# Amazon: Good at Selling Books, Bad at Publishing Them.



## Ankari

I know it may seem like I'm bashing Amazon, but I'm not.  I buy way too much stuff from them to have any ill will towards them.

Anyway, seems like the book sellers and publishers are having a war.  Boycotting each others books and such.  Read Amazon's woes here.


----------



## Frog

Actually, after reading that article, it looks like Amazon isn't bad at publishing, Barnes and Noble just doesn't want to sell books published by Amazon.

That makes a certain amount of sense.

This is one more move in a game of brinksmanship between the two giant retailers.  Both of them want to be _the_ definitive e-book provider.  They're even offering deals to authors in exchange for not publishing on the other platform.  

My prediction:  Eventually, one of them goes nuclear with New York.  I'm betting it's Amazon.  They place a clause in their marketing contract that says "you agree to sell your books through us and not B&N."  There will be a lawsuit over this based on Sherman Antitrust, and with the Court in flux God only knows where that's headed, but at the end of the day only one of these two companies is going to be standing.

If it's Amazon, you'll see their publishing branch do a lot better.


----------



## Chilari

I disagree on the prediction there, Frog: I think they'll both realise they're shooting themselves in the foot because both of them are losing sales and eventually drop the blanket exclusivity clauses and perhaps agree to a limited term exclusivity agreement instead. No lawsuit, lower risk.


----------



## TobyNeighbors

I think B&N will and should shift their focus from being a device manufacturer to being a book destination again.  Instead of hanging on to the past, they could rise to the top by making their stores (which is what makes them truly unique) the best place to shop for and buy ebooks.  For instance, if you got a discount for buying ebooks on location it would be an even greater incentive for customers to shop there.  They could print ebook place cards where customers could check out books and scan them for instant sale or purchase at the counter and download later when they get home.

My experience is that Amazon's willingness to incorporate new ideas and make publishing easier for authors will keep them ahead of the curve.


----------



## Kevin O. McLaughlin

It's long run irrelevant. Amazon knows it, the big publishers know it, and even B&N is aware of it.

B&N has three primary elements: brick and mortar bookstores, college bookstores, and the online print and ebook store. Of those, two are making profit. One - the brick and mortar - has lost money every year for years, more each year.

And now? B&N has placed both those profitable ventures into a new corporation, co funded with Microsoft. That leaves only the brick and mortar stores left in the main corporation - the one element losing more money each year. Bottom line is, the new corp is viable, for the long run. The old corporation is dead, as soon as the new corp is finalized. Oh, it may linger a little longer... Maybe another year or two. But the brick and mortar B&N stores are finished.

And everybody in the industry already knows it.


----------



## BWFoster78

Kevin O. McLaughlin said:


> It's long run irrelevant. Amazon knows it, the big publishers know it, and even B&N is aware of it.
> 
> B&N has three primary elements: brick and mortar bookstores, college bookstores, and the online print and ebook store. Of those, two are making profit. One - the brick and mortar - has lost money every year for years, more each year.
> 
> And now? B&N has placed both those profitable ventures into a new corporation, co funded with Microsoft. That leaves only the brick and mortar stores left in the main corporation - the one element losing more money each year. Bottom line is, the new corp is viable, for the long run. The old corporation is dead, as soon as the new corp is finalized. Oh, it may linger a little longer... Maybe another year or two. But the brick and mortar B&N stores are finished.
> 
> And everybody in the industry already knows it.



That's sad.  I really like B&N's stores.


----------



## Steerpike

Maybe it will open the way for more independent book stores. There are some really great brick-and-mortar bookstores doing well. If you're even in Pasadena, CA, stop by Vroman's, for example. I like B&N, but it doesn't have much character. There's nothing to lure people there as opposed to going somewhere else or shopping online.


----------



## Kevin O. McLaughlin

Steerpike said:


> Maybe it will open the way for more independent book stores. There are some really great brick-and-mortar bookstores doing well. If you're even in Pasadena, CA, stop by Vroman's, for example. I like B&N, but it doesn't have much character. There's nothing to lure people there as opposed to going somewhere else or shopping online.



I'd say that's certainly possible, at least for the short to mid (2-5 years) term. Beyond that, I'm not so sure. In music, it was mostly the smaller stores that went under first, then the larger chain stores. In books, we see the larger stores under pressure because most of the smaller indie stores already went under due to the spread of B&N. I'm not convinced that even if B&N closes tomorrow that it would offer any long term viability for indie bookstores.

The main issue indie bookstores have always had is their inability to stock many titles. Ebooks have made that worse, not better. And I don't think print readers will order more expensive books from an indie store just to keep the indie store open; history has shown us consumers rarely pay more just to keep a retail site around. So if consumers are asked to choose between an indie store with a few thousand books and Amazon or another online retailer with tens of millions of books...well... It's not much of a contest.

The only real advantage physical bookstores have is the ability to get the book NOW, instead of two days from now. But indie bookstores can't stock enough books to take advantage of this edge, and even that advantage is failing B&N.


----------



## Steerpike

Kevin O. McLaughlin said:


> The only real advantage physical bookstores have is the ability to get the book NOW, instead of two days from now. But indie bookstores can't stock enough books to take advantage of this edge, and even that advantage is failing B&N.



