Friday, January 5, 2007

Sometimes I see a store, or a business model, that simply doesn't add up. I look at it, and think, that just doesn't compute. I'm pretty good, though, at eventually figuring it out. At least to my own satisfaction. I mull it over, observe, try to inobtrusively gather information, and I'll usually get some kind of answer which -- right or wrong -- makes sense to me.

When Barnes and Nobles came to town, I thought it was an over-reach. I assumed that they were positioning themselves for Bend's future growth. Sure enough, within a year or two, 2 out of 3 independent bookstores in Bend went out of business, and the surviving shrank to half its size. Then I started getting reports of the sales levels that B & N was reaching, and it simply made no sense to me.

Look, I think I can pretty accurately guess what all the independent bookstores in Bend were doing: I shared the same street with one, and the same mall with another. I have similar discount structures and overhead, and so on, so I'd be willing to bet that I can get awfully close to what their likely sales were.

I've also got a pretty good idea of what B & N is doing, based on what a couple of former employees have told me, and based on the nationwide averages that are reported.

Here's the kicker. By my estimates, B & N is selling somewhere around 10 TIMES more books than all the bookstores in Bend were selling before they arrived. So if I double my estimates of sales of the indy's, and cut my estimates of B & N by half, there is still a huge, huge difference. I'd bet my own money that the higher estimate is closer to the truth.

So, logically, there are only two explanations. Either 10 times more people are buying more books, or the existing book buyers are buying 10 times more books, or somewhere in between.

That just doesn't compute with me. It simply makes no sense.

An increased population is moot, in that it should affect all the stores equally.

1.) Current customers buy more books. If you give a person a plate twice as big, he will put 25% more food on it. A sort of 'Build it they will come' scenario. It wouldn't work for my store; if I had twice as much inventory, I'd be suprised if my business picked up more than 10 or 20%. But the 'Build it they will come' seems to be the motto for Bend, these days.

2.) More customers materialize out of the air. (Where were they?) Casual customers, who buy when it is convenient and easy? Customers who will only buy from the "big" stores? A strange thought, but I know that is possible. Personally, if you told me the only store to buy books from in Central Oregon is the little grocery in Tumalo, I'd walk there, in barefeet in the snow, if I had to. Can't imagine not having books to read.

3.) Customers who were buying elsewhere, either online or in other towns. I'm not sure why they would switch to B & N, but perhaps they were unsatisfied with the selection of the indy's.

4.) A combination of the above.

I think it's the 5 to 10 times the number of books selling that has me stumped. I could accept 2 or 3 times for the above reasons.

But 10 times is just inexplicable.

9 comments:

Duncan McGeary said...

Steven,

I understand everything you're saying, but still can't wrap my head around the fact that books sell SO, SO much better. I mean, I read a book, and then I read another book, and it doesn't matter if there are 2 outlets or 20, I read books. I'm not going to suddenly start reading 10 times more books just because a new store opens.

That people, by what you say, would buy something because...of advertising, because of special events, because of membership clubs and coupons, because of all the other reasons you mention, I understand. But that the same group of people would suddenly start buying so much more, I don't understand.

Maybe I'm just dense. If these were widgets, and there were three small widgets stores, and people were buying 3000 widgets a week, and a much better store opened up and was suddenly selling 30,000 widgets a week, I don't think any amount big store advantages explains away the fact that one day people needed and wanted 3000 widgets, and the next they needed and wanted 30,000 widgets.

Duncan McGeary said...

Steven,

By the way, I think you're explanations are right. They are indeed the only explanations. But they are still mind-boggling in their implications. It basically comes down to the idea that people can be easily manipulated into a whole fortune of impulse buying.

RDC said...

I can understand the impact of the Barnes and Noble.

I am an avid reader. It is very seldom that I will spend a lot of money in an independent store. I might browse one that I happen to walk by, but in most cases they do not carry much of what I am intereted in. On the other hand I know that if there is a Barnes and Noble (or one of the other big box book stores) that they will usually have several books that I am interested in. It is not unusual for me to spend over a hundred on a single visit to a book store.

However, I will also point out that recently I have started to shift to e-books because I can carry almost a thousand on my cell phone/PDA when traveling instead of having to carry 5 or 6 to tied me over for a trip.

Duncan McGeary said...

Steven,

I did leave out the ancillary stuff; I've always assumed their resturant was a loss leader; I've also assumed that the vast majority of magazines and knick-knacks get sent back.

And indy bookstores are also trying to sell other stuff, though obviously not really having the room for it.

My wife Linda has had many people tell her she should sell coffee and such at THE BOOKMARK; and I've wondered why she doesn't do more things like, say, jigsaw puzzles, or used dvd's, or bookmarks, etc. To her credit, she has managed to fend us all off, and keep it simple.

And access to more books from my own wife's store has certainly filled my den's bookshelves faster.

I think I just keep coming back to the exponential factor. Hard to understand.

Duncan McGeary said...

RDC,

Maybe I should be more worried about e-books, but I don't think they will take over until I'm gone. I, personally, still love the tactile feel of books.

For techies, it is pretty hard to understand that most of the world, even the reading world, is pretty low tech, still.

Also hard to see how that model will support a publishing industry.

RDC said...

That is one of the reasons Baen has found giving away free e-books to be so successful. It has attracted new readers to their authors and most people like the feel of physical books. So in many cases even if they have an e-book they still buy the physical copy.

In my case I really like the ability to carry a full library with me every where I go. Today I probably spend as much on e-books as I did no paper copies.

Most publishers copy protect their e-books and I think that they have not been as successful with that approach as Baen. I think part of the logic that Bean used is that reading is a somewhat shrinking hobby (maybe not in total, but certainly as a percentage of the population) and unlike music, there is a lot of potential to grow the market (i.e. get more people interested in reading) instead of market share issues. Thus there focus on making it easy for people to access and then get them interested both reading and the authors for future sales. Certainly a grow the market approach instead of maximizing revenue for each sale.

Duncan McGeary said...

rdc,

In my own little corner of retail, that rational is often used. "See...we're selling this stuff at a discount at Walmart in order to expand the customer base."

Instead, what happens is the customers I have just start buying at Walmart, along with any 'new' customers that are created.

On the other hand, one could make the case that there are so few comic readers anymore because people no longer find them at newstands and grocery stores.

It's a bit of a Catch-22.

RDC said...

In most cases discounting does not expand market, it is more a grab for market share. So as you say it usually fails because the growth in share does not comepnsate for the loss of sales.

The question is " are there specific items are product lines which can function as loss leaders and increase the customer base?" Not just try and grap market share from someone else but increase it everywhere.

As you say comic book readership has dropped off. It used to be that they were present in every grocery, drug store, etc. Now you have to go into a specialty store. As a result what do you see, probably more sales to people in their 30's or older, instead of kids under 16. Why? Because they got hooked back when they were maintream and the current generation has not.

If I was a comics publisher I would make some online material for free and then work it into a system where the readers can find where other comics in the same series is available in their area. Otherwise they are the equivalent of buggy whip manufacturers at the time the automobile was being released. A rapidly shrinking market.

Jen said...

Gift cards make a difference too. I can't tell you how many out-of-town relatives send me and my kids gift cards for Christmas and birthdays. B&N or Target... every time (they don't dare send me a card for Wally World)!

If I want to purchase a book, we generally use the cards. But in general we are a library crowd, so I save the purchases for an exceptional read, or cookbook, or the like.

If I asked them to send me a card for Millette's, Pegasus, or another local store they would be stumped. Too bad there isn't an outlet for small stores to market gift cards nationally...