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

271–280 of 461 posts

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#271

Post by joekrill »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #266
joekrill wrote: post #235

> The people who lost their jobs had been actively assured this would NOT happen for the past several months. My last employer did this. Not so much the exact scenario, but they constantly assured us they were fully committed for the long-term to our satellite office that they opened. They went out of their way to reiterate this quite regularly and put a good of effort into it. Until one day they showed up and shut d…

A similar thing happens with seemingly healthy companies going bust overnight. There's a reason they never let anyone know: it would be self-fulfilling if they let the world know they were in trouble.

I'm not saying they need to let the world know. But don't actively tell them on a daily basis that the company is in excellent shape and everyone is safe and secure for the foreseeable future.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#272

Post by joekrill »

sametmax wrote: post #241
joekrill wrote: post #235

> The people who lost their jobs had been actively assured this would NOT happen for the past several months. My last employer did this. Not so much the exact scenario, but they constantly assured us they were fully committed for the long-term to our satellite office that they opened. They went out of their way to reiterate this quite regularly and put a good of effort into it. Until one day they showed up and shut d…

You do understand why. You know that people won't work as much. Will disengage. Will cause trouble and cost you money, time, efforts. This is resources consumed. Some companies value saving resources over human decencies. This is magnified when there is crisis and resources are in shorter supply than before. There is no mystery to it, no complexity to it.

But I'm not suggesting they tell everyone the company is in dire straits and they are on the verge of getting fired. Just don't willfully lie to them on a daily basis and tell them that things are amazing and their jobs are totally secure. In my scenario, we weren't actively asking questions regularly. But they were offering the (mis)information on an almost daily basis.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#273

Post by hluska »

watwut wrote: post #268
hluska wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I downvoted you because of the suggestion that "most books" are appropriate for (and interesting to) 8-14 year old girls. That is so untrue as to border on absurdity. And, I also downvoted this comment because asking why you're being downvoted is not only dull, it adds nothing to the conversation.

The other answer to that question "Maybe someone took umbrage with the idea that Asimov stops being interesting after 14?" did added something to the conversation. Young girls are primary demographic for reading. While it is true that 8 years old are not there, 14 years old already are. Majority of what is in bookstore is appropriate, maybe boring, but I don't recall running into something super inappropriate while r…

First of all, you not only edited your original comment to ask why you were being downvoted, but then you made an entirely different reply to ask the same thing. Repetition like that is dull and adds nothing to a conversation.

Second, I don't think that 8 year old girls and 14 year old girls should be grouped together. I have an 8 year old stepdaughter and she talks to her stuffed animals. She knows (at least, I hope she knows) that Unicorn is stuffed and I make her voice. But, she still talks to, argues with and consoles Unicorn. And, when I meet her friends, she wants her friends to meet Unicorn.

Let's flash forward six years. What do you think she will say/do if I talk like Unicorn in front of her friends? Or, what will happen if her first boyfriend comes over for dinner, I plop a faded old stuffed unicorn on the dinner table, affect a squeaky voice and ask him "do you like unicorns?" That's not appropriate! It will either embarrass her, keep her friends away from me, or otherwise hurt my relationship with her.

Finally, you talked about how you don't recall running into something super inappropriate while browsing bookstores. I'm not talking about Fifty Shades type of stuff. Rather, let me give you an example.

I love The Catcher in The Rye and genuinely believe that every person should be required to read it before being allowed to graduate from high school.

So, that's a book that I would definitely recommend to 12-16 year olds. The thing about the Catcher is that it's best when you've already started questioning the social world around you. Otherwise, it's too easy to declare Holden Caulfield a whiny little twat and not gain from the book.

So, I would argue that while that book is amazing and all kids deserve a copy, not every kid will be ready for it at the same age. So, while the sentiment is appropriate, the book isn't appropriate for every young person at the same time.

Or, in terms of code, let's say that you've never programmed before. It wouldn't be appropriate to teach you "hello world" then go right into monads. There's nothing particularly wrong with monads, it's just that they would be so far beyond you that you wouldn't gain from the lesson.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#274

Post by hluska »

watwut wrote: post #270
hluska wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think recommending Isaac Asimov is wrong. Some people really like his writing (myself included). If you would read my reply again, you'll note that I said, "I downvoted you because of the suggestion that "most books" are appropriate for (and interesting to) 8-14 year old girls." Frankly, I don't think that's controversial enough to have to explain. First, it's flat out wrong to group 8-14 year old girls toget…

I can see how most books would not be interesting to you, but why would they be "not appropriate"? What does the word appropriate means in this context?

