Books A Million now joins BN in refusing to carry amazon titles

[oliewankanobe]

Via PW:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/50495-books-a-million-won-t-carry-amazon-titles.html

It almost forces amazon to employ the plans to open storefronts. And yet everyone keeps calling amazon a bully and accusing them of starting/perpetuating a "war."

[Donald Wells]

Amazon is the Indie of the publishing world.

[mickip]

Amazon is the Indie of the publishing world.

I totally agree. They opened their 'doors' to Indie authors and have given us all chance.

[Asher MacDonald]

Does Books A Million have an ebook presence? I understand B&N insisting on the right to sell ebooks if they also carry the paper title. I'm not so sure about BAM's reasoning, however, if they are only a physical book seller.

[edwardgtalbot]

I'm not going to judge who's "right" or "wrong" in terms of different entities trying to dominate markets and trying to keep the others from doing so. They're all motivated by maximizing their own profit. But I will say this - I'd bet on the success of  company that is focusing exclusively on what it can offer its customers as opposed to the companies gleefully announcing the choices they will refuse to offer their customers.

IMNSHO, if places like B&N and BAM don't start focusing on adding value instead of subtracting it, they're making Amazon's job even easier.

[Rusty Bigfoot]

^^^

What he said.

[intinst]

I haven't been in either bookseller since I got my first kindle March of 2008, wish them luck with this.

[George Berger]

A decade or so ago, B&N bought a publisher. (Several, actually, but nobody cared about most of the littler ones.) Stirling, maybe, was the name of the largest one? Anyway, BAM was one of the first competitors to announce a boycott of the newly-purchased publisher.

A year or two later, B&N tried to buy a book distributor, and BAM was, again, one of the first to announce a boycott of the distributor, refusing to be forced to do business with a direct competitor.

Everything old is new again.

[JRTomlin]

Via PW:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/50495-books-a-million-won-t-carry-amazon-titles.html

It almost forces amazon to employ the plans to open storefronts. And yet everyone keeps calling amazon a bully and accusing them of starting/perpetuating a "war."

I don't see that it forces Amazon to open storefronts. There are plenty of other retailers in the world than these two and B&M stores are losing money right and left.

[amiblackwelder]

Amazon is the Indie of the publishing world.

Exactly, I love amazon. I'm on their side. They have done more for me as an Indie than anyone else, with exception to smashwords. They have my loyalty.

[jackz4000]

When a company focuses on what it doesn't sell versus what it does sell this is just wrong-headed thinking. Amazon just scares them shi(r)tless and they keep making poor decisions. There was a recent article about this and it is obvious the legacy pub crowd has a huge fear of Amazon and that seems to make them react in strange ways.

Amazon doesn't need these stores. There are plenty of other places to sell.

[Herc- The Reluctant Geek]

Denying distribution seems to be the only way these guys seem to respond. *sigh* You want to give people more reason to come into your shop, not less. Silly duffers.

[Strayer]

BAM sells the Nook. Also some Independent bookstores are doing the same and not having Amazon authors for personal appearances.
Amazon would do the same if it was B&N or another company doing this.

[JRTomlin]

BAM sells the Nook. Also some Independent bookstores are doing the same and not having Amazon authors for personal appearances.
Amazon would do the same if it was B&N or another company doing this.

No, actually they wouldn't. Or to put it more accurately they didn't and don't. B&N owns a publishing company. Amazon sells the books that company publishes. Amazon knows you don't gain customers by not giving them what they want.

Both companies have every right to make this decision but the best I can say for it is that it is misguided.

[Terrence OBrien]

"A year or two later, B&N tried to buy a book distributor, and BAM was, again, one of the first to announce a boycott of the distributor, refusing to be forced to do business with a direct competitor."

Interesting behavior.

I note three of the world's most successful firms are happy to do business with the competition. Apple competes fiercely with both Amazon and Samsung. However, Apple gets screens from Samsung, and it gets server farms for its iCloud from Amazon.

[Strayer]

I think B&N will be selling the books online. It would be a question of shelf space.
Amazon would do the same because that is what businesses do. It isn't a personal grudge.
B&N is getting rid of the publishing company. It was a subsidiary.
It sounds like some posters  don't like B&N. That's fine, but that's not the issue.
I like both. I have an ebook on both sites.
Amazon lost to Penguin Books in that dispute.
Business is business.
Amazon cut out other book sellers with Select.

[JRTomlin]

I think B&N will be selling the books online. It would be a question of shelf space.
Amazon would do the same because that is what businesses do. It isn't a personal grudge.
B&N is getting rid of the publishing company. It was a subsidiary.
It sounds like some posters  don't like B&N. That's fine, but that's not the issue.
I like both. I have an ebook on both sites.
Amazon lost to Penguin Books in that dispute.
Business is business.
Amazon cut out other book sellers with Select.

