Overview

 Amazon’s Annual Vendor Negotiations (AVNs) for 2025 turned out to be a wake-up call for many brands. Despite hopes that Amazon might ease up amid economic headwinds, the reality was a relentless push for profitability. Trade terms jumped by an average of 91 basis points (0.91% of net sales) year-over-year(consulterce.com), squeezing vendor margins even further. Negotiations dragged on for months and grew more combative, with nearly half of vendors calling the process “challenging” or “highly confrontational”(consulterce.com). In short, Amazon came out ahead, leaving many first-party (1P) vendors wondering how to adapt their strategy.

For Amazon agency professionals, these developments carry critical lessons. Agencies managing 1P vendor accounts must not only understand what happened during the 2025 AVN cycle, but also translate those insights into practical negotiation strategies for clients. This article distills the core findings from a recent Marketplace Masters webinar featuring Martin Heubel (Founder of Consulterce and former Amazon Vendor Manager) and offers a playbook on how to negotiate smarter with Amazon in the year ahead. We’ll explore why Amazon pushed so hard on profitability, which trade terms were most affected, how vendors responded, and what tactics agencies can employ to protect their clients’ profitability.

Amazon’s Profit-First Agenda in 2025 AVNs

It’s no secret that Amazon’s retail team has been laser-focused on the bottom line in recent years. In the 2025 vendor negotiation cycle, this profit-first mindset hit a new level. According to a global survey of 1P brands, Amazon successfully increased total trade terms to about 18.6% of net sales on average – up nearly a full percentage point from the previous year(consulterce.com). To achieve this, Amazon zeroed in on non-negotiable cost buckets like base co-op accruals and tied services, rather than introducing new incentives.

The core demands Amazon pressed for in 2025 included:

• Higher base co-op fees ( accruals): These “vendor co-op” or base accrual fees – essentially a toll for doing business on Amazon – were ratcheted up for almost half of vendors surveyed. Many brands saw Amazon insist on raising the base co-op percentage that gets deducted from every invoice. In fact, industry observers note base accrual rates have crept from ~6% a few years ago to 8–10% (or more) in 2025 for many brands, especially smaller vendors. This directly boosts Amazon’s margin without any incremental service in return.
  
  
• Amazon Vendor Services (AVS) fees: Amazon also pushed more vendors to enroll in its paid AVS support program (and at higher fee levels). Vendor managers discouraged one-time (“straight”) payments for AVS, instead favouring ongoing accrual-based fees. The rationale is clear: an accrual scales with sales, protecting Amazon’s net profit margin (Net PPM) even if a vendor’s business grows. In 2025, many brands had to either increase their AVS percentage or newly sign up for the service, effectively trading margin for access to an Amazon account manager.
  
  
• Extended payment terms: In a bid to improve cash flow, Amazon asked vendors – especially new ones – for significantly longer payment terms. 90-day or even 120-day payment terms became common asks. Accepting these terms means vendors wait months to get paid, shifting financing costs onto the supplier. This was a notable pressure point in 2025’s talks, as Amazon looked to hold onto cash longer.
  
  
• Amazon Business incentives: Amazon’s B2B marketplace (“Amazon Business”) emerged as another focal point. Vendor managers increasingly pushed for bulk discounts or segment-specific terms to fuel Amazon’s growth in the B2B segment. While Amazon Business has been a quiet growth driver for Amazon, many vendors weren’t initially prioritising it. In 2025, however, brands found Amazon asking them to invest more – for example, offering bulk purchase discounts for business buyers or allocating additional marketing funds – as part of their trade term agreements.
  
