
Barnes and Noble’s new plan is to act like an indie bookseller - pseudolus
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-04/barnes-noble-wants-to-be-more-like-an-indie-bookseller
======
AndyMcConachie
The key is curation.

Walk into a book store and look around. From different points in the bookstore
count how many titles you can see. Which titles can you see entirely and which
can you only see the spine of? Count them.

Now go to Amazon.com and perform the same experience. Count how many titles
you can view at any given time. 10?

I buy and read a lot of books. What makes a good bookstore stand out is its
selection. I want to be introduced to books that I would otherwise not know
existed and frankly even with all of its algorithms Amazon sucks at this. I
can walk into any bookstore and within 1 minute my eyes have scanned dozens of
books. I take in their titles, size, color, binding, etc. All of this
information impacts whether or not I will pick up a book to examine it
further.

I enjoy the selection process and I want a bookstore that gives me that. My
favorite bookstores have floor to ceiling shelves so that I can cover more
ground quickly. There's no way you can reproduce this on a monitor, it's
simply impossible.

~~~
snarf21
This is true for you and other discerning readers. A lot of people just want
the new Jack Reacher. I doubt there is enough volume or profitability here but
who knows.

Interestingly, the only department to actually make money in B&N in the last
few years, is the board game section. I think this is how they win. Being more
of a general edutainment destination and focusing on kids stuff. 6 page kids
picture books cost $7. Parents and grandparents will drop lots on "smart" toys
and gifts for kids. I'd be all in on this, expanding with more play area and
story times making it a fun place to visit. They already smartly dropped CDs
as they have to ability to compete there except maybe to have new releases at
the register as an impulse purchases but streaming mostly killed that.

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
> This is true for you and other discerning readers. A lot of people just want
> the new Jack Reacher.

I don't know what the experience is in the US, but in the UK, Waterstones'
insight has been that it's not worth competing for those customers. They'll
just buy the new Jack Reacher from a supermarket or, at best, WH Smiths (the
stationery store). To be price-competitive with the supermarkets, you have to
discount so heavily that you'll lose money on every sale anyway.

Waterstones have targeted the discerning reader and are doing well at it. This
appears to be an attempt to replicate Waterstones in the US.

------
aksss
We have one large B&N in town - diverse selection of books and mags, clean,
and a sizable quasi-Starbucks cafe with tons of power outlets. I really enjoy
it, and frankly compared to our indie bookshops, I prefer it - its volume,
sterility, service and anonymity combined with familiarity and an
unpretentious attitude. I don't need to see the same homely indie bookmonger
making eye contact with me every time I walk in a bookstore with their
expectations and shawls. Leave me alone and don't talk to me. :D

I really look forward to their development and wish them nothing but success.

~~~
nothrabannosir
_> with their expectations and shawls_

This is the most beautiful neutral-yet-poignant description of a bookstore
clerk I have ever read. I'm still laughing about it.

~~~
justwalt
It really is one of those succinct descriptions that puts a complete image
into your head. For me it came with smells and an ambiance.

------
divbzero
I was chatting with a B&N store clerk the other week who hinted at this plan.
Great to see it become official.

Their new “indie” approach sounds intriguing and akin to what Amazon Books
tries to accomplish. In today’s world, the physical store can no longer
compete with the web’s infinite selection, but can still offer value in
curation and presentation.

Don’t know if B&N will pull it off but wish them the best. I love bookstores
and would hate to see them die.

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
If anyone can pull it off, James Daunt (the new MD) can. He's done exactly the
same at Waterstones in the UK and it's made a huge difference: the bookshops
have gone from "competent but uninspiring" to places where you genuinely want
to spend time. And money.

~~~
nicholassmith
I like Daunt, he genuinely seems to like selling books and he's reasonably
ruthless about achieving the goals to get a business to health. His approach
definitely seemed like a shock to the system for the business and the staff
but it's been incredibly successful long term.

------
LanceH
In the last year or two I've decided B&N is done (caveat, sample size of one).
Watching it through the years it has been clear that it was on a downward
descent, but lately it looks like they've given up, again maybe only my
location.

20-25 years ago, B&N was packed end to end with books. Books were spine out
unless they were popular and trying to draw someone in. Coffee table books
were limited to a rack or two of shelves near the front for impulse buys.
Games likewise had a small section.

