Why the Seattle Mystery Bookshop Must Close

I'm deeply saddened to hear that the Seattle Mystery Bookshop is closing. This feels like something easily missed in today's automation-based economy; the ability to go to an expert and get quality recommendations is not to be missed. Seattle Mystery Bookshop was only one of many excellent book stores in the Seattle area, but it seems that their number is diminishing by the day. I can only assume that that trend holds firm in other cities, and we are the poorer for it.

Indie book stores are doing fine actually. The model is closer to thriving than done.

https://www.voanews.com/a/indie-booksellers-hold-steady-toug...

http://publishingperspectives.com/2016/01/independent-bookst...

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_edgy_optimist/201...

http://theweek.com/articles/573874/4-reasons-why-independent...

This is what I don't understand about this blog post. It goes directly against this narrative that I've been hearing for a while now (and which you are pointing out with sources), that independent bookstores are thriving.

What makes them different than this place? I've never been to the store in the article. Maybe its because they're still trying to sell new books, and the thriving stores are all selling used books?

So many people I know (anecdotal, for sure) seem to still prefer to read physical books. Even younger people, in their early 20s. Beyond that, some people will still want to collect the physical representation of something they really love.

Certainly, this will not be as many people as before ebooks were around. Still, there has to be more to the story with this one store. It doesn't seem to add up.

> neither Tom Clancy nor Stephen King have any control over their publishers' marketing departments

Are you joking?

If Tom Clancy or Stephen King or a JK Rowling-level said "Add Seattle Mystery Bookshop to my next signing tour" it would get done. They might hem and haw about how wanting to do B&N instead, or some other excuses and they might try to talk them out of it, but if the star wants it, they're going to get it. Nobody wants to be responsible for losing the rights to Stephen King's next book.

Small authors can obviously go wherever they want, nobody cares enough to stop them. It's the mid-level guys who are under control by the publishers but aren't large/influential enough that they can dictate their own schedules.

While I find this article sad, it's ultimately inevitable as far as I see it.

I read a lot, and I enjoy collecting books, but I ceased buying physical books a long time ago. I've started backfilling my ebook collection based on my old physical collections. At some point, I will be able to find digital replacements for 99% of my physical book collections and I will eventually find a decent way to digitize the rest. Ultimately, digital books are just better for me. I can pull my Kindle out of my bag and have a copy of every book I've ever read and access to basically anything I might want to read. I may mourn the loss of paper books, I absolutely do mourn the loss of bookstores but ultimately ebooks are just a far superior product. The fact that they are cheaper doesn't personally factor into the equation to me.

Ultimately, I think the digital print industry is just shaking off vestiges that the physical print industry required and the digital economy no longer requires. In a few (more like 10-20) years the amount of value-add coming from the publishers to writers is going to drift close enough to zero that I think the whole industry will go closer to self-publishing and become far more egalitarian.

You'll pay someone to proof your book, someone to (digitally) typeset it, and someone to upload it to the top N digital distribution platforms. (Apple iBooks, Amazon, ?? who else) and the revenue cut from that will be far, far lower than what today's publishers get. You can obviously hire a publicist and have them do that facet of things too.