Marketing Expert Employed Techniques Widely Accepted in Market Research Community
Posted on August 11, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
The Federal Trade Commission contended that Amazon tricked, coerced, and manipulated consumers into subscribing to Amazon Prime. According to the FTC, this was accomplished by failing to disclose the material terms of the subscription clearly and conspicuously and by failing to obtain the consumers’ informed consent before enrolling them. The FTC also alleged that Amazon did not provide simple mechanisms for subscribers to cancel their Prime memberships. The FTC sued Amazon.com, Inc. and three of the company’s executives, Neil Lindsay, Russell Grandinetti, and Jamil Ghani.
Amazon requested that their marketing expert, Ronald T. Wilcox, conduct two surveys: (1) “A survey to assess the extent to which Prime members can locate and complete the desktop version of the Cancellation Flow on Amazon.com as described in the Amended Complaint” (Cancellation Survey); and (2) “A survey to assess the experiences of US consumers with free trials of memberships or subscriptions that automatically turn into paid memberships or subscriptions unless cancelled” (Free Trial Survey).
Wilcox reported that the Cancellation Survey, designed to assess which Prime members can locate and complete the desktop version of the Cancellation Flow on Amazon.com, shows 99.8% of respondents (529 of 530) located the Cancellation Flow and 96.4% of respondents (511 of 530) paused or ended their Prime membership.
The Free Trial Survey, designed to assess the extent of U.S. consumers’ experience with free trial memberships or subscriptions, particularly those that automatically turn into paid memberships or subscriptions, found 92.5% of respondents currently pay for at least one of the memberships or subscriptions on the list provided to respondents.
The FTC, however, filed a motion to exclude these survey results.
Marketing Expert Witness
Ronald T. Wilcox, Ph.D., is a Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia’s Darden Graduate School of Business Administration. He conducts research and teaches classes on marketing. His areas of expertise within marketing are branding, consumer behavior, surveys, statistical modeling of consumer choice, and the public policy implications of marketing.
Discussion by the Court
FTC asserted that the results of the first survey should be excluded for two reasons: (1) Wilcox recruited and sampled only the most technology-savvy, attentive survey takers; and (2) he failed to ensure the respondents were representative of U.S. Amazon Prime members seeking to cancel their memberships. The FTC likewise filed a motion to exclude the results of the second survey because it said nothing about respondents’ understanding of Prime memberships.
Wilcox’s Surveys
Cancellation Survey
The FTC said that testimony about the Cancellation Survey must be excluded because nothing indicated the respondents were representative of U.S. Prime members. In particular, it argued that Wilcox selected only the most tech-savvy, attentive respondents to take this survey, and that he ignored this bias. And the survey must also be excluded, according to the FTC, because Wilcox did not verify that the respondents appropriately represented key demographics.
The Court agreed that testimony about the Cancellation Survey is admissible because Wilcox used techniques with general acceptance in the market research community.
The Cancellation Survey was also intended to test whether respondents were able locate the Cancellation Flow and pause or end a Prime membership. This was pertinent to the allegation that Amazon did not provide simple mechanisms for subscribers to cancel their Prime memberships.
The FTC’s contrary arguments do not dictate a different conclusion. First, it said that the sample group was skewed towards tech-savvy participants. But this is a critique of the survey’s design and methodology, which goes to weight—not admissibility. Similarly, the FTC’ second argument against Wilcox’s use of attention checks goes to weight because technical unreliability—for example, issues with the format of the questions or how the survey was conducted—goes to the weight afforded a survey, not admissibility.
The FTC’s third point, that it is problematic to have a greater percentage of people who have used the Cancellation Flow among the survey respondents than exists in the general population of Prime members, also goes to weight. As does its fourth argument, that Wilcox did not consider relevant socio-demographic information. These third and fourth arguments both go to weight because “[t]he selection of an inappropriate universe generally affects the weight of the resulting survey data, not its admissibility.”
Free Trial Survey
The FTC next claimed the Free Trial survey had to be excluded because it was irrelevant. It objected to this survey on the grounds that it said nothing about Prime membership, and whatever respondents thought about a free trial of a gym membership, streaming service subscription, or other subscription service other than Prime had no bearing on this litigation. In addition, the FTC argued that the survey had to be excluded because Wilcox did not provide any evidence to connect the results of the Free Trial Survey to consumers’ understanding of Prime’s enrollment process.
Defendants responded that Wilcox’s testimony about this survey is relevant for three reasons. First, the survey concerned the FTC’s allegation that consumers are unaware of Prime’s auto-renewal features. Second, the FTC has repeatedly argued that the context of disclosures matters, and this survey provides context about consumers’ understanding of subscriptions, free trials, and auto-renew features. Third, Defendants’ online consumer behavior expert connected the Free Trials survey to her opinions that many consumers are familiar with free trials and that consumers’ familiarity with free trials suggests they are familiar with free trial enrollment and cancellation.
The Free Trial Survey is related to the FTC’s argument that Amazon’s strategies “made it unlikely many ordinary consumers would even look for Prime’s material terms, much less notice that Amazon was enrolling them in a Prime free trial or that the Prime free trial automatically renewed as a paying subscription.” This is because Wilcox’s survey purports to show that consumers are generally aware of paid subscriptions’ auto-renewal features.
The Court decided that the Free Trial Survey was relevant and admissible because it may aid the trier of fact in determining a fact in issue.
Held
The Court denied the Plaintiff FTC’s Rule 702 motion to exclude the testimony of Amazon’s expert, Ronald Wilcox.
Key Takeaway:
While the FTC identified a number of purported defects with the Cancellation Survey, precluding Wilcox from testifying about this survey is unwarranted. This evidence “is to be attacked by cross examination, contrary evidence, and attention to the burden of proof, not exclusion.”
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Federal Trade Commission V. Amazon.Com, Inc., Et Al. |
| Docket Number: | 2:23cv932 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Washington Western |
| Order Date: | August 06, 2025 |
