Rebellions was last valued at $1 billion. Shin said the current round of funding would push the valuation over $1 billion but declined to give specific figure.
Rebellions is aiming for an initial public offering once this funding round has closed.
“Our master plan is going public,” Shin said.
Rebellions designs chips that are focused on AI inferencing rather than training. Inferencing is when a pre-trained AI model interprets live data to come up with a result, much like the answers that are produced by popular chatbots.
With the backing of major South Korean firms and investors, Rebellions is hoping to make a global play where it will look to challenge Nvidia and AMD as well as a slew of other startups in the inferencing space.
Samsung collaboration
Rebellions has been working with Samsung to bring its second-generation chip, Rebel, to market. Samsung owns a chip manufacturing business, also known as foundry. Four Rebel chips are put together to make the Rebel-Quad, the product that Rebellions will eventually sell. A Rebellions spokesperson said the chip will be launched later this year.
The funding will partly go toward Rebellions’ product development. Rebellions is currently testing its chip which will eventually be produced on a larger scale by Samsung.
“Initial results have been very promising,” Sunghyun Park, CEO of Rebellions, told CNBC on Tuesday.
Park said Samsung invested in Rebellions partly because of the the good results that the chip has so far produced.
Samsung is manufacturing Rebellions’ semiconductor using its 4 nanometer process, which is among the leading-edge chipmaking nodes. For comparison, Nvidia’s current Blackwell chips use the 4 nanometer process from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Rebellions will also use Samsung’s high bandwidth memory, known as HBM3e. This type of memory is stacked and is required to handle large data processing loads.
That could turn out to be a strategic win for Samsung, which is a very distant second to TSMC in terms of market share in the foundry business. Samsung has been looking to boost its chipmaking division. Samsung Electronics recently entered into a $16.5 billion contract for supplying semiconductors to Tesla.
If Rebellions manages to find a large customer base, this could give Samsung a major customer for its foundry business.
Data storage tapes are stored at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) facility at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which will house the U.S. supercomputer to be powered by Nvidia’s forthcoming Vera Rubin chips, in Berkeley, California, U.S. May 29, 2025.
Manuel Orbegozo | Reuters
Europe is setting its sights on gigawatt factories in a bid to bolster its lagging artificial intelligence industry and meet the challenges of a rapidly-changing sector.
Buzz around the concept of factories that industrialize manufacturing AI has gained ground in recent months, particularly as Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang stressed the importance of the infrastructure at a June event. Huang hailed a new “industrial revolution” at the GTC conference in Paris, France, and said his firm was working to help countries build revenue-generating AI factories through partnerships in France, Italy and the U.K.
For its part, the European Union describes the factories as a “dynamic ecosystem” that brings together computing power, data and talent to create AI models and applications.
The bloc has long been a laggard behind the U.S. and China in the race to scale up artificial intelligence. With 27 members in the union, the region is slower to act when it comes to agreeing new legislation. Higher energy costs, permitting delays and a grid in dire need of modernization can also hamper developments.
Henna Virkkunen, the European Commission’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, told CNBC that the bloc’s goal is to bring together high quality data sets, computing capacity and researchers, all in one place.
“We have, for example, 30% more researchers per capita than the U.S. has, focused on AI. Also we have around 7,000 startups [that] are developing AI, but the main obstacle for them is that they have very limited computing capacity. And that’s why we decided that, together with our member states, we are investing in this very crucial infrastructure,” she said.
These are very big investments because they are four times more powerful when it comes to computing capacities than the biggest AI factories.
Henna Virkkunen
European Commission’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty
“We have everything what is needed to be competitive in this sector, but at the same time we want to build up our technological sovereignty and our competitiveness.”
So far, the EU has put up 10 billion euros ($11.8 billion) in funding to set up 13 AI factories and 20 billion euros as a starting point for investment in the gigafactories, marking what it says is the “largest public investment in AI in the world.” The bloc has already received 76 expressions of interest in the gigafactories from 16 member states across 60 sites, Virkkunen said.
The call for interest in gigafactories was “overwhelming,” going far beyond the bloc’s expectations, Virkkunen noted. However, in order for the factories to make a noteworthy addition to Europe’s computing capacity, significantly more investment will be required from the private sector to fund the expensive infrastructure.
