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

Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#61

Post by AdmiralAsshat »

It is nice to see the store doing well. Unfortunately, my partner and I are pretty much all-in on ebooks at this point, aside from the odd graphic novel or coffee table book. I did manage to convince her to switch away from her Kindle to a Nook, with the idea that at least B&N would continue to get a cut of the sales when she stops buying physical. But even then, it's unlikely that a purchased Nook title would benefit our nearby store specifically, unless B&N somehow tracks the store from which the device was purchased.

Meanwhile, I'm rocking a Kobo, so, the only recurring business from me they're getting these days is the tin of tea I buy at their cafe.

Nonetheless, I still enjoy going there to browse. The new management seems to have a better "vision" of what the store should be, whereas the previous few years just screamed desperation. The place was starting to feel like half bookstore, half Toys 'R Us.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#62

Post by mwexler »

This is a great pr/marketing piece. The reality is not so rosy. Still a fan, but they make harder and harder.

The new stores and redesigns may be portrayed as "inviting browsing"... But they are rather soulless racks of shelves, with little of the unique touches that differentiated Barnes. The new designs are uncomfortable, not quite sterile but just... Meh. In effect, in the effort to put the books up front, locations now look more like the pop-up calendar remainders shops that show up every Feb in US malls.

Gone are any nods to community: chairs are few so no sitting, comparing, or even quietly chatting to fellow book shoppers. Newer locations have no bathrooms. Some have food still, but fewer options with higher prices tell the story there. While newer stores have fewer "bestsellers", they also have fewer variety of books in total, as smaller footprints force out more niche categories.

Daunt is an amazing fellow, and he loves books. Some of his changes are great to see. And Waterstones are still a joy to visit. But B&N isn't quite Waterstones.

At the end of the day, B&N have chosen to ignore the power of scale and presence, and instead act like a local shop. But, I'd rather then go to a local shop. If the local shop doesn't have my unique need covered, I expect a bigger shop to do so. And up til a few years ago, B&N would have.

B&N owned the middle-to-largr size bookstore space. Amazon was infinite, my local was curated, but what was immediate, relatively vast, and had good open hours? Instead of playing to this strength, it tried to become Amazon, then the local "upscale" toy store (Learning Express et al), and a cd/record/DVD shop, a genre "collector's" shop, anything but leveraging the things that made them. And now, they try to copy the local bookstore.

It feels like the old cartoon images of the massive American football player in the ballerina tutu. Instead of trying on every costume in the shop, perhaps B&N should have played to its strengths instead of trying to find a new thing to copy.

All that being said, I will still keep visiting, hoping that we won't lose B&N in total. But I hope they recognize why I go, sooner rather than later.

Disclosure: worked at bn.com and the nook store for a few years.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#63

Post by mleo »

randcraw wrote: post #17
huytersd wrote: post #7

I wish they served beer and wine there.

I wish they sold BOOKS. My local B&N (15 miles north of Philly) has converted 25% of shelf space to toys. The tradeoff: just 2 shelves of computer-related books, now titled "Technology", most of which are about using Windows or Office. Does this trend reflect the dumbing down of B&N or its customers?

At my B&N they replaced the music and movies section with the larger toys section and added more writing products. They didn’t take away any space for books. Having the toy section is actually nice since the demise of Toys R Us.

I used to buy computer books there, but I mostly buy Manning ebooks now.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#64

Post by philipwhiuk »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #21
keiferski wrote: post #11

Since he embarked on the Barnes & Noble redesign in 2020, Mr. Daunt has demonstrated that consistency doesn’t rank very high on his priority list. New York City has nine Barnes & Noble stores featuring four different logos above the front doors. A lot of brands benefit from uniformity, knowing that your coffee or burger at Starbucks/McDonalds/wherever is functionally the same in Tokyo or Toronto. I think book stores…

If nothing else, uniformity doesn't add as much value to a brand that isn't selling its own product. Nobody really worries that the copy of a book they buy in one shop will be different to a copy bought in another. There are likely some benefits to consistency, like a familiar store layout or knowing that a shop will stock a good range of books, but these are kind of ancillary to the product (and my experience is tha…

The Southwold Waterstones was controversial when it opened: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/feb/27/waterstones-ch...

