Home » Amazon, Bookstores » Barnes & Noble falls 13 percent after lackluster digital holiday sales

Barnes & Noble falls 13 percent after lackluster digital holiday sales

6 January 2018

From The St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Shares of Barnes & Noble tumbled after airing some ugly holiday sales numbers.

The beleaguered bookseller said late Thursday that comparable-store sales slid 6.4 percent during the crucial nine-week period ending Dec. 30.

 Most retailers have strengthened digital operations and their sales have followed. At Barnes & Noble, however, online sales dropped 4.5 percent.
. . . .

Barnes & Noble says trends of improving sales leading into November began to fade by December.

Shares of Barnes & Noble Inc. fell nearly 14 percent, closing Friday at $5.60.

Link to the rest at The St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Amazon, Bookstores

11 Comments to “Barnes & Noble falls 13 percent after lackluster digital holiday sales”

  1. Wow, they just cannot get out from behind the eight ball.

  2. “Christmas Never Came” – it’s almost pathetic…

    https://www.barrons.com/articles/barnes-noble-christmas-never-came-1515171251

    If you had invested $100 in Amazon stock twenty years ago you’d have $25,600 today. If you’d put that money in Barnes & Noble, you’d have… $50. (And twenty-two cents.)

  3. I hope they go broke. They refuse to carry political books that are best sellers but conflict with their liberal ideology – and then when they get a high demand book blasting POTUS in a National Enquirer fashion….they can’t get physical inventory to stores to meet demand. And when they fail at this, they literally blame the weather.

    Mismanaged for as long as I’ve been watching them. The entire Big Pub machine cares more about being activists then they do being capitalists – which is fine, but don’t expect me to feel sorry for you when your stock flops.

    • Just FYI: HarperCollins is owned by Newscorp which is owned by Rupert Murdoch.

    • I just went to their web site and they have a whole page devoted to Ann Coulter’s anti-liberal books. She is a conservative author and some of her books have sold very well, probably hitting the best-seller list on more than one occasion.

  4. Their first mistake was counting on xmas gift sales. Pbook gift giving for the holidays has been on the decline since at least 2013.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10996661/Publishing-industry-blow-as-nine-million-fewer-books-given-as-gifts-in-2013.html

    And with good reason: the “bookworms” that would be the targets for most of those gifts, the avid readers, have moved to ebooks. For the rest, online works beautifully. Pick the book, have it gift packaged, and shipped. Job done.

    None of the reasons usually floated as excuses for preferring B&M over online apply.

    Relying on xmas sales to save the day is so last decade (if not last century) that it reflects a fundamental disconnect with the market as it exists today. Add in the continued focus on big “stores or nothing” and the impression is they have absolutely no idea of anything else to do.

    So the band plays on while the ship keeps on taking water.

    The company may not be literally bankrupt just yet but their leadership clearly is intellectually bankrupt. So they keep on keeping on until they run aground.

    A total waste of a still salvageable operation.

    • The company may not be literally bankrupt just yet but their leadership clearly is intellectually bankrupt. So they keep on keeping on until they run aground.

      Starting tomorrow, what should the leadership do? What can they do to deal with 1) the trend toward digital and away from paper, 2) the trend toward buying paper online, and 3) the larger general trend of B&M sales migrating to online?

      For those who recommend they reverse those trends, that’s an objective. How do they do it?

      For those who recommend the leadership resign, what should the new leaders do?

      What external conditions favor B&M bookstores?

  5. Milo had a #1 Amazon best seller and even made the NY Times list, yet B&N didn’t carry it at that time.

    I’m sure they carry mainstream conservative titles, but when they do practice censorship it’s only in one direction.

    I just think it’s funny that they finally got a title they loved and still couldn’t work the logistics to sell the paperback at a maximum level.

    Someone else made the point how’s it amazing that so many coastal elites can’t figure out how to read a book electronically.

    I read articles about people scurrying about Manhattan in 20 below wind chills looking for this book, furiously going to other boroughs in search of stock while their phones sit idly in their pockets dreaming of the Amazon app.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.