  
• Supply chain programs (Direct Import & Direct Fulfillment): Amazon also dangled programs like Direct Import (DI) and Direct Fulfillment (DF) as negotiation levers. For products manufactured abroad, Amazon often requested direct import agreements (buying FOB and importing itself) to cut costs. Separately, Direct Fulfillment – where vendors ship orders directly to customers, bypassing Amazon’s warehouses – was promoted as a way for vendors to take on fulfillment costs. Amazon’s message: help us lower operational costs (through DI/DF) and we’ll count it towards margin improvement. For heavy or bulky goods vendors, shifting more volume to Direct Fulfillment can indeed reduce Amazon’s expense and was a key ask in some negotiations.
  
  

Notably absent from Amazon’s 2025 playbook were new value-add programs. Unlike past years, Amazon didn’t have many fresh carrots to offer – it was mostly sticks. As Martin Heubel observed, “Amazon lacked new initiatives for vendors to invest in, leaving brands with limited options to allocate trade spend towards growth-driving activities.” Instead, Amazon doubled down on extracting more from the usual suspects (co-op, AVS, payment terms), forcing suppliers to concede margin just to maintain their current relationship status.

Hardball Tactics and Lengthy Talks

If some vendor leaders hoped for a quick or collaborative negotiation this year, most were in for a rude awakening. The average AVN in 2025 lasted 3.2 months from start to finish(consulterce.com). What many finance teams budget as a “four-week exercise” ballooned into a quarter-long saga in reality. In some cases, talks even stretched past six months. The prolonged timeline was a direct result of Amazon’s hardline stance – vendor managers were unwilling to settle until their profitability targets were met.

During this drawn-out process, Amazon didn’t hesitate to play hardball. Fully 50% of vendors reported facing punitive measures during negotiations(consulterce.com). These pressure tactics included:

• Buy Box suppression: Suddenly, some of the vendor’s ASINs would lose the Buy Box or show as “Unavailable” despite being in stock. Nothing motivates a concession like watching your Amazon sales vanish overnight.
  
  
• Order holds (“stop buys”): Amazon can halt or slow its purchase orders for a vendor’s products. Many brands saw Amazon temporarily stop replenishment orders for weeks as a negotiation squeeze – a move that directly hits the vendor’s top line.
  
  
• Traffic diversion: Some vendors suspected Amazon was subtly redirecting shopper traffic to competing products, for example, by adjusting search placements or Sponsored Product prominence. This soft tactic is hard to prove but adds to the pressure.
  
  
• Unresponsiveness: An extremely common complaint was simply radio silence – Amazon vendor managers ignoring emails and delaying meetings, making it hard for vendors to progress the discussion or address issues. This tactic wears down vendors and often coerces them to accept terms just to move forward.
  
  

It’s no wonder that nearly half of vendors described the 2025 negotiations as challenging or very confrontational(consulterce.com). One participant quipped that Amazon’s approach made it feel “like negotiating with a brick wall.” The days of friendly annual chats – if they ever existed – are long gone. In 2025, Amazon showed it is fully willing to sacrifice short-term harmony for long-term margin gain.

From the brand perspective, these moves often felt one-sided and frustrating. Yet, interestingly, Amazon still delivered growth for most vendors. In the Consulterce/Stratably survey, about 74% of brands said Amazon’s retail sales growth for their products was in line with or above category averages(consulterce.com). In other words, even as Amazon squeezed margins, it also drove strong sales (especially in categories like consumables and softlines). This dichotomy – high growth but at the cost of profitability – put many vendors in a bind. If Amazon is your fastest-growing channel, can you afford to say no to its demands? Amazon’s negotiators certainly leveraged this dependence: brands that saw Amazon significantly outperform the market for them had less leverage, as Amazon knew they relied on its channel for growth.

“One key lever is understanding whether Amazon is driving your growth or vice versa. If Amazon’s growth far outpaces your category, they know you’re reliant on them – and they’ll be less willing to concede.” – Martin Heubel, Founder, Consulterce

On the flip side, vendors whose Amazon sales were lagging their category had a slightly different challenge. If Amazon wasn’t keeping up, it pressed those vendors for even more investments in traffic and conversion (e.g. “maybe your co-op isn’t high enough to drive the desired growth”). Neither scenario gave brands much respite. The bottom line: Amazon aimed to improve its margin regardless of a vendor’s situation – by extracting more funds from the winners and pushing the laggards to spend into growth.

