4 ms·

This is an anticipated side-effect of raising the minimum wage: it raises the "table stakes" a small business needs to compete. Sad, but not in the large surpri

This is an anticipated side-effect of raising the minimum wage: it raises the "table stakes" a small business needs to compete. Sad, but not in the large surprising. (One could argue that it's also an anticipated side-effect of being a bookstore in a world moving away from bound print media, but I don't think that's the larger factor here; it's not like anyone expects Barnes & Noble to go under any time soon).

astazangasta 12y ago
Barnes & Noble has a huge digital library and their own e-reader. This is absolutely about the world moving away from bound print media, and also from brick-and-mortar booksellers to online sellers. It's also about gentrification, rising real estate prices and a million other things (in addition to the fact that a SciFi & Fantasy book store is a somewhat dodgy proposition in the first place). This is not the first venerable San Francisco book store to close up shop in the past few years. It's not even the first one on that block. I love Borderlands and will probably go to their meeting to see what I can do to save it, but this is not a shock, and it certainly isn't just, or mostly, about the minimum wage.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Barnes & Noble has a huge digital library and their own e-reader. ...which loses tons of money, while the physical bookstores are profitable. The Nook unit is doing so bad that the long-discussed plans to split it off from the profitable physical bookstores into separate companies are now being widely discussed as in jeopardy because there is no credible business case to make to investors for the Nook unit as a separate business. B&N is a profitable physical bookstore chain tied to failed e-book effort that is swallowing all the profits (and more), which if it can't be sold off or turned around soon is likely going to have a stake driven through its heart.
- DrDanDLyons 12y ago
  "It's not even the first one ON THAT BLOCK" --actually the one that left the block relocated to 24th St.
skuhn 12y ago
> it's not like anyone expects Barnes & Noble to go under any time soon Well actually... On 2014 revenue of $6.4bn they lost $1.6bn. Their total assets are $3.8bn and liabilities are $2.6bn, which means another yearly loss of $1.6bn will sink them. They are expected to spin off the Nook business and make some money (and reduce losses) from that, but I doubt it will be enough to save them in the long term.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > They are expected to spin off the Nook business and make some money (and reduce losses) from that, but I doubt it will be enough to save them in the long term. The physical bookstores have remained profitable, the losses have all been in the Nook unit (and specifically the digital part of the Nook unit -- the college bookstores, which are tied to the Nook unit, are also profitable.) The most recent reports have cast doubt on the plans to spin off the Nook unit given its worsening performance -- while the college bookstores could probably be spun off (or kept with the main bookstore business) successfully, there doesn't really seem to be anything for investors in the Nook business.
- hullo 12y ago
  That is all pretty much completely incorrect - I think you must be misreading a 1.6b expense line as a loss? FY 2014 for BKS was pretty much even. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_RVIHoB8eZ8wa6nIDgBA https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_... You'll also see the 2.6b you're calling liabilities is maybe accumulated depreciation? Actual FY2014 debt is 127.5M. Barnes & Noble is relatively debt-free for a large retailer. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_RVIHoB8eZ8wa6nIDgBA https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_...
  - skuhn 12y ago
    You're correct, I miscalculated their annual loss (but not from their expense line). The assets and liabilities are literally from these lines on their balance sheet: Total Assets 3,835.75 Total Liabilities 2,627.98 Per: http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/earnings/earnings.asp?ticker=BKS http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/earnings/earnings.a... "2014 revenues at Barnes & Noble, Inc. totaled $6.4B USD, while annual losses equaled $1.12 per share." B&N has 60.24M shares outstanding. That makes their annual loss $67 million. They do indeed have a longer runway than I anticipated, but I still feel that they run a business in decline. Their saving grace from a few years ago (Nook) is now an albatross. What is their next move?
wwweston 12y ago
Don't forget to follow this back, though -- this is one of the problems with the general cost of living increases (or sector-specific booms that not everyone participates in, same thing when you're talking about a market economy with any scarcity): it raises the table stakes individuals need to participate. And a minimum wage law only formalizes the involved failure point, it doesn't create the fact that there would be one (though how it's not north of $15/hr in SF is beyond me). > it's not like anyone expects Barnes & Noble to go under any time soon http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/barnes-and-noble-survival-plan/ http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/barnes-and-noble-survival-pla...