Along came the nook. It ate up a large section of the "fiction & literature"
area. Obvious classics were still there, but deep cuts were few and far
between. About this same time they moved to largely selling trade paperbacks
in lieu of mass market paperbacks. So my option to buy a book that was in
public domain started at $17.95. My experience at this point was that I would
come in and look for something and it usually wouldn't be there. They would
helpfully tell me that they could order it for me. The books they did have
were the obvious popular ones -- exactly the ones that I knew about and could
order from home. There was virtually no discovery.

But maybe that worked. Maybe not everyone is like me. At least they were
trying.

Today it looks like they've given up. The ex-nook-section has tables with some
books laying out. Most sections have trade paperbacks set up cover out
(meaning fewer different books, on more prominent display), and the bottom
shelf is empty is large parts of the store. Basically they just aren't
restocking anything but the most liquid of books.

I still go every now and then because I have kids, but Half Price Books is far
more enjoyable for the possibility of finding something that I'm not
particularly looking for.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Once they fired most of their experienced help, the experience went downhill.
Including bad placement of books, empty shelves, squandered opportunities to
turn the ex-nook section into a showcase etc. When you get rid of your
enthusiastic, experienced employees and go to minimum-wage 'whatever'
employees, that happens.

~~~
LanceH
That definitely smells of desperation, but again, at least they were trying
something. Now though, they have fewer books on fewer shelves. Maybe they're
trying something, but it's not about being a book store.

I know carrying inventory is expensive. But old inventory in a bookstore
should almost be considered a marketing/advertising cost. There will be a
reason to browse and stay. The store will _smell_ like a bookstore.

The discovery process at B&N is minimal and sometimes worse than Amazon. At
least with Amazon, I get the "people who bought this also bought this".
Especially when dealing with a series, it makes a lot of sense. The "people
who looked at this also looked at that" suggestions are great when comparing
which book of non-fiction to get.

Going to B&N and trying to buy a specific book in a series is pure
frustration. More people read the first book, so it's commonly not in stock.
Or the series isn't popular enough and the subsequent volumes aren't
available.

Really, I want them to do well. I tell my kids about the golden age of big
bookstores where there were books and books and books. I try to buy things
where I discover them, even if that makes them more expensive because I want
the ability to discover things to stick around.

------
te_chris
Waterstones in the UK did this - they decentralised curation to their store
managers. Seems to have worked, at least in the narrow part of London that I
inhabit. The stores are generally a lot higher quality than one would expect
from a chain bookstore. I still support my local when I can, but for travel
books and such Waterstones is great - plus you can reserve an instore copy
online and pick up in person (easy when you work in Victoria) for free.

~~~
egypturnash
B&N is doing the same thing Waterstones did because they hired the guy who
turned Waterstones around.

------
that_jojo
We all figured this would be coming, but man does it feel weird to be rooting
for B&N to stay afloat when they were basically the evil empire of book stores
just a handful of years ago.

The indie bookstores will probably be around forever, but I'll be super sad
the day that the big book store is dead. I'm still fucked up from Borders
going under.

~~~
toyg
Nowadays “You’ve Got Mail” with Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan looks terribly
outdated, on that side.

~~~
I-M-S
You might enjoy the latest episode of a wonderful podcast called Decoder ring
- [https://slate.com/podcasts/decoder-ring/2020/03/youve-got-
ma...](https://slate.com/podcasts/decoder-ring/2020/03/youve-got-mail-how-
barnes-and-noble-took-over-the-book-business)

------
motohagiography
The main difference between big box and indie bookstores was the
attractiveness of the staff. This may seem glib, but the whole point of a book
store was they were curated hangouts based on filters of what the staff would
tolerate. Big box stores are accessible, but not attractive, they lack what
was ultimately termed, "erotic capital."

Being interested in books or niche music was a pretty good filter for people.
My book stacks are based on walking down the street with $20 in my pocket, and
spending it somewhere I thought I would encounter some curated random personal
encounters.

It was never about the products, it was about the community around it. The
ability for owners to shoe out undesirable people is what made them attractive
places to be. It was a rare retail experience where men and women could meet.
Today the people in a "book" store full of scented candles and twee knicknacks
that happens to sell books is too random a selection to make it a destination
for anyone.

From what I can tell by the big box chain here, today, books are used as a
loss leader to provide a decorative bourgeois shopping theme park experience.
They mainly sell chocolate sugar candies, magazines (all of which exist on a
spectrum of aspirational porn), and brickabrack from slave labour factories.

B&N's strategy will be interesting, as either they will be in the culture
business, or the sugar-porn-junk business.