Key Outcomes: What Changed (and What Didn’t)

Looking at the 2025 cycle outcomes, a few clear trends emerged:

• Trade term increases were the norm: As noted, 93% of vendors ended up with higher total trade terms than the previous year. The typical increase ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 percentage points of net sales, though some unlucky brands conceded even more. Only a tiny minority (around 7%) managed to reduce their terms – often by offering something else of value, like cost concessions or supply chain efficiencies, to offset Amazon’s asks. For most, holding steady itself was a win, while the majority swallowed a higher percentage of co-ops/fees(consulterce.com).
  
  
• Many vendors gave cost price concessions: Early in 2025 (prior to new U.S. import tariffs kicking in), Amazon aggressively pushed vendors to lower their cost prices. Roughly a quarter of brands agreed to upfront cost-of-goods reductions (some >5%), betting that higher volume or avoidance of penalties would make up for it. However, once tariffs on imports were announced in Q2, the tide turned – about one-third of vendors went back to Amazon seeking cost price increases to offset tariff impacts. 
  
  Amazon was generally resistant, putting those brands in a tough spot. In some cases, vendors negotiated no increase in cost but got something in return (like a smaller rise in trade terms than initially demanded). The net effect is that cost prices stayed flat for nearly half of vendors, while others were split between decreases and increases, largely tied to external cost pressures.
  
  
• Margins tightened for many brands: Despite the sales growth on Amazon, about 49% of vendors said their net margins declined due to the 2025 negotiations, with only 11% managing to improve margins (often through price increases or expense cuts) and the rest treading water(consulterce.com). It’s telling that even in a year of strong consumer demand on Amazon, almost half the suppliers lost profitability. 
  
  This underscores how heavy Amazon’s take has become. Yet, interestingly, over two-thirds of vendors still rated their Amazon net margins as “healthy” or “very healthy” in absolute – indicating that for many, Amazon is still profitable, just slightly less so than before(consulterce.com). Agencies should probe their clients on this point: do they truly understand their real Amazon P&L after all fees, chargebacks, and accruals?
  
  
• Hybrid selling is on the rise: Frustrated by these annual margin squeezes, a growing number of 1P brands are exploring a hybrid 1P/3P strategy. In 2025, nearly half (47%) of vendors surveyed said that using a hybrid model – i.e. selling some products via Seller Central (3P) or through agency/retail partners – is becoming increasingly relevant to their business(consulterce.com). 
  
  While 63% still sell exclusively via Vendor Central, the interest in diversification is climbing. This trend is a signal to Amazon that vendors have other options. Even if a brand remains primarily 1P, having a viable third-party route provides leverage: it shows Amazon that if terms become too onerous, the brand can shift certain ASINs to 3P where they have more control over price and margin. We’ll discuss how to use this in negotiations shortly.
  
  

In summary, 2025’s AVN season was a win for Amazon’s bottom line – but a bruising experience for vendors. Amazon achieved its margin improvements and maintained strong growth in most categories. Vendors, meanwhile, had to navigate tougher terms, tricky economic factors like tariffs, and even risked interruptions to their Amazon sales during the standoff. As we turn toward 2026, what can agencies and brands learn from this? How can you negotiate in a way that protects profitability without jeopardising the partnership? The next section lays out concrete strategies.