We're talking over two threads here and I went into this in another comment.

To answer it succinctly, I'll use the programming language example that I used.

Let's say that you have never programmed before, so you come to me for help. I start teaching you. The first lesson, I teach you how to output "hello world". The second lesson, I teach you about monads. Honestly, how do you think you'd do?

There isn't anything absolutely wrong about monads, but I'd tend to argue that they're a little too advanced for someone who only knows how to output "hello world". In this example, I'd say that teaching you about monads in the second lesson was inappropriate - you likely won't gain from it, in fact, it's more likely that learning about monads too soon will actually hurt your progress.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#275

Post by madengr »

Don’t ever count on “loyal and faithful service” on keeping your job. I’ve seen engineers with 25 years of service laid off with 5 minutes notice. The only relationship you should have with an employer is extracting as much pay and benefits in exchange for work.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#276

Post by bluedino »

phil21 wrote: post #6

I was out shopping 3-4 days before Christmas this year, and happened to be near a Barnes and Noble so figured I'd grab a copy of a magazine I've been wanting to read for a while. Grabbed the magazine, wandered the aisles a bit and picked up another book then went to check out. Basically I was their marketing department's dream - walk-in traffic coming to buy something cheap and specific who made an impulse retail buy…

What retailer doesn't have long lines 3 days before Christmas?

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#277

Post by lostcolony »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #232
blhack wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! Any specific stories you recommend? The problem I was having with the things I was looking at were that a lot of them seemed to be basically romance novels for kids.

I am not a girl. But I liked the Dealing with Dragons series from Patricia C. Wrede (humorous), The Hero and the Crown and The Blue Sword from Robin McKinley, and the Dragon's Blood series from Jane Yolen.

You can get the entire Enchanted Forest series (the name of the series that Dealing with Dragons is the first of; four books in total) for $20-30.

As a male I enjoyed it, and one of my best female friends also remembers it fondly.

I'd also throw in Sabriel, as a YA fantasy novel that I really liked, that had a female protagonist who kicked ass (rather than was there to support a male, or something else equally stereotypical)

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#278

Post by bluedino »

eludwig wrote: post #260
phil21 wrote: post #6

I was out shopping 3-4 days before Christmas this year, and happened to be near a Barnes and Noble so figured I'd grab a copy of a magazine I've been wanting to read for a while. Grabbed the magazine, wandered the aisles a bit and picked up another book then went to check out. Basically I was their marketing department's dream - walk-in traffic coming to buy something cheap and specific who made an impulse retail buy…

>>Two cashiers working out of 8 or so possible registers And the worst part about this is that each cashier seems determined to relentlessly pester me with annoying questions at the register! Did I want to join this loyalty program? Did I realize that I could save $5 by signing up for so and so. Do I want to get on the B&N mailing list? Really aggressive questioning. Oh my God. I realize that the cashiers have been o…

>> Retail checkout in the US has become a one-way grilling.

At one point Best Buy was trying to get you to sign up for MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTIONS at checkout. Who thought that was a good idea?

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#279

Post by Digory »

fatbird wrote: post #211
rayiner wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the rest of the year, the stores are empty. Which validated the company's decision: why have a bunch of full time employees, when what it really needs is part time and flexible employees to handle holiday surges (probably caused by waiting for Amazon shipping to not be an option).

Nothing here validates B&N's decision. 30 years ago I was a part-time employee at a big box store from October to January. Large retailers long ago figured out how to ramp up their workforce temporarily to adequately handle the sales season that accounts for the largest portion of their sales every year. For any retailer to blow the Christmas sales season by not adequately staffing it, which has been basic retail man…

“Our current strategy isn’t working; our new one doesn’t need full time employees.”

“Well, give ‘em one more Christmas.”

As you say, it’s unthinkable they didn’t see Christmas coming. And it’s equally unthinkable layoffs of this size weren’t planned out twelve weeks ago.

Re: The unnecessary demise of Barnes and Noble

#280

Post by deadbunny »

bluedino wrote: post #276
phil21 wrote: post #6

I was out shopping 3-4 days before Christmas this year, and happened to be near a Barnes and Noble so figured I'd grab a copy of a magazine I've been wanting to read for a while. Grabbed the magazine, wandered the aisles a bit and picked up another book then went to check out. Basically I was their marketing department's dream - walk-in traffic coming to buy something cheap and specific who made an impulse retail buy…

What retailer doesn't have long lines 3 days before Christmas?

What retailer doesn't make sure they have all checkouts open when you have 50 customers in line?
Post reply on HN