Comment by zackmorris | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zackmorris | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I have no great love for BBB, but they saved me countless times when I was looking for last-minute gift ideas. The store closest to me was always packed, and prices were just enough higher than other stores that I figured they were making bank. As the #1 place people think of for just about anything domestic, I don't know how they could be mismanaged so badly that the whole chain goes under?!

On the flip side, they remind me of all of the ills of the 2000s: McMansions, SUVs, 19 Kids and Counting, excessive wedding registries, homogenization of cities, globalization, just on an on, a fiscally liberal/socially conservative vision of 'Merika which I don't subscribe to. So I guess it makes sense that they imploded as people abandoned materialism post-pandemic?

I think most brick and mortar stores will close by end of decade. To be replaced by drone delivery and service work until 3D printed androids take over those jobs too. Commercial real estate may never be priced higher than it is right now. It will be curious to find out what's keeping rents so high, but I suspect that money is funding retirements and policing the world. When young people pull the plug, it will be interesting to watch more entrenched power structures crumble.

> people abandoned materialism post-pandemic

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but you might be living in a bit of bubble.

>I don't know how they could be mismanaged so badly that the whole chain goes under?!

They're not the first. Linens n' Things was another big chain in a similar vein that went bankrupt.

Mostly I went into Bed Bath and Beyond if I wanted to actually look at and touch cooking utensils. Their selection tended to be better than places like Target. (Sur la Table is another chain for that kind of thing but there seem to be fewer of those around.)

I assume Bed Bath and Beyond's revenue skewed towards couples setting up a first home.

I've found they always ended up in this weird "quality" gray area.

They sell a bunch of mid-tier items that don't really offer any actual quality or value over low-tier items. For items I really care about, I can spend a bit more and get an actual, high quality item.

Did they get bought out by a private equity firm? That's usually a death knell for a company.

> 19 Kids and Counting

I think the birthrate in the US has been falling consistently for years and years. After people have one kid, they realize how expensive childcare is, and usually don't have more than one more.

It was a TV Show[0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19_Kids_and_Counting

Oh, from the context I assumed GP was listing general, pervasive trends from the 2000s.

If one spouse stays home, it’s not much more to have multiple from a day to day perspective.

If you put in the effort to teach kids to manage age appropriate chores, the workload can be kept sane.

Having one spouse at home is a tremendously expensive form of child care, from an economists point of view. But the cost is mostly flat with the number of children, that's true for sure.

Not really. Lower tax rates for remaining spouse. Huge reduction in food expenses from having time to cook at home.

Cost of childcare for even 1 child is huge. Unless spouse is making major money, it just isn’t worth it from a money standpoint.

> Huge reduction in food expenses from having time to cook at home.

Most people already cook most of their food at home, regardless of whether they have children.

> If one spouse stays home, it’s not much more to have multiple from a day to day perspective.

Sure, if you're the one working. Even with both of us watching our kids at the same time, it's still exhausting to keep up with them. The hardest days of my week are Saturday and Sunday.

> 19 Kids and Counting

Reality TV aside, U.S family size hit an all-time low (3.13) in 2003, and has stayed there since.

And the birth rate has failed to attain replacement since the early 70s.

> U.S family size hit an all-time low (3.13) in 2003

Do you have a reference for this? Would love to see what the metric is based on (e.g. does it assume two parents, meaning 1.13 children).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com