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#65

Post by jamincan »

yayamo wrote: post #31

Now if only Canada’s largest bookstor, Indigo, would do this. Instead their CEO is intent on moving in the opposite direction. “Mr. Ruis is planning a major expansion in categories such as cookware, tech gadgets and beauty products. “It’s not four or five things; it’s about 400 or 500 that we’re busily beavering away, trying to bring them to market,” he says, sitting in a boardroom at Indigo’s Toronto offices.” https…

For what it's worth, Ruis left as CEO earlier this year and it was announced that Heather Reisman was returning to the post about a month ago.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9967909/indigo-heather-reisman-ce...

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#66

Post by kevmarsden »

huytersd wrote: post #7

I wish they served beer and wine there.

The location in my town serves food and beer/wine. At one point they had at least five B&N Kitchen locations, but it looks like they're down to two:

https://www.barnesandnoblekitchen.com/locations/

To me, it makes sense to get rid of the full kitchen but keep the coffee, beer, and wine.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#67

Post by gosub100 »

bko wrote: post #58
gosub100 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they're indistinguishable from a local business other than having corporate amounts of capital to weather storms, policies to control workers and inventory (what books to stock), and they send their profits out of the community. Neat

> weather storms This is good. Means they're less likely to be impacted by temporary fads and I can count on them being around in a decade > Policies to control workers and inventory Policies are good and usually law abiding. Meaning that they treat their employees fairly, pay taxes and obey labor laws or they'll get sued. > send their profits out of the community The main beneficiaries are the patrons and people wor…

> Meaning that they treat their employees fairly

The existence of a policy doesn't make it fair, in fact the reason I abhor 1-size-fits-all policies is because of places like Amazon warehouses where you're fired for being late X times ("sorry, it's policy, my hands are tied :( ). Corporate policies are there to protect the company from lawsuits, and as a consequence they erode the agency of individuals which is literally dehumanizing. It's one step away from a human and one toward a robot. people should be treated like humans.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#68

Post by krustyburger »

bko wrote: post #58
gosub100 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they're indistinguishable from a local business other than having corporate amounts of capital to weather storms, policies to control workers and inventory (what books to stock), and they send their profits out of the community. Neat

> weather storms This is good. Means they're less likely to be impacted by temporary fads and I can count on them being around in a decade > Policies to control workers and inventory Policies are good and usually law abiding. Meaning that they treat their employees fairly, pay taxes and obey labor laws or they'll get sued. > send their profits out of the community The main beneficiaries are the patrons and people wor…

Barnes and Noble is privately held, so I’m not sure how it would be in anyone’s 401k.

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#69

Post by bko »

gosub100 wrote: post #67
bko wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> weather storms This is good. Means they're less likely to be impacted by temporary fads and I can count on them being around in a decade > Policies to control workers and inventory Policies are good and usually law abiding. Meaning that they treat their employees fairly, pay taxes and obey labor laws or they'll get sued. > send their profits out of the community The main beneficiaries are the patrons and people wor…

> Meaning that they treat their employees fairly The existence of a policy doesn't make it fair, in fact the reason I abhor 1-size-fits-all policies is because of places like Amazon warehouses where you're fired for being late X times ("sorry, it's policy , my hands are tied :( ). Corporate policies are there to protect the company from lawsuits, and as a consequence they erode the agency of individuals which is lite…

I don't know, I like policies. What's the alternative? Different rules for different people? How does that square with anti discrimination. Because I am willing to bet the ones that get disproportionate punishment will be a historically marginalized group. Same rules for everyone is a good thing. And it adds transparency and order.

Treating someone like a human doesn't mean firing someone for being late while not firing someone that does the same thing. Make the late policy lenient and applied consistently. That's more human

Re: Barnes and Noble Sets Itself Free

#70

Post by camgunz »

keiferski wrote: post #45
camgunz wrote: post #30

It's not clear to me what the benefit of chains is (before anyone says consistency that's definitely not it) to consumers and markets. I guess the idea was supposed to be something like leveraging economies of scale, but most chains are just fronts for broader supply chains with multiple other clients--it's pretty rare that there's a specific like, Applebee's supply chain. But isn't it clear by now that it's all arou…

Consistency is definitely the benefit of chains, especially for travelers. That was one of the original reasons chains like Howard Johnson’s did so well. Today, when abroad, it is still helpful to know that a chain will have predictable food, even if you didn’t fly halfway around the world to eat at McDonalds. Sometimes comfort and convenience beats out novelty.

I mean, fast food is my chief inconsistency case. Have you had fries at more than 1 franchise? They're always different.
Post reply on HN