Strategies for Successful Amazon Vendor Negotiations

Negotiating with Amazon might feel like David versus Goliath, but brands are not powerless. The 2025 cycle revealed strategies that savvy vendors (and their agency partners) can use to push back and find win-win outcomes. Here are key tactics to carry into the next AVN cycle:

1. Start with Data and Cross-Functional Prep
   The foundation of any successful negotiation is thorough preparation. Before talks even begin, assemble a cross-functional task force – sales/account managers, finance analysts, supply chain leads, and marketing/media strategists – to review your Amazon business holistically. Dive into your numbers from the past year:

• What were your total Amazon investments (co-ops, damage/freight allowances, AVS fees, Ads, promotions, etc.), and what ROI did each generate in terms of sales lift or operational benefit?
  
  
• How did Amazon perform relative to your category and other retailers? Did Amazon drive above-market growth for your brand (signalling strong execution, but also your reliance on Amazon), or did it lag (pointing to missed opportunities or Amazon-specific issues)? Have these insights ready.
  
  
• Get a clear picture of your true profitability by SKU or category on Amazon. Include all the “hidden” costs – chargebacks, Fred (freight) allowances, OTAs, etc. – to know your baseline margin. Agencies can add value here by providing advanced analytics (like profitability dashboards) that quantify these factors. (Pro tip: Use tools like MerchantSpring’s analytics platform to connect vendor accounts and pull a full P&L, including often-overlooked deductions.) Armed with this, identify which product lines are net-margin accretive for Amazon and which are not. This will be crucial in discussions about profitability.

By quantifying the return on every dollar invested, you can approach Amazon with a factual narrative. For example, if $1 in Amazon Advertising drove $5 in sales, whereas $1 in co-op accrual only yielded $2 in organic growth, bring that to the table. As Martin Heubel advises, anchor the conversation in data. An informed vendor can counter Amazon’s generic requests with specific evidence, e.g.: “We’re willing to invest more in growth drivers like ads or Subscribe & Save discounts, but the current co-op fee is not yielding proportional sales. Let’s re-balance where that dollar goes.” Backing such claims with hard numbers immediately changes the tone of negotiations from emotional to analytical.

2. Be Proactive and Anchor the Terms Early
   One of the biggest mistakes is waiting for Amazon to make the first move. “If you wait for Amazon to table the first proposal, they frame the whole conversation,” Martin notes. Instead, take the initiative: when the negotiation window opens (often Amazon signals via email or Vendor Central), respond by setting a meeting agenda and timeline. Communicate your expectation that the discussion should conclude by a reasonable date. Then, present the first proposal rather than purely reacting to Amazon’s draft.

By putting forth your terms or adjustments upfront, you accomplish two things: 1) you establish yourself as an active negotiator (not a passive price-taker), and 2) you anchor the negotiation around your numbers. For instance, you might propose, “We’re prepared to hold our base accrual at X% and increase our marketing funds by Y%, in exchange for a commitment to new A+ content placements and maintaining current payment terms.” Even if your opening offer is aggressive in your favour, it sets a benchmark that Amazon now has to counter. Psychologically, this can prevent Amazon from running the table with their initial high demands. Vendor managers are trained to shoot for the moon; by anchoring low (but with justification), you reset their expectations of what’s achievable.

Being proactive also means outlining what success looks like for both sides. In your joint business plan or kickoff call, articulate your growth goals and the resources you’ll need from Amazon to hit them. For example: “We aim for 15% growth, but that assumes Amazon maintains 1-day Prime shipping on all our ASINs and increases marketing placements in Deals events.” Frame your asks as mutually beneficial: if Amazon wants double-digit growth and higher margin, they must partner on initiatives (selection, logistics, marketing) that drive the volume to pay for those margin asks. This approach shifts the tone from “Amazon says, vendor does” to a more collaborative planning dialogue. It won’t stop Amazon from asking, but it positions your brand as a planner with a plan – not a punching bag.

3. Leverage Your Strengths (and Alternatives)
   In any negotiation, leverage is key. For Amazon vendors, leverage can come from your market position and your alternatives to Amazon’s demands:

• Market share and brand strength: If your brand is a category leader or uniquely in-demand by Amazon’s customers, recognise that strength. Amazon category managers care deeply about having must-have selection. Use that in negotiations: if Amazon’s terms threaten to make your business unsustainable, be prepared to (tactfully) remind them that squeezing you too hard could mean stock-outs or loss of a key brand on the platform. 
  
