I don't understand how businesses are supposed to adjust their strategies when presented with meaningless data like this. I can only believe that it's designed to give the impression that paper book sales are better then reality.
- they provide unit sales instead of $ value
- they include Borders liquidation sales (unit sales) in 2011 and 2012
- they include Walmart sales in 2013
- basically they do whatever they can so you can't make valid year over year comparisons
http://www.publishersweekly.com:8080...d-in-2013.html
Quote:
|
Sales of print books through outlets that report to Nielsen BookScan’s retail & club channel fell 2.5%, to 501.6 million units, in 2013, compared to 2012. Total print units this year were 620 million; for the first time, that total includes sales from Walmart, which became part of BookScan’s mass merchandiser and other channel in 2013, the addition of which skews year-over-year comparisons. The retail & club channel includes all bookstores plus Amazon and accounted for approximately 81% of units sold through outlets that report to BookScan. Retail & club unit sales fell 11.4% between 2011 and 2012; the 2011 total includes sales from the liquidation of Borders. Between 2011 and 2012 total units (which do not include Walmart figures) fell about 9%.
|