In 2013, Amazon had 65% market share of online book sales [1]. It wouldn't surprise me if this was 20% higher now.
When customers walk into a Barnes and Noble (or any bookstore) and browse books but don't buy (for example, because they found a cheaper price online), they are most likely to end up on Amazon to complete the purchase. B&N did the work but Amazon got the money.
Amazon doesn't have that problem. They don't need to sell books in the store to "pay the store's operating expense" - they just need people to come in and browse.
Currently, Amazon doesn't compete for a high percentage of books (50%) moved through physical stores [2]. They are in the enviable position of being able to create stores that don't leak sales to competitors. This is the final nail in B&N's coffin.
This is an interesting thesis... which is that brick and mortar can work if you also own the online alternative.
I never bought books and B&N because I knew I could get the book cheaper at Amazon. The same with toys when I used to shop at ToysRUs. But those are both goods that I'd actually like to buy on the spot. If I know that the price in the store is the same as online, I'd probably do a lot of in store purchases.
And since I'm a Prime customer, they save 2-day shipping cost to me (I'll continue to be a Prime customer).
I used to hold this viewpoint until I watched a video (I can't seem to find it now) that made a pretty good point. The point was something along the following: "I like book stores. I like going in and flipping through the books. Sure, I could buy the book on Amazon for $4 less, but if I keep doing that eventually book stores won't be around. And I like book stores."
Ever since then, I usually try to buy the book in B&N or wherever, provided that's where I am at the time.
(Something like a campus book store and textbooks, however, is an entirely different case...)
For such concerned customers, Amazon Book store seems to be the solution. So still you can flip the pages and buy online but Book store won't go anywhere.
Seems like retailers either accept this, or fail to.
For example, Best Buy, they knew people were coming in to sample goods and then buying it online. Their solution was simply to agree to price match Amazon, and that appears to have been quite successful, I know I have purchased things at physical BB instead of Amazon due to the policy.
They still make margins on their in-house warranties, and any goods sold not priced matched. I don't legitimately know if they lose money on some goods price matched on Amazon, or if they can pass some of it on to the manufacturer.
Just this week we were in Barnes and Noble, and we skipped buying things because they were cheaper on Amazon. It is sad but true.
PS - We did buy stuff on sale, and get coffee/cake at their little coffee shop, so we aren't complete monsters.
> they knew people were coming in to sample goods and then buying it online.
And even when people go into their store with the intent of buying, they don't, because of BB's poor customer service. My sister just did this - she wanted to buy an iPad, but couldn't find anyone to sell one to her (from the security-locked cabinet). So she did a search on her phone while standing in the store, and bought it from Walmart.com
Additionally, the decline of brick and mortar book stores may have hurt Amazon's book sales. Customers no longer have as many showrooms to browse for books. See also: Tesla showrooms which cannot sell you the car (due to dealership rules).
I hope it isn't. I like B & N book stores so much, I would consider paying a monthly fee just to browse, and hang out.
Every time I go there, I wonder how they keep the lights on.
I leave and look back thinking, "Will this be my last visit?"
I dont know what they can do in order to stay in business. I don't buy books there. I have a weird taste in books, and they just aren't at B & N. I mainly buy old books at used book stores. I do buy magazines there though, and food and coffee.
If by some miracle, I was made CEO. I would try a few things.
I would get rid of Starbucks. All the food and coffee would be in-house. I would basically copy what Starbucks does, but add more food items. I would also expand the eating area. I think Starbucks does a great job, but I'd rather all my money going to B & N. It probally wouldn't be feasible--I imagine Starbucks has some great leases, and agreements?
I would add more seating to the store. No sofas, but more wood seats, and benches.
I would have all security in plain clothes.
They would all be open until 11 p.m., except Sunday.
Their employees are great. I would leave them alone.
I would add a used, and rare book room to each store.
I know I'm rambling, about a business, I know nothing about. I just don't want them to close.
The Barnes and Noble cafes aren't actually Starbucks; they serve Starbucks products (probably for historical reasons) but they have products Starbucks doesn't have, and they don't accept Starbucks gift cards.
When customers walk into a Barnes and Noble (or any bookstore) and browse books but don't buy (for example, because they found a cheaper price online), they are most likely to end up on Amazon to complete the purchase. B&N did the work but Amazon got the money.
Amazon doesn't have that problem. They don't need to sell books in the store to "pay the store's operating expense" - they just need people to come in and browse.
Currently, Amazon doesn't compete for a high percentage of books (50%) moved through physical stores [2]. They are in the enviable position of being able to create stores that don't leak sales to competitors. This is the final nail in B&N's coffin.
[1] http://www.thewire.com/business/2014/05/amazon-has-basically...
[2] http://www.dailydot.com/business/ebook-sales-2013-revenue/