That's close to my view.

The article makes a big deal out of Amazon's work with AI: Okay, they do some applied statistics like companies have been supposed to do, and some companies have done, going back more or less 100 years. A lot of their analytical, AI work will have to be classic operations research -- optimization including under uncertainty.
E.g., operations research is just
awash in work for shipping, inventory,
optimizing a supply chain under uncertainty, etc.

My view is that Amazon did well because of their Web site and there because of a biggie that came along just in time: Internet data rate that permitted sending lots and lots of nice pictures. So, apparently Amazon set up a nicely equipped group for taking good still images -- good in lighting and resolution -- that let customers do reasonably well informed shopping.

Then IMHO, the Amazon Web site now should be easy enough to borrow from by Wal-Mart, Sears if they weren't going out of business, Macys, Target, ..., Tiffany's, etc. along with companies around the world.

Then IMHO manufacturers in the US or anywhere in the world can also have such Web sites. E.g., want bed sheets, bath towels, shower curtains, bathroom looped rugs, etc., then just get these from the manufacturer, wherever.

Then for shipping, Amazon is trying to replace FedEx and UPS -- I fail to see that they will be successful there. FedEx and UPS are doing well providing shipping services; the needs of Amazon are not that different from the needs of many other happy companies shipping via FedEx and UPS; FedEx and UPS have economies of scale, ship by plane or truck, ship internationally, likely ship via chartered plane if appropriate, etc. I don't see Amazon doing better.

Then, net, each original supplier in the world that might sell via Amazon can have their own Web site and ship via FedEx or USP. But, what about a warehouse closer to the customer, do low cost trucking to the warehouse and then fast shipping to the customer once and order is placed? Gee, FedEx has been offering that variation for decades.

For Amazon Web Services (AWS), what do they have that Google, Facebook, Microsoft, or other operators of big server farms have? My guess is very little.

I'm failing to see that Amazon has any very significant long term advantages and, really, stands to be vulnerable to manufacturers running their own Web sites and shipping more or less directly to customers themselves.

E.g., at Amazon can buy parts for a computer, e.g., case, motherboard, processor, graphics card, hard disk drives, video display, main memory, keyboard, mouse, etc. So the processor comes from, say, AMD or Intel. So, why should AMD/Intel not just sell direct? Kingston memory does that now -- can buy from Amazon or direct from Kingston.

Brand? Well, the brands people want are Intel, Western Digital, Seagate, GE Force, Radeon, Asus, etc.

Yes, now Amazon is starting to have house brands. Okay. In that case, the Amazon advantage is their house brands, but I don't see that as a major advantage.

Amazon may deliver via self driving cars, drones, etc. Okay, but then so will others be able to do much the same. Indeed, as UPS discovered way back, there are biggie economies in one truck delivering in one area of customers packages from several sellers.

Delivering groceries? Come ON guys: Now pizza and Chinese home deliveries are common, but they have not stopped people picking up their own pizza or Chinese carryout.

Amazon has moved very quickly, much faster than Wal-Mart or Sears, but I fail to see that so far Amazon has a long term advantage.