------
bluedino
I've overhead cafe managers talking about how much of the store's sales are
from the cafe. You can't build a 20,000 square feet Starbucks and be
competitive.

That really is the draw, though - making B&N a place to hang out. People spend
hours there at a time.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I actually can't do that at my B&N - the tables are over-subscribed. Tiny
tables, all with campers at them. Its actually the bane of every coffee shop -
students who buy one cheap coffee and camp all day.

------
JulianMorrison
I'll be glad to see the end of "bestseller" (that nobody wants) push-
marketing.

------
crazygringo
> _The carpets were dusty, and the escalators had broken down. A cheap pine
> table was littered with trinkets and scented candles. A vase was wedged
> between new titles, its bouquet of sunflowers sagging in brown water._

This is a really bizarre intro. I've been going to the Union Square B&N
regularly for years. It's perfectly fine, normal retail condition and as busy
as ever.

The carpets are clean, the escalators don't seem to break down any more often
than anywhere else, and what does a "cheap" pine table even mean? This article
is making it sound like a K-Mart or something.

It just makes it hard for me to trust the rest of the article when the
narrative it starts with seems so blatantly prejudiced ("littered" with
"trinkets"?), from my first-hand experience.

------
someonehere
I’ve been to one of the new stores. It should have been like that ten years
ago.

I remember Borders saying they suffered defeat by not getting their ordering
from publishers worked out correctly. They wouldn’t stock the right books
based on demand and that was one of the reasons they failed.

Hoping BN can make this work.

------
swiley
The best indie book shops I’ve been to have a kind of dank cramped feel to
them, it’s not nice.

Plus they carry used books, I always love finding the old
math/engineering/music books. I don’t think B&N even carries used fiction.

------
michaelbuckbee
The latest episode of the "Decoder Ring" podcast is about the rise and fall of
indie booksellers + Barnes and Noble in NYC through the lens of "The Shop
Around the Corner" and "You've Got Mail".

In the movies, the (thinly veiled) B&N is the big bad and it examines just why
that is and sort of why people were so against it for what now seems like
stupid reasons:

[https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/decoder-
ring/](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/decoder-ring/)

~~~
mangodrunk
I will checkout the podcast, thanks for linking it.

To me, B&N is still the big bad, even though a bigger badder entity is out
there. To me, indie bookstores are far better than any B&N and amazon because
they hire minimum wage workers whereas the indie store is a small business
that will give an opportunity to people within the community to run the
business the way they want and reaping most of the benefits of the business.

Also, indie bookstores give variety and are (hopefully) different from any
other bookstore in varying degress.

------
subhro
I was under the impression that One of the major reason that B&N suffered for
was price. Even if being able to “feel and browse” the bookshelf exists in
physical store, how does this work when someone uses B&N as a discovery tool?

~~~
mangodrunk
I actually do the opposite. I use amazon as a discovery tool and then go to
indie bookstores.

------
ducttape12
I don't get the point of book stores when there's libraries.

My local library let's me reserve books online, and if they don't have a book,
they usually have it at another library in the county and will ship it to my
local library and hold it for me.

And this all costs me $0 (yeah, okay, taxes, but you know what I mean)

~~~
majos
I get this logic, and it would fit better with the rest of my personality if I
treated books this way, but I don't. Instead I have maybe 100 books, 90% read,
even after culling stuff I don't like about once per year. And my default is
still to buy books. Some reasons for this are:

1\. Books are pretty cheap. If you're looking for something more than 15 years
old, you can probably find a cool-looking used paperback on eBay for $4-5
shipped. This isn't as cheap as "free at the library" but my book habit still
sets me back <$200 a year or so, with the cost dominated by a few expensive
new books.

2\. Some people (including me) like books as aesthetic objects. Maybe there is
some element of "mmm, I am so smart" when I look at my bookcase, but it's also
just a nice wooden case with a bunch of colorful objects in it. I like having
it around.

3\. It's fun to look at your old books and remember what it was like to read
them. My books are physical objects that I actively thought about, held in my
hands, and carried around for a week or whatever years ago, so it's a
surprisingly effective way of conjuring up time and place.

4\. Giving away books to friends is fun and makes it more likely they'll
actually read the thing.

5\. As a kid I loved big shelves with lots of books, they suggested so much
possibility and I'm glad my parents had so many. If I ever have a kid I would
enjoy providing them with a similar environment.

So buying books doesn't make much sense from a pure information acquisition
standpoint, but there are some more idiosyncratic benefits.