  Share data on your brand’s contribution to Amazon’s category growth or the incremental traffic you drive. The message should be, “We want to grow with Amazon, but we need terms that let us remain profitable to reinvest in that growth.” This signals that Amazon’s success is tied to yours – a point sometimes lost on hard-charging vendor managers focused only on margin.
  
  
• Hybrid selling or channel diversification: As mentioned, having a viable 3P option or alternative channel can be a trump card. Even if you prefer the 1P model, evaluate the economics of Seller Central for your products. If selling as a third-party (or via a distributor) could yield better margins on select SKUs, you don’t necessarily have to pivot, but you should quietly document that opportunity. 
  
  In negotiations, you can subtly allude to this: “At these terms, our direct-to-consumer or marketplace model becomes more attractive for certain product lines. We’d prefer to keep the business with Amazon Retail, but we have to be margin-conscious.” You need not threaten overtly; Amazon already knows that brands have options (Walmart, D2C, etc.). By demonstrating you’ve run the numbers, you show Amazon that you won’t accept an unfair deal out of desperation. As a bonus, doing a 1P vs 3P profitability analysis can also reveal inefficiencies to fix – a service agencies can provide to add value for clients.
  
  
• Operational excellence: Another source of leverage is your operational performance. If you have a great track record on supply chain metrics (e.g. >98% in-stock, fast fulfillment, low chargebacks), use that credibility. Amazon values vendors who make their life easier. You can negotiate from a position of, “We consistently deliver to Amazon’s needs; in return, we expect reasonable terms.” 
  
  Additionally, consider offering operational concessions instead of purely financial ones. For example, if Amazon is hammering you for a higher freight allowance (i.e. you covering more inbound shipping cost), perhaps you can agree to use Amazon’s preferred carrier programs or consolidate shipments to cut Amazon’s costs without simply giving a bigger allowance. Offer solutions: “We’re open to enrolling in Amazon’s Inbound Cross Dock program to streamline freight – which should alleviate the need to raise the allowance by the full percentage you asked.” This shows you’re willing to collaborate on efficiency rather than just hand over margin.
  
  

4. Emphasise Profitable Growth, Not Just Terms
   Amazon often treats trade terms and growth as separate conversations: first, they secure margin improvements, then they (maybe) talk about helping you grow. Savvy agencies should flip this script by making profitability and growth two sides of the same coin. In practice, this means negotiating programmatically: tie any margin concession to specific growth-driving commitments from Amazon, and vice versa.

For example, if Amazon insists on +0.5% more co-op, counter with: “Alright, if we invest that, we need to see a plan for +15% growth supported by XYZ initiatives (premium placements, inclusion in Amazon marketing campaigns, etc.). If Amazon’s growth target for us is, say, 10%, we’ll stretch to 15% but we need support to get there profitably.” Get Amazon to agree (even if informally) to joint KPIs like unit sales growth, new item launches, or market share gains. Document this in the term sheet or follow-up emails – it can be used later if Amazon comes up short on their end.

Another technique is reallocating funds toward measurable ROI activities. If Amazon wants more “soft” investments (like the ever-opaque Amazon Marketing Fund or untargeted merchandising accruals), propose shifting some of that into performance advertising or content enhancements that you control. For instance, “Instead of an extra 1% base accrual, let’s put that budget into Sponsored Brand Ads and A+ content updates for our new products.

This will drive conversion and benefit both of us – Amazon gets higher sales and we get brand equity – whereas an accrual just disappears into margin.” By doing so, you’re aligning the spend with growth while still conceding something. Often, Amazon might accept this trade-off, because it still improves their topline and likely their bottom line too (advertising is a huge profit center for Amazon).