‘Intelligence revolution’
The EU describes the facilities as a “one-stop shop” for AI firms. They’re intended to mirror the process carried out in industrial factories, which transform raw materials into goods and services. With an AI factory, raw data goes into the input, and advanced AI products are the expected outcome.
It’s essentially a data center with additional infrastructure related to how the technology will be adopted, according to Andre Kukhnin, equity research analyst at UBS.
“The idea is to create GPU [graphics processing units] capacity, so to basically build data centers with GPUs that can train models and run inference… and then to create an infrastructure that allows you to make this accessible to SMEs and parties that would not be able to just go and build their own,” Kukhnin said.
How the facility will be used is key to its designation as an AI factory, adds Martin Wilkie, research analyst at Citi.
“You’re creating a platform by having these chips that have insane levels of compute capacity,” he said. “And if you’ve attached it to a grid that is able to get the power to actually use them to full capacity, then the world is at your feet. You have this enormous ability to do something, but what the success of it is, will be defined by what you use it for.”
Telecommunications firm Telenor is already exploring possible use cases for such facilities with the launch of its AI factory in Norway in November last year. The company currently has a small cluster of GPUs up and running, as it looks to test the market before scaling up.
Telenor’s Chief Innovation Officer and Head of the AI Factory Kaaren Hilsen and EVP Infrastructure Jannicke Hilland in front of a Nvidia rack at the firm’s AI factory
Telenor
“The journey started with a belief — Nvidia had a belief that every country needs to produce its own intelligence,” Telenor’s Chief Innovation Officer and Head of the AI Factory Kaaren Hilsen told CNBC.
Hilsen stressed that data sovereignty is key. “If you want to use AI to innovate and to make business more efficient, then you’re potentially putting business critical and business sensitive information into these AI models,” she said.
The company is working with BabelSpeak, which Hilsen described as a Norwegian version of ChatGPT. The technology translates sensitive dialogues, such as its pilot with the border police who can’t use public translation services because of security issues.
We’re experiencing an “intelligence revolution” whereby “sovereign AI factories can really help advance society,” Hilsen said.
Billion-euro investments
Virkkunen said the region’s first AI factory will be operational in coming weeks, with one of the biggest projects launching in Munich, Germany in the first days of September. It’s a different story for the gigafactories.
“These are very big investments because they are four times more powerful when it comes to computing capacities than the biggest AI factories, and it means billions in investments. Each of these need three to five billion [euros] in investment,” the commissioner said, adding that the bloc will look to set up a consortium of partners and then officially open a call for investment later this year.
Bertin Martens, senior research fellow at Bruegel, questioned why such investments needed to subsidized by government funds.
“We don’t know yet how much private investment has been proposed as a complement to the taxpayer subsidy, and what capacity and how big these factories are. This is still very much unclear at this stage, so it’s very hard to say how much this will add in terms of computing capacity,” he said.
Power consumption is also a key issue. Martens noted that building an AI gigafactory may take one to two years — but building a power generation of that size requires much more time.
“If you want to build a state-of-the-art gigafactory with hundreds of thousands of Nvidia chips, you have to count on the power consumption of at least one gigawatt for one of those factories. Whether there’s enough space in Europe’s electricity grid in all of these countries to create those factories remains to be seen… this will require major investment in power regeneration capacity,” he told CNBC.
UBS forecasts that thecurrent installed global data center capacity of 85 GW will double due to soaring demand. Based on the EU’s 20-billion-euro investment and the plan for each factory to run 100,000 advanced processors, UBS estimates each factory could be around 100-150 MW with a total capacity for all of the facilities of around 1.5-2 GW.
That could add around 15% to Europe’s total capacity — a sizeable boost, even when compared to the U.S., which currently owns around a third of global capacity, according to the data.
Following the announcement of the EU-U.S. trade framework, EU chief Ursula von der Leyen said Sunday that U.S. AI chips will help power the bloc’s AI gigafactories in a bid to help the States “maintain their technological edge.”
“One could argue that it’s relatively easy, provided you have the money. It’s relatively easy to buy the chips from Nvidia and to create these hardware factories, but to make it run and to make it economically viable is a completely different question,” Martens told CNBC.
He said that the EU will likely have to start at a smaller scale, as the region is unable to immediately build its own frontier models in AI because of their expense.
“I think in time, Europe can gradually build up its infrastructure and its business models around AI to reach that stage, but that will not happen immediately,” Martens said.