Originally Posted by charmian
As it is, I've read the amount of shelf-space (nationally) is shrinking. So shelf-space, to B&N, must be a scarcer commodity that they can charge more for.
Indigo took that approach in Canada but that is a slightly different market; they're in a much stronger position because of the local content laws.
That shelf space in the US has shrunk is undeniable; the Borders implosion wiped out at least 25% of the shelf space and, when you factor in B&N closures and their own repurposing, a 30-35% loss of shelf-space isn't out of the question. But...
...the need for shelf space has *also* gone down because of users migrating to online pbook sales and ebooks. And one of the (many) reasons Borders without the BPHs even blinking was an actual glut of shelf-space.
So the real question is *what* has gone down more: shelf-space or B&M pbook demand?
That is what makes this fight interesting: B&N thinks they're indispensable, S&S begs to differ. With the fight now approaching three months, the two seem pretty entrenched.
I suspect we'll see some kind of resolution once the first quarter sales reports get in. I doubt either side will completely cave in but it's not totally out of the question.