A gentleman named Farhad Manjoo just posted a proudly contrarian article on Slate explaining why independent bookstores are not only irrelevent but maybe even harmful. I work at an independent bookstore, so that’s an argument I’d be very very curious to see made well.
Genuine question: To what extent are indie bookstores competing directly with Amazon? Obviously Amazon would destroy the indies when it comes to things like Stephen King books, New York Times bestsellers, Twilight, etc. But reading this bookseller’s response to the Slate article, it sounds like indie bookstores aren’t — or shouldn’t be — trying to compete on mass-market items; Amazon’s cost advantages are too big.
It seems like indies would have an advantage providing some of the services Dustin describes: Events, provision of expertise in certain genres, etc. And indie bookstores might be able to compete on used books, out-of-print books and other specialty items that don’t have the same mass-market qualities as Amazon’s top sellers. Booksellers could justify selling those books at higher prices; they’re special.
Separately: One tension that seems to keep coming up in these discussions is interchangeability. How much do we care where the words on our pages or screens come from? Is one Hemingway paperback the same as an identical Hemingway paperback that comes from a different place? The answer is: Depends on what else that place does.
One problem with independent bookstores is a lot of their services (readings, provision of intellectual atmosphere, the advancement of literacy) are bundled up in the price of books. Customers who just want books and are indifferent to intellectual atmosphere are going to shop at Amazon, because all those other things make no difference and all other things equal, customers want to save money.
Maybe independent bookstores need to find other ways to get people to pay for those other services without buying books. Some places already do this by charging admission to readings, or offering complements like coffee. The point, I guess, is that it’s hard to convince people that when they buy a book — an object which is almost entirely undifferentiated from the thing they can get at Amazon — they are actually funding all this really great community-centric stuff. From the customer’s perspective, he or she gives you money, and then he or she gets a book, and that’s it.
It’s not customers’ faults, and it’s really not even Amazon’s fault, that people are indifferent about these things. People value their money. Many people — even given the explicit choice between helping their community/participating in literary culture on the one hand and saving a couple dollars by buying on Amazon on the other — would choose to save the money.
However! You can teach people to value those extra services and persuade them that your product possesses all these intangible qualities that make it superior to the cold corporate word factory of Amazon. That’s hard and there probably isn’t a billion dollars in it, but it can be done. I’m rooting for the indies.
*Two last things: 1) I don’t know for sure, but I kind of doubt Amazon engages in predation. Their costs are probably so low that they can undercut indie booksellers while still making profit. 2) Amazon has been profitable for a long time now.
My man Seedz is real smart.
