Quote:
Originally Posted by soondai
Everyone always busts B&N's chops for all their "blunders."
I think they are in an untenable position.
|
They are.
The thing is, hindsight being 20-20, it is easy to see exactly where they went wrong. And in both realms they had all the pieces to succeed and at every single junction they did exactly the wrong thing, in the face of evidence favoring the opposite move. This isn't the case of being blindsided by a bolt out of the blue: they had all the data before them and either read it wrong or chose to ignore it.
Simple test: when Amazon bought Mobipocket, it was public knowledge.
When Amazon set up Lab126, it was public knowledge.
Put the two together and it was obvious what they were up to.
Worse, Kindle rumors started months ahead of the actual release and then Amazon screwed up the launch and had no product to sell for six months. Yet, after all that, it took them two years to answer the Kindle.
Similar misteps on the pbook side continue to today, where they *still* have a substandard online operation twenty years after Amazon launched and well over a year after announcing a relaunch for *last* spring.
Their position is untenable because they made it untenable.
Here, check this. It is surprisingly relevant.
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/i...unning-kruger/
It made me think of Cheers' Cliff Clavern.