Crucially, track the outcomes of such investments. If you negotiate that you’ll, say, boost your Amazon Ads budget by 20% instead of giving 0.2% more co-op, monitor the sales and margin impact. Agencies should report back during QBRs (Quarterly Business Reviews) with Amazon on how those investments paid off. This not only justifies your approach but sets the stage for next year: you can say, “We delivered X% growth by investing smartly; let’s continue funding what works rather than just increasing co-ops.” Over time, this pivots the negotiation dialogue from “Amazon asks, vendor yields” to a more nuanced discussion of where to invest for mutual gain.

5. Negotiate Value for Every Concession
   In 2025, Amazon largely dictated terms. But that doesn’t mean you have to give in without getting something in return. A golden rule for negotiations is: never give value away for free. If Amazon wants a higher discount or a new fee, make sure the brand receives a tangible benefit or concession in parallel. Here are a few examples of value pairing in Amazon negotiations:

• New item listings in exchange for cost support: If you plan to introduce new products, leverage that. Amazon always wants the latest selection. You could agree, “We’ll launch these 5 new SKUs on Vendor Central this year (exclusively perhaps), but we need a 2% cost increase on our core item to cover increased manufacturing costs,” or “we’ll only do it if our damage allowance is reduced by 1 point, since we improved packaging.” Link the ask to something Amazon cares about (selection, Prime-ready assortment) and trade it for relief elsewhere.
  
  
• Marketing opportunities for margin: Sometimes a vendor might acquiesce to a margin ask but can attach a perk. For instance, “We’ll accept the +0.5% accrual increase, but in return we want a guaranteed Deal of the Day slot in Q4” or inclusion in an Amazon marketing event. Ensure this is written into the terms or JBP. If the vendor manager can’t unilaterally promise that, you at least get them to commit to advocate for your brand’s participation. This way, your extra spend has a chance to come back as sales.
  
  
• Chargeback waivers or operational fixes: If your brand has been plagued by chargebacks (e.g. for supply chain issues), consider making any new concession contingent on resolving those. “We agree to the longer payment terms, but all incorrect chargebacks from the past 6 months must be cleared,” or “we’ll pay for AVS, but expect priority support in fixing our EDI issues to eliminate future chargebacks.” This turns a painful give (like 60 to 90-day terms) into an opportunity to improve your operational cost structure, which can offset some margin loss.
  
  
• Explicitly tie growth to terms in writing: Another strategy is to negotiate an earn-back mechanism. For example, “If we exceed 20% sales growth, Amazon will rebate 1% of co-op at year-end,” or conversely, “If Amazon’s orders fall short of forecast by 15%, co-op fees will be revisited.” While Amazon doesn’t usually love variable terms, even a symbolic clause shows that terms are conditional on performance. At the very least, it opens the door to revisit terms mid-year if things change (e.g. tariffs, recessions, etc.). Some vendors have had success including such clauses in their vendor agreements.
  
  

“Never concede without an ask. If Amazon wants an extra discount or fee, tie it to something – a cost increase, a service level, a marketing placement – so there’s a two-way value exchange.” – Martin Heubel

This approach ensures that when you do give ground, you advance your strategic interests too. It also somewhat equalises the psychological balance: Amazon sees that you won’t surrender points just because they’re big and you’re small; you’re willing to find solutions that work for both sides.

6. Plan Your Walk-Away and Escalation Path
   Despite best efforts, some negotiations will reach a stalemate or turn especially sour. That’s why it’s essential to define your walk-away conditions and escalation plan before you’re deep in the throes of talks. As an agency or vendor team, huddle with senior leadership to decide: What is our absolute floor? At what point do we prefer risking Amazon disruption over signing a bad deal? Identify specific metrics: e.g. “If the total requested trade term > 20% of net sales, we cannot accept” or “If Amazon refuses any cost relief despite tariff doubling our costs, we will escalate to VP level.” Knowing this in advance prevents last-minute panic or capitulation.

