Hacker News Reader

Comment by brandonmenc | Hacker News Reader

> That’s what publishers did. They allowed a far less expensive version of their books to be available right away, undercutting the sale of hardcovers with the cheaper e-version.

And...?

Is the author seriously trying to convince me that getting books into the hands of poorer people immediately is a bad thing?

> Those who couldn’t afford the hardcover price knew they could get it at the library or get it in paperback in a year.

All so that a funky little book stores can exist as middlemen?

I'm sorry, but as much as I loved the small independent book (and music, etc) store, that model is done - and if the result is that books are cheaper, and more widely accessible, it's a fair trade.

View on HN

Indie book stores are doing fine actually. The model is closer to thriving than done.

https://www.voanews.com/a/indie-booksellers-hold-steady-toug...

http://publishingperspectives.com/2016/01/independent-bookst...

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_edgy_optimist/201...

http://theweek.com/articles/573874/4-reasons-why-independent...

This is what I don't understand about this blog post. It goes directly against this narrative that I've been hearing for a while now (and which you are pointing out with sources), that independent bookstores are thriving.

What makes them different than this place? I've never been to the store in the article. Maybe its because they're still trying to sell new books, and the thriving stores are all selling used books?

So many people I know (anecdotal, for sure) seem to still prefer to read physical books. Even younger people, in their early 20s. Beyond that, some people will still want to collect the physical representation of something they really love.

Certainly, this will not be as many people as before ebooks were around. Still, there has to be more to the story with this one store. It doesn't seem to add up.

That whole block is located just off of the core part of downtown Seattle (3 blocks from city hall and muni tower; 1 from Smith Tower), but currently filled with little shops in a small building. A coffee shop next door moved across the street to expand and switch from a short building to a slightly taller, somewhat newer one.

Downtown Seattle has pushed about as far North as it can, and is starting to expand South (past the government and banking towers) as well. Most of these shops are just going to shuffle into new spaces or be replaced by other little shops in new spaces. It's unfortunate, because the neighborhood is old, but there's limits to how much poorly developed land we can hold in the core of downtown. I expect everything from downtown to the stadiums is going to become towers just like SLU did -- because the core of the city needs the space. We'll probably keep a touristy section along the water (just like now) and the core of Pioneer Square, Smith Tower itself, etc. But these kinds of small shops need to move or find a business model that fits with the new density.

I might feel differently if it were a park than a bookshop -- but I don't really feel that bad that a small, niche store got pushed out of the core of downtown so the property could develop.

Bookselling is not generally a high-margin business, and a decline in foot traffic due to parking, construction, etc. can make a huge difference - that's what happened to The Stars Our Destination, a SF bookstore in Chicago that closed more than a decade ago. Parking on the side streets became sticker-only and restricted to residents, which meant that it was difficult for people to get to "destination" stores. I know from personal experience that it was easy to waste a half hour or more just driving around the area looking for a parking space.

I also hate hardcover, always preferred paperback, much easier to hold while reading.

I always felt that way, too. Hardcover is a status symbol. Paperbacks are for reading.

It's been several years since epubs from major publishers were much cheaper than paper.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com