Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#51

Post by TeMPOraL »

sanderjd wrote: post #49
TeMPOraL wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called a trade show, and pretty much every type of product has some. I agree that there could be a room between them and shops, i.e. small-scale displays, but at this point why not just let one buy the stuff?

Trade shows are temporary. The advantage of a permanent showroom is that people know they can always go look at things right now. > why not just let one buy the stuff? Because then the store needs inventory, and all the overhead that entails. It is much cheaper to keep a single copy of everything. But the perhaps bigger issue is one of incentives. I hate that when I'm at Best Buy looking at things, I know I'm being a…

Thanks, you wrote some good points I haven't considered. You've actually convinced me and now I wish for a permanent showroom too. I wonder, maybe electronics stores will slowly evolve towards that? Order on-line and pick up at store is already a thing, and the second part of the equation would be just a streamlined mobile buying experience.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#52

Post by joesmo »

After Amazon threatened to close my paid Prime account because I was returning too many things (totally false) I'm now going back to the brick and mortar stores too. As more and more people get alienated by policies that aren't even written down, applied transparently and randomly by stupid algorithms, I think more people will deal with the inconvenience of shopping in person or at the very least look for online retailers that don't tell their paying customers who have been spending $10-30k a year regularly for many years to go fuck themselves.

I think there's a lot of chances for retails stores as people realize that the promise of online technologies is incredibly hindered by their actualization and the artificial limits imposed by such unscrupulous vendors as Amazon.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#53

Post by sanderjd »

rbcgerard wrote: post #46

For what its worth I basically use a two axis model for my likelihood to buy online vs. retail one axis is time frame (do i need that bathing suit right now or can i wait two weeks) this is really product agnostic - basically I'll pay a (potential) time/money premium to get something now. the second axis is commodity vs. customization/fit on one end of the spectrum are standardized things (AA batteries, a DVD, part #…

The time axis is being eroded by the speed of delivery. If I order something from Amazon on a weekday, I almost always have it the next morning. For me, there is a very small window between "want it now" and "want it by tomorrow morning". For me currently, that window is basically just restaurants and groceries, which could be eliminated with better planning.

The in-store value add is a real thing, and what I think a lot of stores are going for, but for most things, the best they can do are knowledgeable salespeople, whose knowledge will never be as useful as research on the internet. I can only think of one other example where I really want a good salesperson besides ski boots: "important" clothing, like a nice suit, that benefits from professional tailoring.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#54

Post by Jemaclus »

If I were opening a book store today, I'd do two things:

1. I'd put Amazon affiliate links everywhere. If you want to buy it from Amazon while browsing my store, go for it. I'll just get a cut of the sale via my affiliate link.

2. If you buy a Kindle version via Amazon, I'll discount you on the hard copy that you buy from my store. That way you'll have both versions, if desired.

I have absolutely no idea if this would be effective, but I think one thing booksellers are going to have to do to stay competitive is adopt something like this, where you're not shutting the customer down. I'm one of those people who browses the store and then buys on Amazon, but that's mainly because I have a Kindle with hundreds of books, and I only buy hard copies of my favorites. If a store enabled that -- and profited from -- then that would be awesome. I'd love to give a small kickback to my local store for showing me what's available, even if I bought it from Amazon in the end.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#55

Post by Jemaclus »

zellyn wrote: post #4

Heh. They're dead right about the difficulty of cutting through a million options. I feel lame every time, but I find myself just going to thesweethome.com or thewirecutter.com, and then buying whatever they tell me to :-/ Either online or locally, whichever is more convenient and/or cheaper.

Wirecutter has never steered me wrong. I've loved every purchase I've gotten on their recommendation. I can't speak highly enough about it.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#56

Post by Yhippa »

Qantourisc wrote: post #22

Sometimes I wonder why nobody opens a showroom that doesn't sell products, but only shows stuff. (At a fee of course.) But it might cost too much to finance all the products you wish/have to show. Manufactures can help and donate demo gear :)

This was attemped in the past to a lesser degree. Best Products (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_Products#Retail_concept) and Service Merchandise(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Merchandise#Showroom_o...) are the two I tried when I was younger.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#57

Post by carterehsmith »

alistairSH wrote: post #8
a3n wrote: post #2

I do the opposite. I don't want to spend the time driving around looking at stuff, so I research online, and then find where it's sold locally. 'cause I want it the instant I pay for it, and returns are much easier and immediate at a store. I do buy from Amazon, but Amazon is also one of the best research tools for local buying.

I'm shocked that people continue to "showroom" items. The local Best Buy has a terrible selection of items and the employees don't know any more about the products than I do. It doesn't make any sense to go to Best Buy for anything at all - there is almost literally zero value added by a big chain electronics store.

Depends on your preferences... I prefer to read reviews online then buy in the store. One reason being, you get the product right away. Second, if the product is defective, it is just another quick drive to the store to have it replaced.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#58

Post by DenisM »

The article is an advertising piece for Wayfair, and doesn't even try to hide it.

The truth is that retailers, especially large retailers have a lot of tools to fight back against e-tailers:

- Demanding manufacturers to set and enforce Minimal Advertised Price.

- Exclusive products. If Macy's ask for a new product to be theirs only, they usually get their wish granted.

- Geo lockout. Smaller retailers are granted geo-local monopoly.

- Custom SKUs to thwart price lookups and price matches. Samsung makes the same TV in BestBuy SKU, Sears SKU, Costco SKU, generic SKU, and likely others.

- Own ecomerce portals, like Macy's or Nordstrom.

- Local returns and repairs.

And that's not all of it. At our startup we're making many of these tools available to smaller retailers and manufacturers, if you want to join, my email is in profile. In particular we're hot on post-visit engagement workflow, the stuff of the 21st century.

Retail is far from dead. If it were, they wouldn't need the advertising piece in HBR.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#59

Post by Eridrus »

DenisM wrote: post #58

The article is an advertising piece for Wayfair, and doesn't even try to hide it. The truth is that retailers, especially large retailers have a lot of tools to fight back against e-tailers: - Demanding manufacturers to set and enforce Minimal Advertised Price. - Exclusive products. If Macy's ask for a new product to be theirs only, they usually get their wish granted. - Geo lockout. Smaller retailers are granted geo…

Besides the local repairs, all of these seem to attempt to stop people from being able to purchase the items you can see in store cheaper online, which makes the assumption that if the shopper can't find the item cheaper online they will purchase it in store.

It seems unlikely that a shopper savvy enough to have an item recognition app is going to not know what the online price is for a similar item, even if it's not identical.

Consumers obviously assign some value to being able to see the actual item, but it's not clear that the value is as high as you need to sustain a retail operation vs a generous returns policy.

Re: Case study: Can retailers win back shoppers who browse then buy online?

#60

Post by JoeAltmaier »

lfowles wrote: post #50
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there room for an app here, where you can declare your need for help, and the store can respond (by queuing it or whatever)?

An app? The solution has existed for decades without being more complex than a lightbulb.. hit a button that turns on a light in the area so staff can come help you. The specific case I'm thinking of was buying a graphing calculator that was locked in a case. Hit the button and someone will come by to get you one. Same concept on airplanes too, though.

Except, no queuing, no estimate of when they'll get to you, no idea if anyone will ever show up at all.

Complaints about bad service are epidemic. I'm thinking there's room for disruption here.

Post reply on HN