Yes, I am. I am sure there are big differences (especially in the outcome) but both were losing money in the hope of building an audience, and to lower costs later.
As Hsieh wrote:
"Zappos sells shoes and apparel online, but what distinguished us from our competitors was that we'd put our company culture above all else. We'd bet that by being good to our employees -- for instance, by paying for 100 percent of health care premiums, spending heavily on personal development, and giving customer service reps more freedom than at a typical call center -- we would be able to offer better service than our competitors. Better service would translate into lots of repeat customers, which would mean low marketing expenses, long-term profits, and fast growth. Amazingly, it all seemed to be working. By 2005, gross merchandise sales were $370 million, and we made the Inc. 500. We weren't profitable yet, but we were close to breaking even, and our revenue was growing quickly."
I believe these are very different situations -- Zappos was covering some, nearly all of their SG&A with product margins. Ecomom was, according to the information in the link, needing to pony up cash to cover negative margins on product sales.