astazangasta 12y ago

Barnes & Noble has a huge digital library and their own e-reader. This is absolutely about the world moving away from bound print media, and also from brick-and-mortar booksellers to online sellers. It's also about gentrification, rising real estate prices and a million other things (in addition to the fact that a SciFi & Fantasy book store is a somewhat dodgy proposition in the first place). This is not the first venerable San Francisco book store to close up shop in the past few years. It's not even the first one on that block. I love Borderlands and will probably go to their meeting to see what I can do to save it, but this is not a shock, and it certainly isn't just, or mostly, about the minimum wage.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> Barnes & Noble has a huge digital library and their own e-reader. ...which loses tons of money, while the physical bookstores are profitable. The Nook unit is doing so bad that the long-discussed plans to split it off from the profitable physical bookstores into separate companies are now being widely discussed as in jeopardy because there is no credible business case to make to investors for the Nook unit as a separate business. B&N is a profitable physical bookstore chain tied to failed e-book effort that is swallowing all the profits (and more), which if it can't be sold off or turned around soon is likely going to have a stake driven through its heart.
DrDanDLyons 12y ago
"It's not even the first one ON THAT BLOCK" --actually the one that left the block relocated to 24th St.

skuhn 12y ago

> it's not like anyone expects Barnes & Noble to go under any time soon Well actually... On 2014 revenue of $6.4bn they lost $1.6bn. Their total assets are $3.8bn and liabilities are $2.6bn, which means another yearly loss of $1.6bn will sink them. They are expected to spin off the Nook business and make some money (and reduce losses) from that, but I doubt it will be enough to save them in the long term.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> They are expected to spin off the Nook business and make some money (and reduce losses) from that, but I doubt it will be enough to save them in the long term. The physical bookstores have remained profitable, the losses have all been in the Nook unit (and specifically the digital part of the Nook unit -- the college bookstores, which are tied to the Nook unit, are also profitable.) The most recent reports have cast doubt on the plans to spin off the Nook unit given its worsening performance -- while the college bookstores could probably be spun off (or kept with the main bookstore business) successfully, there doesn't really seem to be anything for investors in the Nook business.
hullo 12y ago
That is all pretty much completely incorrect - I think you must be misreading a 1.6b expense line as a loss? FY 2014 for BKS was pretty much even. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_RVIHoB8eZ8wa6nIDgBA https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_... You'll also see the 2.6b you're calling liabilities is maybe accumulated depreciation? Actual FY2014 debt is 127.5M. Barnes & Noble is relatively debt-free for a large retailer. https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_RVIHoB8eZ8wa6nIDgBA https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABKS&fstype=ii&ei=Kz_...
- skuhn 12y ago
  You're correct, I miscalculated their annual loss (but not from their expense line). The assets and liabilities are literally from these lines on their balance sheet: Total Assets 3,835.75 Total Liabilities 2,627.98 Per: http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/earnings/earnings.asp?ticker=BKS http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/earnings/earnings.a... "2014 revenues at Barnes & Noble, Inc. totaled $6.4B USD, while annual losses equaled $1.12 per share." B&N has 60.24M shares outstanding. That makes their annual loss $67 million. They do indeed have a longer runway than I anticipated, but I still feel that they run a business in decline. Their saving grace from a few years ago (Nook) is now an albatross. What is their next move?

wwweston 12y ago

Don't forget to follow this back, though -- this is one of the problems with the general cost of living increases (or sector-specific booms that not everyone participates in, same thing when you're talking about a market economy with any scarcity): it raises the table stakes individuals need to participate. And a minimum wage law only formalizes the involved failure point, it doesn't create the fact that there would be one (though how it's not north of $15/hr in SF is beyond me). > it's not like anyone expects Barnes & Noble to go under any time soon http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/barnes-and-noble-survival-plan/ http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/barnes-and-noble-survival-pla...