Amazon Seller Account (10 Years of Operation) Listed at ¥1,380,000 and Sold

Why Did ¥1,380,000 Get Paid with Revenue Undisclosed?

Website-sale pricing is normally discussed with the yardstick of “monthly profit x N months.” Yet in this deal, with monthly revenue undisclosed, a buyer appeared just 13 days after a listing that asked ¥1,380,000. What was sold was neither a media property nor a product brand, but the Amazon seller account itself, maintained since May 2012, roughly 14 years, with no suspension history. With no revenue backing, what exactly was valued at ¥1,380,000? We break it down using Rakko M&A’s closed-deals list and the deal-detail page linked from it.

The Deal Numbers (from Rakko M&A’s Listing)

Correction (September 28, 2026): This article first presented the ¥1,380,000 as a closing price. The deal-detail page labels that figure as the seller’s asking price, and the amount the seller and buyer finally agreed on has never been published. The amounts here have been restated on an asking-price basis. No multiple is calculated for this deal because revenue is undisclosed, and the net figure after backing out inventory is likewise an asking-price number.

This is not an operator interview; it records the going rates of the individual-scale M&A market from the closed-deals list and deal-detail information Rakko M&A publishes on its official site.

What Was Sold Was Not a “Business” but an “Account”

Reading the deal details clarifies the nature of this transaction. Products handled were game consoles, hobby goods, and toys (CDs and DVDs were also sold in the early days). The transfer covered only the seller account itself plus roughly 10 units of inventory remaining in the FBA warehouse (estimated sale value around ¥30,000). Sourcing was spot purchasing at mass retailers and the like, and the listing states explicitly that no supplier relationships transfer. Staffing needed: one person. Skills needed: basic PC and Seller Central operation. Fixed costs: the Professional selling plan at ¥5,390 a month. No post-purchase support either.

What the buyer acquired was, in effect, neither a supply chain nor a customer list but a vessel, “a healthy account with 14 years of sales history.” Netting out the ¥30,000 of inventory, effectively ¥1,350,000 was the asking price for the account alone.

Three Accumulations You Cannot Buy with a New Account

Why does the vessel fetch ¥1,350,000? Working backward from the walls a new Amazon seller faces, the price’s composition comes into view.

Ungating is one wall. The listing states that approval to sell major brands (Nintendo, SONY, Bandai, Tomy, SHARP) had already been obtained. For a new account to earn the same permissions requires building up sales history and submitting documentation, which takes time and carries no certainty.

Accumulated reviews are another. Over 1,200 reviews are trust data that drive purchase rates and Buy Box wins, and they can only be built with time. The listing title touts “99% positive,” and the detail page’s breakdown puts 5-star reviews at 86%.

A clean record rounds out the three. About 14 years with no account suspension and a health score of 200 is a history that, like a used car’s accident-free record, cannot be manufactured after the fact.

Here lies the reason the deal closed in 13 days despite undisclosed revenue. The buyer did not buy current sales. They bought sales infrastructure that functions the moment they load their own products onto it. The ratio of 359 views to 3 negotiation requests also tells the story: this was not a deal everyone swarmed, but one that “buyers who understood the value decided on instantly.”

The Uncertainty the Buyer Took On

At the same time, the listing also shows the precariousness of this purchase. With monthly revenue undisclosed, “how much this account can earn” depends entirely on the buyer’s own sourcing ability. Since no suppliers transfer, nothing guarantees the reproducibility of sales, and there is no post-purchase support. The non-compete period is a short 3 months, and the contract terms allow the seller (reason for selling: “to focus on another business”) to resume the same kind of selling after 3 months. With the usual “N months of revenue” yardstick unusable, the only material for testing whether ¥1,380,000 was fair sits inside the buyer’s own business plan.

The Conditions That Make This Structure Work

From the seller’s side, the visible fact is that assets can sell even showing zero revenue. A long-running seller account, brand ungating, and accumulated reviews retain market value even after the business is wound down. But that value rests on account health, and it evaporates the instant it is damaged by a terms violation or deteriorating ratings. From the buyer’s side, this kind of deal only works in one configuration: “an operator who already has product-sourcing capability buying time-to-market with money.” Buy the vessel with no sourcing plan and all you are left with is the ¥5,390 monthly fixed cost.

Comparison with 20 Deals Closed in the Same Period

Combined with the 15 deals of batch 1 (psychology YouTube at ¥4,800,000 and others), the picture firms up further: websites at roughly 20 months, YouTube widely scattered at 3–120 months, and SNS accounts priced at a few yen per follower. The scatter in multiples is precisely the scatter in “confidence in revenue durability.” Note that the same batch 2 also includes a revenue-undisclosed Amazon beauty seller (¥750,000), so a deal where the seller account itself carries a price is no one-off special case.

Further Reading

• The practical mechanics of selling a telecom site for ¥950,000 in 21 days
• Cross-comparison of the 15 batch-1 deals
• The apparel EC business that closed fastest in the same batch 2, in 4 days