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

RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 230 posts

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#61

Post by jordigh »

sbergot wrote: post #48
jordigh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Out of curiosity, since several comments here complained about the paywall ("paywalls are nsfl"), and an equal number or more on HN run adblockers and/or openly dislike ads in general (the whole "you are the product" meme), how do you think newspapers should monetize? I adblock aggressively, and I don't think it's my capitalist duty to watch ads for products in order to create wants for products I don't need.[1] I'…

It is interesting to interpret not using adblock as capitalist duty. I see it more as a way to respect the terms of the content producer. "But the page is bloated and unusable with ads". Then refuse the contract. Use another service. Inventing your own terms about the cost of something produced by someone else is never ok. "guilting me into watching ads will never work". It is great that you accept your own behavior.…

> It is interesting to interpret not using adblock as capitalist duty. I see it more as a way to respect the terms of the content producer.

The author has no lordship over my computer or my mailbox. I can toss out junk mail. I can even more easily program my computer to toss out ads. Programmability is a very natural feature of a computer, so why not use it? My home, my computer, my rules.

If you make it more difficult for me to remove ads, then yes, I will eventually stop getting anything from you at all. I'm fine with this arms race. If you want to make your ads so obnoxious as to make them very difficult to ignore, then I'm fine with ignoring all of you.

I will never be fine with having consumerism forcibly shoved down my throat. As long as I can program my computer to ignore ads, we can enjoy an uneasy armistice. If you give me a donation or subscription button for your website or service, we can both be much happier.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#62

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

specialp wrote: post #51
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adafruit, Sparkfun, et al, might like a word with you. Even though they are smaller businesses, they are thriving, there is nothing to say that they would be if RS had taken the same road.

Adafruit, Sparkfun, et al are also working out of cheap locations, Not malls and other high rent retail locations. I ordered from Adafruit once and it shipped from an apartment in Brooklyn. Radio Shack is a retail store with many locations. There are not many people that have an immediate need for Rasberry pi components, they order online. So that model is dead. Radio Shack despite this does indeed still devote a sma…

>There are not many people that have an immediate need for...

There are not many people that have an immediate need for any one particular item in a dry goods store on any particular day. The same is true for other stores and was always true for nearly every item RS carried.

I think the arguments ITT boil down to: did the internet kill RS, or did RS finally succumb to its own poor management.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#63

Post by tuxracer »

bythe4mile wrote: post #20

With the maker movement picking up, I almost feel that RadioShack could have done so much more in the hobbyist electronics market. They could have had Arduino kits and additions, 3D printers, drone parts etc, instead of just the go to store for cables. I can almost see the RadioShack of the bygone days that hosted electronic clubs which could have had a comeback.

Coincidentally I just yesterday bought an Arduino Yun, starter kit, and sensors. They were located near the 3D printer that was on sale. Maybe part of their problem is marketing.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#64

Post by thawkins »

bythe4mile wrote: post #20

With the maker movement picking up, I almost feel that RadioShack could have done so much more in the hobbyist electronics market. They could have had Arduino kits and additions, 3D printers, drone parts etc, instead of just the go to store for cables. I can almost see the RadioShack of the bygone days that hosted electronic clubs which could have had a comeback.

I bought my first Arduino mega2560 at RS for $59.95.

Now i order them direct from dx.com at $15 for a clone that is exactly the same.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#65

Post by hellgas00 »

specialp wrote: post #38

Radio Shack cannot make money selling hobbyist things to support their expensive retail locations. We all love that kind of stuff but admit it, that business has gone online to places like Adafruit. Even hardcore electronic component retailers that were in low rent industrial parks, or in my case a guy that operated out of his basement when he could not afford the rent in his industrial park have closed. For years ce…

I live in Toronto, Canada where there are a bunch of independent stores that sell hobbyist electronics and seem to make a good profit doing so, so the market isn't dead. I like to buy stuff online but there have been plenty of times where I've been stuck needing a sensor, resistor, or things of that sort, and don't want to wait for 2 weeks for it to ship from China. It's a false premise to say that electronic component sales moved online when these isn't much in the way of a flagship brick and mortar location to purchase these goods. RS made a choice to move away from a potentially growing market, a market that they owned and could have expanded, and inevitably pushed their customers online.

Just my 2c, but I'm amazed that they thought they would move in on BestBuy (and FutureShop in Canada) territory and be able to compete.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#66

Post by dragonwriter »

themoonbus wrote: post #46
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adafruit, Sparkfun, et al, might like a word with you. Even though they are smaller businesses, they are thriving, there is nothing to say that they would be if RS had taken the same road.

It doesn't matter that they are successful though, they operate on a much, much smaller scale than Radioshack. The maker market isn't nearly large enough to sustain a company of that size... that is to say, if Radioshack shrank to the size of one of Adafruit, it be a colossal failure as a corporation. The only chance they had to stay relevant was to challenge the Best Buy's of the world, but they failed to do that.