If a walk-away threshold is crossed, one approach is a temporary stock cut – for instance, subtly pausing promotions or limiting shipments on less profitable products – to signal to Amazon that you’re serious about profitability. This is a big move and should be done with caution (and communication with Amazon), but it’s part of your arsenal. Agencies should advise clients to use this only if they are truly prepared to shift business elsewhere, even if briefly.

More constructively, have an escalation matrix ready. This means identifying the contacts above your vendor manager: the category leader, Amazon regional director, or even a VP in charge of vendor negotiations. Aim to cultivate those relationships before negotiations turn ugly. For example, schedule a mid-year top-to-top meeting between your company’s VP of Sales and Amazon’s Category Director.

Use that meeting (well ahead of AVN season) to build rapport and discuss strategic plans – not the nitty-gritty of terms, but overall partnership goals. Then, if talks bog down later, you have a channel to escalate politely: “As discussed in our top-to-top, both companies want to grow this partnership. We’re hitting an impasse on terms that I believe our teams can resolve. Can we enlist your help in finding a balanced solution?” Amazon is hierarchical; a note from a senior Amazon leader to the vendor manager to “work it out” can break a stalemate.

Also, decide on communication cadence. If Amazon goes quiet for too long or misses agreed deadlines, be ready to professionally call it out and elevate the issue. Sometimes, even CC’ing a category manager on an email can prompt a faster response. The key is to use escalation judiciously – not as a threat, but as a path to mutual agreement when lower-level discussions have stalled.

Finally, always keep negotiations professional. It’s easy to get frustrated (and understandably so when faced with tough tactics), but maintaining a firm, data-driven and respectful tone will serve you best in escalations. Amazon vendor managers change roles frequently; the bridges you burn today might be relationships you need tomorrow.

By contrast, if you handle a difficult negotiation in a principled way, you often earn long-term respect. As Paul Sonneveld (Marketplace Masters host and former Amazon vendor lead) noted, the goal is to navigate Amazon with confidence, not animosity. A composed approach under pressure is the hallmark of an agency partner that brands will trust with their Amazon business year after year.

Preparing for 2026: Turning Lessons into Action

While 2025’s negotiation season is barely behind us, the savviest vendors are already gearing up for 2026. Why so soon? Because changes in strategy and relationship-building take time – you can’t start planning in December and expect a different outcome in January. Here’s how Amazon agencies should help clients now to be in a stronger position next cycle:

• Audit 2025 results and set 2026 objectives: Perform a thorough post-mortem on the 2025 terms. Where did you net out on each component (co-op %, freight, payment days, etc.) versus last year? How did those changes impact your P&L and Amazon sales? Present this to your client’s leadership along with a clear ask: What is our priority for 2026? It could be margin recovery, or securing cost increases due to inflation, or maybe gaining Amazon marketing support for a big product launch. Establish your non-negotiables early.
  
  
• Monitor Amazon’s strategic signals: There are rumblings that in 2026, Amazon might shift at least partially back toward a sales-growth focus (after years of margin emphasis)(profitero.com). Macroeconomic factors – softer consumer demand, new competition from Walmart/Target or overseas entrants, and the impact of tariffs – could pressure Amazon to seek higher top-line growth. Keep an eye on communications from Amazon in Q4 2025: are they suddenly emphasising revenue-driving programs or giving hints about easing up on certain fees? Being attuned to this will help you adapt your negotiation approach. If Amazon is hungry for growth, you might find them slightly more flexible on terms in exchange for acceleration.
  
