Hacker News Reader

Comment by kken | Hacker News Reader

Interesting insight and speculation from the comment section of the article:

>Jane Friedman

>Speaking as a publishing industry reporter & observer, I couldn't agree more with your assessment of James Daunt's leadership and business strategy. Unfortunately, the picture isn't quite as bright for B&N as those numbers would have you believe. B&N stores were once quite large (e.g., 25,000 square feet); the new stores opening are less than half that in some cases. And they're largely re-opening stores that closed during the pandemic.

>It's also concerning that during a record two years for book sales (the pandemic was great for book sales of all kinds), Barnes & Noble didn't see the same percentage increase, indicating they've lost market share. Some industry insiders believe the current private equity owner is trying to position the company favorably for sale.

View on HN

Moving to smaller stores in the pandemic hardly counts as a bad thing. Restructuring your leases to reduce your rent is a great idea. It gives you room to stop chasing short term revenue such as publisher deals.

Also, a loss of market share in a growing economy is also not a bad thing as long as it’s accompanied by increased profitability. What this means is that B&N has basically maintained their revenues, while significantly reducing their costs, which as the clear market leader in the space sets them up very well to pursue a more considered growth strategy based on the current environment as opposed to the pre-Amazon environment, which is what their original stores were based on.

Also, those larger stores didn’t mean much in terms of B&N as a bookseller because they were largely filled with their coffee shops and selling toys and Knick knacks.

A Barnes & Noble near my parents moved from their original space at one end of the mall to the other end. This new space is smaller than their original space by about half or two thirds. While they have fewer materials on the shelves (and fewer shelves), it seems more lively than the original spot did, probably because there's fewer space for the number of people who go there. I bet that the company would see that as a fair tradeoff.

Yeah probably most books sold are the best sellers not the extensive sections for less well selling stuff. Paring down is not a bad idea, and if you need references a library is a good place

No idea about the market share, but downsizing shops seems like a wise move.

Rent and/or property taxes and maintenance are massive overheads. Considering that bookshops are no longer trying to have every possible book someone could want in direct inventory, big shops aren't needed for any but the flagship stores.

So what if the stores are smaller? In retail it's sales per sq. foot that counts.

No financials in the article. None available of course because it’s private. My guess is it’s loss making and debt just got a whole lot more expensive. If I was the owner I’d be looking to unload B&N fast and focus on my investments with strong cash flow and solid business models.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com