> The only chance they had to stay relevant was to challenge the Best Buy's of the world, but they failed to do that.

They tried -- back when what is now RadioShack was Tandy Corp. and Radio Shack was one of its units, it tried with the Incredible Universe stores -- but gave up because at the time their boutique Radio Shack stores were more profitable than their big-box Incredible Universe stores.

Of course, for widely-held, publicly traded corporations, there's a strong and often hard to resist incentive to do what maximizes results for the next earnings report rather than long-term resilience (if nothing else, because what will do the former is often much more clear than what will do the latter.)

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#67

Post by geraldcombs »

debacle wrote: post #45
dewitt wrote: post #15

Apologies about the link to a restricted site. I didn't notice it since I landed on the article via a search. Out of curiosity, since several comments here complained about the paywall ("paywalls are nsfl"), and an equal number or more on HN run adblockers and/or openly dislike ads in general (the whole "you are the product" meme), how do you think news sites should monetize? Seems like newspapers still add value in…

People who use adblock are just entitled. They are manipulating the tragedy of the commons and then absolving themselves of any responsibility. They'll defend their right to use adblock militantly and then go pirate a game using the same defense. It's a personal moral defense rather than a logical justification.

IMHO ad blocking is good security practice. There have and continue to be plenty of instances of malware being served up via ad networks. "Malvertising" even has its own Wikipedia page.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#68

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

debacle wrote: post #45
dewitt wrote: post #15

Apologies about the link to a restricted site. I didn't notice it since I landed on the article via a search. Out of curiosity, since several comments here complained about the paywall ("paywalls are nsfl"), and an equal number or more on HN run adblockers and/or openly dislike ads in general (the whole "you are the product" meme), how do you think news sites should monetize? Seems like newspapers still add value in…

People who use adblock are just entitled. They are manipulating the tragedy of the commons and then absolving themselves of any responsibility. They'll defend their right to use adblock militantly and then go pirate a game using the same defense. It's a personal moral defense rather than a logical justification.

I'm not even so opposed to ads. I resent and avoid being followed and targeted mercilessly and stupidly[1].

[1] - Seeing and increase in ads for lawn mowers after purchasing a lawn mower, as if I needed another one.

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#69

Post by criley2 »

sbergot wrote: post #48
jordigh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Out of curiosity, since several comments here complained about the paywall ("paywalls are nsfl"), and an equal number or more on HN run adblockers and/or openly dislike ads in general (the whole "you are the product" meme), how do you think newspapers should monetize? I adblock aggressively, and I don't think it's my capitalist duty to watch ads for products in order to create wants for products I don't need.[1] I'…

It is interesting to interpret not using adblock as capitalist duty. I see it more as a way to respect the terms of the content producer. "But the page is bloated and unusable with ads". Then refuse the contract. Use another service. Inventing your own terms about the cost of something produced by someone else is never ok. "guilting me into watching ads will never work". It is great that you accept your own behavior.…

It's offensive for you to place your opinion in the context of "right and wrong", specifically that your opinion is "right".

If content owners want to block adblocker: They can! They absolutely can use javascript to detect ad-blockers and prevent the majority of all of them from visiting the site unless the adblock is disabled.

Sites like Hulu.com use anti-adblock to ensure that their terms are met and that users view advertisements or are barred from content.

Instead of making a moral argument against the legal and acceptable use of browser extensions, you should be examining the business decisions that lead to intentionally and strategically choosing to NOT BLOCK users who use adblock.

"Inventing your own terms about the cost of something produced by someone else is never ok."

I totally agree, which is why I question your invented ethical cost regarding browser extensions and advertisements.

Their terms are clear, and if they want to block certain users, they are free to do that. You don't need to invent some silly ethical argument where none needs to exist. If adblocking was against the law (like, say, shoplifting) then your argument would have merit. But it's not.

Your argument is similar, in my view, to saying "it's unethical to go to Best Buy to window shop and later purchase on a website. You should respect the terms and businesses intentions of a brick and mortar store and pay extra since you walked in the door".

Re: RadioShack Prepares Bankruptcy Filing

#70

Post by dragonwriter »

whistlerbrk wrote: post #18

Why couldn't they just stay a hobbyist store instead of schlepping cell phones? This stuff is cyclical and we're on the up-cycle now as they are going bankrupt. Instead of having their employees push plans they could have had them grow and share their knowledge of electronics. Sad, this place was near and dear to me for a bit.

> Why couldn't they just stay a hobbyist store instead of schlepping cell phones?

Because even before selling cell-phones was a big deal, their main money maker for a decades was being a general consumer electronics store, with the hobbyist thing being secondary at best.

Post reply on HN