It has nothing to do with disliking B&N. I don't like their website which isn't well written but I occasionally shop in one of their stores if it's more handy than Powell's. I bought the Job's book there as a matter of fact. I certainly don't dislike Books A Million which I've never even seen. (Judging by their press release, B&N will not be carrying the Thomas & Mercer books online either, by the way)

So Sterling is a subsidiary. So is Thomas & Mercer. B&N will have to find a buyer before they get rid of Sterling though.

That doesn't make this a wise decision. It isn't a matter of shelf space. Everyone knows it. They are choosing not to carry a number of popular authors by this decision. Losing the McBain's books is particularly stupid. This is NOT a business winning decision.

Edit: What do I think the effect of this will be? Although there will be many retailers will carry the Thomas & Mercer books, a lot of people will just order them directly from Amazon thus increasing the Amazon profit margin, having exactly the opposite effect that B&N and BAM have in mind.

[dgaughran]

Any bookstore is entitled to stock whichever books they choose, of course, but they should be aware of the contradiction inherent in accusing Amazon of monopolistic tendencies when indie bookstores, Barnes & Noble, and Books-a-Million all proudly announced the embargo of any books published by Amazon.

[ETS PRESS]

I predict the rise of the indie bookstore. A smart indie bookstore will stock Amazon books, hardback editions, and children's books.

[Edward M. Grant]

It sounds like some posters  don't like B&N. That's fine, but that's not the issue.

Actually, I suspect you'll find that most of us like bookstores and are just puzzled when they do something which appears suicidal to us.

'Come to our store, where you won't find the books you want to buy because we refuse to stock them!'

That said, if it means an end to big bookstore chains and they are replaced by independents, it may not be a bad thing.

[pamclaughton]

I read this and first thing I thought of was the old saying about 'cutting off your nose to spite your face.'  Just seems like a dumb, spiteful move that shows a lack of business savvy.

[Herc- The Reluctant Geek]

B&N have reacted negatively to Amazon's positive moves and it's a silly way to go about it. A better move, imho, is to offer incentives to publsihers and writers to go exclusively with them rather than to offer disincentives to readers visiting their stores. Getting exclusive titles would be an incentive for readers to visit their stores. Instead of banning books, why not et up a rival select program? Or organise an exclusive deal with one of the trad publishers for exclusivity with one or more of their prominant and popular writers? In print and digital? 'Only available at B&N, stores and online' sure sounds better than 'Not available at B&N'.

(oops, wrong thread but close enough )

[jackz4000]

B&N have reacted negatively to Amazon's positive moves and it's a silly way to go about it. A better move, imho, is to offer incentives to publsihers and writers to go exclusively with them rather than to offer disincentives to readers visiting their stores. Getting exclusive titles would be an incentive for readers to visit their stores. Instead of banning books, why not et up a rival select program? Or organise an exclusive deal with one of the trad publishers for exclusivity with one or more of their prominant and popular writers? In print and digital? 'Only available at B&N, stores and online' sure sounds better than 'Not available at B&N'.

(oops, wrong thread but close enough )

Because this is not really about business. This is about fear. They fear Amazon and so they lash out and retaliate by thinking they are punishing Amazon.  All they are doing is giving Amazon a good reason to sell their books in other stores, new outlets that will sell the books that B&N and BAM has refused to allow in their stores.  In a couple years they will complain about all the new brick and mortar places Amazon has their books in and how terrible it all is..what Amazon has done to them etc.

If you think about it-- this should be on the comedy channel or an SNL skit. "Yeah, we'll show them. We're not going to sell any of their books in our stores. No sir not in our stores. People are just going to have to buy them somewhere else, spend their money at those other stores. We don't need them." Duh.

[Bards and Sages (Julie)]

I predict the rise of the indie bookstore. A smart indie bookstore will stock Amazon books, hardback editions, and children's books.

There are hundreds of indie bookstores.  Many probably won't stock Amazon books either simply because they can't afford to compete against their own suppliers.

If I was a bookstore, I would not stock Amazon books unless I had a guarantee that Amazon would not sell to end customers for less than it sold to me.  Amazon has historically sold physical books far below what is considered the typical "wholesale" price.  The typical bookstore deal is 40-50% off the retail.  So if a hardcover has a retail of $29.99, the bookstore pays $15.  Now let's use this book as an example.  The retail price is $26.99.  Let's assume the bookstore pays half that ($13.49).  Amazon is selling the book for $17.81, which is just over $5 profit.  Not bad for Amazon.  But that is bad for a bookstore with a brick and mortar presence that has the added expenses of a physical building to pay for. 

Now let's look at what Amazon does with the price of AmazonEncore books.  Retail price is $24.99.  They are selling it to end consumers for $7.61!  Even if they offered the book to bookstores for 65% off, they are still selling to end users for less that a distributor can buy for.

Now seriously, forget the ebooks for a minute.  Who in their right mind would agree to stock their books in this sort of situation?  Unless they are giving bookstores the books for 90% off, the bookstore can't win. 

[edwardgtalbot]

I think B&N will be selling the books online. It would be a question of shelf space.

Nope.  This week, B&N pulled my Createspace book from the B&N online store after listing it since last February when I po\ublished it.  It does not seem likely that it is a coincidence.