I think that's an advantage a place like Vroman's have. They probably stock more books than your average Barnes & Noble. They also have gifts, and a nice coffee shop, and are located in an area people like to frequent. You can buy from them online as well. But that store has been there around 120 years and is sort of a fixture. They even attract big-name authors for signings. For most indie bookstores, particularly a new one that is just starting out, there is no way to meet the overhead of a place like Vroman's. The question is, if they don't run that kind of outfit from day one, will they survive long enough to get there?


----------



## Caged Maiden

I like the ambiance of a bookstore, and it's sad to see them go, but I think i only ever went into a B&N once, to kill time.  I prefer the little bookstores I remember on State Street in Madison.  Sure, the were specialty, dealing in metaphysical and stuff, but the whole set-up, from gifts and trinkets, to all the unmatched bookshelves, lined with all sorts of unusual finds.. it was quite irreplacable in my mind.


----------



## Devor

Steerpike said:


> Maybe it will open the way for more independent book stores. There are some really great brick-and-mortar bookstores doing well. If you're even in Pasadena, CA, stop by Vroman's, for example. I like B&N, but it doesn't have much character. There's nothing to lure people there as opposed to going somewhere else or shopping online.



Typically when a big business goes under - say, Borders - you get a lot of out of work industry experts thinking about what went wrong, what could've been done better, and sometimes they go out and give it another shot on their own.  That's a big part of why economic downturns turn into recoveries.

It wouldn't surprise me if something springs up with the fall of the brick and mortar bookstores, but if it does, I would expect it to look new and to fill the vacuum pretty quickly.  My guess, it might merge a coffee lounge, library and ebookstore into one, passing out in-house kindles with your book of choice while you sip your mocha and read at a window.  Or maybe Amazon/B&N could start up a service where they lease Kindles and Nooks to restaurants and coffee shops to do something like that, giving you the option to order the book before you leave.


----------



## PaulineMRoss

TobyNeighbors said:


> I think B&N will and should shift their focus from being a device manufacturer to being a book destination again.  Instead of hanging on to the past, they could rise to the top by making their stores (which is what makes them truly unique) the best place to shop for and buy ebooks.  For instance, if you got a discount for buying ebooks on location it would be an even greater incentive for customers to shop there.  They could print ebook place cards where customers could check out books and scan them for instant sale or purchase at the counter and download later when they get home.



The UK bookstore chain Waterstones has already started moving in that direction. They've dropped Sony, and done a deal with Amazon to sell Kindles and allow Kindle users to browse (ie read) a selection of recommended ebooks for free while in-store. If they offer a discount to buy on the spot, they'll be on to a winner, I think. 

Details here: BBC News - Waterstones and Amazon's Kindle turn a new chapter


----------



## Kevin O. McLaughlin

Problem is, B&N is doing the reverse, has been for years now. Walk into a B&N. Grab a bestseller off the shelf. Now open your smartphone up to barnesandnoble.com, and price the book there.

It's going to be cheaper online. Almost always. Barnesandnobles.com is underpricing B&N brick and mortar stores on most popular books, because the online store is directly competing against Amazon, and pricing to compete that way. But the brick and mortar stores can't do that. So consumers are walking into the store, seeing a book, checking the price against the Nook price (which is usually cheaper) and the online store print price (which is often much cheaper).

Bottom line is that brick and mortar retail stores CANNOT sell goods cheaper than online stores. It's why Best Buy is preparing to close a bunch of their stores. It's why we're seeing a steady trend of more and more commerce moving online each year. Brick and mortar cannot compete on price; the only things it can compete on are elements which cannot be had online (say, trying on clothes).


----------



## Devor

Kevin O. McLaughlin said:


> Bottom line is that brick and mortar retail stores CANNOT sell goods cheaper than online stores. It's why Best Buy is preparing to close a bunch of their stores. It's why we're seeing a steady trend of more and more commerce moving online each year. Brick and mortar cannot compete on price; the only things it can compete on are elements which cannot be had online (say, trying on clothes).



Only if you just look at a small piece of what's happening in the retail industry.  WalMart and Costco, for instance, often sell books cheaper than Amazon.  It's more about sales volume.  Barnes & Noble can't sell enough books to keep their prices competitive because they opened stores in an area that was designed to support them on paper, and priced low enough to block new entrants, but a new entrant emerged online and cut into their sales.  Lower prices wouldn't help; the sales region for any given store just wasn't big enough to support that many competitors.

((edit))

To add a little, that's important to understand if you want an idea of what role bookstores might serve in the future.  It's unlikely that the bookstores in most communities can support the volume of sales it would need to maintain a brick and mortar store large enough to give consumers the choices they would want from it at a competitive price.  Barnes & Noble is facing the same pressures from Amazon that little stores face from WalMart.  They have to raise prices to compensate for the lost sales volume, and then add enough service to justify the higher price.  But it's not that _brick and mortar stores can't compete with the web_, it's that _these_ brick and mortar stores weren't _designed_ to compete with the web.  They were designed to compete with other brick and mortars in a tight geographic area.

It's still entirely possible that someone can figure out a brick and mortar business model that's competitive on all fronts with the web.


----------

