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

The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

audreyii-fic.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 461 posts

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#91

Post by ryanwaggoner »

cowpig wrote: post #73
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. Belief and passion may be necessary, but they're not sufficient. How do you pick this person? Based on the strength of their belief? Because if it's based on their experience and track record, you're back to where you started: this person likely has better alternatives and is smart enough to want to be compensated for the opportunity cost they're incurring. Also, it's all well and good to say this when it…

I've done a lot of hiring, and have found that salary demands are weakly inversely proportional to performance. That is to say, people whose salary demands are at the lower end of the salary range for that career have outperformed those whose demands are at the higher end. My sample size is small but significant. Food for thought.

That's interesting, but I'm pretty skeptical, and I don't even think it's relevant here, unless you were hiring executives for large but dying companies?

Here's more food for thought: the five biggest companies in the US are all data-driven tech companies that are renowned for paying ridiculously high compensation. Why wouldn't they apply your framework to both save on hiring costs and boost performance?

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#92

Post by Digory »

emodendroket wrote: post #63
ams6110 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's saying the arguments of the post are irrelevant. Sure they could have hired seasonal workers for the holidays, and maybe had better results, but either way they are doomed. I haven't bought a book at a retail outlet in probably 10 years. There's just nothing about the retail experience at B&N that's even worth the effort to drive there and park. It's not salvageable.

You don't think there is space in the United States' market for even a single major brick-and-mortar retailer of books? I find that pretty hard to believe.

If there is such space, it will have to be run by kiosk and a few minimum wage employees.

B&N's 'competitive advantage' today is not experienced staff. I can't ever recall an employee up-selling significant amounts of merchandise, or having a customer relationship that might move a needle.

Like Sears, it has real estate and a terrible retail position. If you treat the stores like mini-warehouses, with Amazon-warehouse-worker-hours, it might work. My guess is that failing to staff-up for the holidays was, seen charitably, a way to get the full-timers through the holidays.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#94

Post by ams6110 »

emodendroket wrote: post #78
ams6110 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Not for the long term. Certain independents and specialty shops -- sure. We still have record stores here and there, but the big chains are all gone.

Fye is still around.

Never heard of 'em. Where I live, we used to have Musicland - gone. Sam Goody - Gone. Tower - Gone. Several other smaller shops -- all closed years ago. There's only one record store here, an independent dealing mostly in new and used vinyl.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#95

Post by emodendroket »

Digory wrote: post #92
emodendroket wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think there is space in the United States' market for even a single major brick-and-mortar retailer of books? I find that pretty hard to believe.

If there is such space, it will have to be run by kiosk and a few minimum wage employees. B&N's 'competitive advantage' today is not experienced staff. I can't ever recall an employee up-selling significant amounts of merchandise, or having a customer relationship that might move a needle. Like Sears, it has real estate and a terrible retail position. If you treat the stores like mini-warehouses, with Amazon-warehous…

> If there is such space, it will have to be run by kiosk and a few minimum wage employees.

I don't think so. Outside of the airport that's not useful to anyone. At that rate you can just go to the section where they have bestsellers at Costco or Walmart. A bookstore with no selection is practically pointless.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#96

Post by metaobject »

gwern wrote: post #34
aaron-lebo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't believe it's wrong to say you are a very niche customer. Their selection of Hemingway isn't much better, but that's because they've got limited floor space. Not sure how they could solve your specific issue unless they had much bigger locations.

Is it so unrealistic? When I wanted a copy of _Beowulf_ in 2003 or so, what I did was I wandered into my local Borders and found it, and compared 5 or 6 different books; I ultimately settled on Heaney's translation which I liked the bits I read the most of, and then picked the volume with the most additional historical essays providing context. And _Beowulf_ is surely less read than Homer.

That was 15 years ago, though -- a veritable millennium in the internet age. Although Amazon was around, a lot of people still accessed the internet over a cable modem (or even dial-up!) or some other technology which didn't provide ubiquitous internet access. Most people surfed the internet from their desktop, as opposed to using their phones from a wide variety of places from the couch to the toilet.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#97

Post by emodendroket »

ams6110 wrote: post #94
emodendroket wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fye is still around.

Never heard of 'em. Where I live, we used to have Musicland - gone. Sam Goody - Gone. Tower - Gone. Several other smaller shops -- all closed years ago. There's only one record store here, an independent dealing mostly in new and used vinyl.

https://stores.fye.com/index.html

There are also various regional retailers.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#98

Post by hueving »

ivraatiems wrote: post #84
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we still need to prepare for the future that's coming I disagree, honestly. Not because I don't think all the things you're saying will happen will happen, but because of all the things that are also going to happen that we're not talking about, because we don't know what they are. Yes, tons of jobs are going away (although I think it'll be 10-20 years for most of these, not 3-5 years like many seem to think), but wh…

I'm confused by the duality in your comment. You say that in 10-20 years, tons of jobs are going away. You say it seems very unlikely the American political system is going to address it without violence in any successful manner. But you also say that you think we will adjust and adapt and thereby keep the work a job, make a living system that we have. I don't see how that optimistic result follows from the pessimist…

The part you're missing is that jobs will also be created while others are destroyed. We lost tons of horse caring jobs as we switched to the automobile but it didn't wipe out society.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#99

Post by Buge »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #36

This is the flip-side of creative destruction. Amazon and ecommerce in general have given us a world where brick and mortar retail often just can't compete. 99% of these layoffs and restructurings, etc. are just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The writer of this article seems to think that the executives are just trying to milk the company all the way down, but it's not even clear to me there's a better o…

At some point the government could decide Amazon (or other big tech companies) are monopolies, and break them up.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#100

Post by ruytlm »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #64
ivraatiems wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe, but it seems a weird argument to make during record low unemployment. Yes, I'm aware of labor force participation rates, and that the pay for many of these jobs is too low, AI is predicted to destroy jobs, etc, but that's not what we're talking about, right? Admittedly, I'm driving the conversation towards a general problem from this specific example. But I think that even if I accept the premise that right…

we still need to prepare for the future that's coming I disagree, honestly. Not because I don't think all the things you're saying will happen will happen, but because of all the things that are also going to happen that we're not talking about, because we don't know what they are. Yes, tons of jobs are going away (although I think it'll be 10-20 years for most of these, not 3-5 years like many seem to think), but wh…

> Yes, tons of jobs are going away (although I think it'll be 10-20 years for most of these, not 3-5 years like many seem to think), but what new sectors, opportunities, jobs, etc. will be created?

How many of the people whose jobs are destroyed will be able to move into the jobs that are created? In something like 30 states [0] 'truck driver' is the largest single occupation; where would those skills be re-applied?

I agree that nothing will be done regardless due to a lack of political will, but I don't share your optimism. I suspect that the change will be gradual to begin with, but that suddenly there will be a whole category of people unable to earn a living with their skills, and unable to afford to re-skill into something that can be used.

[0]: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-...

Post reply on HN