When someone says tech companies don't need profits, it really means investors/the market tends to value tech companies highly even if they're not currently showing profits, because of expectations of big profits down the road - to an extent not generally found in other sectors. Amazon is in fact an example of that, even if it's not the perfect example.
My point still stands. While it's true that tech companies are often valued highly even when not showing profits, Amazon is a bad example of that.
1. (This is by far the least of the issues) At the time they weren't turning a profit they weren't a tech company.
2. (This is the main point) Even when they weren't "turning a profit" they were still making tons of money
Amazon was reinvesting what would have been profits in CapEx, R&D, etc, and building the empire they now have.
as opposed to tech companies who might be just burning through cash but are still valued highly with the hope that eventually they'll start making money.
3. IINM the "tech company" side of Amazon was pretty much always highly profitable.