In particular, here are a few things Amazon gets wrong about its own commissioned report, leading my study quibbles:

- The study is partial equilibrium, not full. It doesn't model system changes in supply and demand, thus making it unable to support Amazon's claims.
- Revenue is estimates marginal cost at the time of the subsidy, thus excluding margin tightening, externalities, etc.
- "Surplus revenue" is an accounting term, at best, not ratepayer relevant