Barnes and Noble, you’re (also) doing it wrong
Here’s a picture that captures very well why the bookseller Barnes & Noble will likely go the way of Borders.
That’s not a bookseller; that’s the back room at a Radio Shack. People don’t go to bookstores for e-readers, or e-books. Anybody tech-savvy enough to want in on the “e-reader revolution” (I just threw up in my mouth a little bit) will order their goods online, and that’s not going to subsidize brick-and-mortar bookstores.
What’s more, e-books can - and will always - be pirated and shared. Try doing that with a physical Harry Potter book.
Instead:
- Make the Barnes & Noble name synonymous with clean, well-lighted places to get books. Not stuffed animals, not toys, not compact discs (because, why?). Go ahead and have one shelf for e-readers, and make it easy for people to download the e-books, but why put so many eggs in the basket of a publishing trend that is a handful of years old, instead of going with a book format that’s been around for generations?
- Why not try locally-owned franchises? It would help to keep money in the community of the bookstore, it would encourage more loyalty to the bookstore (who is loyal to B&N right now? anyone?).
- Why not make these stores the size of a bookstore, instead of the size of a warehouse? Wouldn’t that cut down on the overhead a bit?
Lastly, put on a tie. You aren’t fooling anyone. (Maybe that’s just me.)