  
• Strengthen operational metrics: Use the remainder of 2025 to fix pain points in your Amazon supply chain and retail readiness. Reducing out-of-stocks, improving packaging (to cut damages), streamlining ASIN content – all these will not only boost current performance but remove excuses Amazon might use to demand higher allowances. If, for instance, your damage rate improves dramatically because of better packaging, you can legitimately push back if Amazon tries to increase damage allowance next time (you’ll have data to show it’s unnecessary). The same goes for chargebacks: resolve systemic issues (with help from Amazon if needed) so you can confidently refuse any new fees that Amazon claims would cover “our cost to serve you.” Show that your cost to serve Amazon has gone down!
  
  
• Invest in relationship capital: Relationships still matter in Amazon-land. Proactively engage with your Amazon vendor manager and AVS lead (if you have one) throughout the year outside of pure negotiations. Quick check-in calls to share positive news (e.g., “We just hit a record sales month, thanks for your support”) or to ask for advice (making them feel like a partner) can pay dividends. Also, as mentioned, set up higher-level connections: perhaps invite Amazon category leaders to your brand’s HQ for a business review, or meet them at industry events (like Amazon Accelerate or other Amazon conferences). These interactions humanise the partnership. When AVN time comes around, the Amazon team is more likely to seek a constructive solution with a partner they know, versus a faceless vendor account code.
  
  
• Scenario plan your asks and offers: As we approach the next cycle, map out a few likely scenarios. If Amazon comes in asking for another +50 bps trade term, what will you counter with? If they surprisingly hold flat, what will you request (don’t waste the opportunity – you could seek better terms or support if they aren’t asking for more money)? Create a playbook so you’re not scrambling in the heat of the moment. Decide ahead which levers you’re willing to pull – e.g., will you consider a strategic list price increase on Amazon to fund their asks? Will you shift 10% of volume to Seller Central as a trial balloon? Having these plans vetted by finance/legal in advance means you can respond swiftly and confidently.
  
  

In essence, treat Amazon vendor negotiations as a year-round endeavour, not a one-time event. As an agency, coaching your clients to implement these forward-looking steps can significantly improve their outcomes and satisfaction. It also transforms the narrative from dreading AVNs to seeing them as a controllable business process. With the right data, preparation, and mindset, vendors can approach 2026 with a proactive strategy rather than reactive concessions.

Conclusion: Navigating Amazon Negotiations with Confidence

The 2025 AVN season taught Amazon vendors one clear lesson: hope is not a strategy. Hoping Amazon will go easy, or that negotiations will be “quick and simple,” is a recipe for disappointment. Instead, brands – and the agencies who support them – must take a strategic, analytics-driven stance to protect their interests. Amazon may be a powerhouse, but through careful planning and smart negotiation tactics, vendors can push back on unreasonable demands, secure valuable concessions, and foster a healthier partnership.

For Amazon agency professionals, your role is pivotal. You bring the outside expertise, industry benchmarks, and level-headed perspective that brands need when in the trenches with Amazon. By implementing the strategies outlined above – from thorough data analysis to assertive negotiation anchoring and creative win-win solutions – you can help your clients not just survive AVNs but thrive through them. The goal is a sustainable relationship where Amazon achieves its growth and profitability goals while your client achieves theirs. That balance is possible with the right approach.

As we look ahead, the best thing vendors can do is turn the hard-earned insights of 2025 into action for 2026. Start early, stay informed, and don’t shy away from tough conversations. In the words of one seasoned vendor manager, “Amazon will always ask – it’s up to you to counter with what you need.” With preparation and a bit of boldness, you can ensure that next year’s negotiation results in a fair deal that sets both sides up for success.

To continue learning and stay prepared, consider watching the full webinar replay with Martin Heubel for an in-depth discussion of the survey results and strategies. If you found these insights useful, subscribe to our newsletter for regular Amazon vendor updates and expert tips. And if your team needs deeper analytics or support to navigate Amazon, don’t hesitate to contact MerchantSpring – our platform and experts are here to help Amazon vendors and agencies turn negotiation challenges into opportunities. Here’s to a profitable partnership with Amazon in the year ahead!