What about Borders?

[Kumabjorn]

There is a reason Amazon's first retail product was books. Together with music I can't think of anything that is better optimized for online retailing.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

There is a reason Amazon's first retail product was books. Together with music I can't think of anything that is better optimized for online retailing.

Yup!
Bezos saw a business on the brink of disruption and he saw how to use technology to set himself up atop the pile of rubble to come.
As you say, it's no accident that Amazon's second big product line was CDs.
And that DVDs and video games are also a big part of their business. All small, compact, yet reasonably valuable. And, most important, where timely *access* to the product makes up a lot of the value.

Amazon is a technology-driven retailer but their core expertise is really logistics. (Much like WalMart and UPS. I could easily see an Amazon/UPS merger at some point in the future.)

By now they have dry goods logistics down pat and even 70-inch TVs and furniture are a big part of their business. Even more interesting, they are starting to explore perishables like food and groceries.

Lots of lessons there... for those willing to learn.

[BeccaPrice]

What killed Borders was years and years of very bad management and bad decisions. They were the grocery store kings, who figured that if you could sell soup, you could sell books. We didn't stock books, we stocked "product" - interchangeable "product".. I worked for Borders during the "make book" days, when we were supposed to sell every customer - whether it was appropriate or not - on whatever the book of the week was. Hideous. And then there was the Borders executive who didn't think Borders needed an internet presence, because "the internet is just a fad."

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

The Borders a few miles from my home still sits empty. I often drive by it and wonder what chain could possibly use a space like that, that is doing well enough to expand into new markets. My mind draws a blank every time.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'd like to turn one into an aquarium.

You know, as a scuba diver, I've often fantasized about flooding an abandoned shopping mall and swimming thought it. Maybe starting with one store in a mall would be a good start.....


(For the record, I've been diving in the Living Seas aquarium at Walt Disney World, where you can look in at people eating in the restaurant through the underwater glass. It really is a blast. But the shopping mall idea is mine...maybe I should write a story...where the heck is that notebook..... )

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

The Borders a few miles from my home still sits empty. I often drive by it and wonder what chain could possibly use a space like that, that is doing well enough to expand into new markets. My mind draws a blank every time.

Owners and developers need to think outside the box and turn large empty buildings like this into multiple stores and shops - a themed microMall if you will.

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Owners and developers need to think outside the box and turn large empty buildings like this into multiple stores and shops - a themed microMall if you will.

Monkey likes small jungle. Monkey wants to know where steppe begins?

[brianj6]

I'm sorry they're gone!

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by brianj6

There's a Border's around my area in Chicago that's usually full (and I go at off times). I'm sorry to hear they're doing badly.

They're doing more than badly; they're out of business.

[jbcohen]

I would like to see what you all think about this theroy: When technology shifts everyone goes back to zero and past sucessess guaranty nothing. What happended with Borders is simply that technology started to shift on them and they were unable to keep up with the times.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I would like to see what you all think about this theroy: When technology shifts everyone goes back to zero and past sucessess guaranty nothing. What happended with Borders is simply that technology started to shift on them and they were unable to keep up with the times.

Unless that shift is "nuclear war wipes out all technology" or "aliens suddenly transport you to another planet," or "you wake up 100 years in the future" then no.
Technologists adapt to new technologies (and as a technologist myself for decades, I haven't gone back to zero yet...though I have found it hard to keep up at times.)

Bad, or unlucky management, however, can result in any significant technology shift causing any one particular entity to be left essentially at zero.

But I don't get the sense this is what happened with Borders. They seemed to be right on the money with the tech shift, tying with Kobo.
It's just that Amazon and B&N did everything Borders did, both with the technology shift and just with being a book store, way better.
And Amazon did it without even HAVING a book store.

ApK

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'd like to turn one into an aquarium.

My son actually builds and services large aquariums. Haha

www.aquamoon.com

Carol

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I would like to see what you all think about this theroy: When technology shifts everyone goes back to zero and past sucessess guaranty nothing. What happended with Borders is simply that technology started to shift on them and they were unable to keep up with the times.

While this is sometimes true, I don't think that it's always true, and I specifically don't think that it was true in the case of Borders. Mismanagement and vast overexpansion in the '90's (B&N had the overexpansion problem, too) weakened Borders so that they became unable to compete with B&N and Amazon. E-books didn't cause their downfall and would have come too late to save them, although they may help B&N.

But technology shifts all the time, and any company that is 30 years old has dealt with this. But (except as below) existing companies are usually in a better position to capitalize on changes.

Technology has changed a lot since GE was founded, but it has managed to manage the technological change. There has been a lot of change since Apple and MS were founded in the 70's, but both companies have survived, even though they are quite different than they were back then. Even Standard Oil survived the change from whale oil (its original product) to petroleum. For that matter, Amazon managed the transition to e-books; it didn't start as an e-book company, and it wasn't the first to the race, but it has done well, obviously. As has B&N's e-book division. There's no intrinsic reason why Amazon had to move before, say, Borders. In fact, Borders switching to e-books would have been a classic "I'm losing against Amazon and B&N, so I'm going to compete in a new area that will use my expertise." (I.e., what Apple did with the iPod when SJ realized that they could do more than just beat their heads against Windows).

The Exception.
While existing companies can usually deal with technological change, this isn't the case when the change is so profound that their previous skills have no relevance. Even if horse trainers were prescient about the development of the automobile, there was nothing that they could do to compete in this area because none of their skills would translate into manufacturing.

The same thing happened to Kodak. Kodak was basically a chemical company with expertise in film, although they did make a few low-end cameras. When digital cameras made film obsolete, Kodak's business was over. But this wasn't the kind of change that Kodak could have dealt with even if they had seen it coming. They weren't a *real* camera company, and they had no expertise in electronics. But not all old-guard companies were washed away in the flood - higher end camera companies (Canon, Nikon, Olympus) *were* able to compete in the digital area because their expertise concerning lenses and light still counted...they just needed to get the electronics from someone else [Canon and Nikon are best thought of as lens manufacturers who happen to sell cameras]. But they had always gotten the film from others, too. Electronic companies (Sony, Panasonic) were able to use their electronics background to get into the market, although for their better products they had to rely on old-school camera [lens] manufacturers for their products - I think Sony usesZeiss lenses and Panasonic uses Leica.

TL;DR

You can't generalize about technological change...

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Even Standard Oil survived the change from whale oil (its original product) to petroleum.

Holy Melville, Batman! I did not know that. That gives me hope that they (SO/Esso/Exxon) will adapt to new energy sources, and not try to sabotage any move away from petroleum.

The same thing happened to Kodak. Kodak was basically a chemical company with expertise in film, although they did make a few low-end cameras. When digital cameras made film obsolete, Kodak's business was over.

It should be noted that Kodak is still in pretty good shape in the document imaging business. They make scanners and imaging software.
They also continue to make film, including microfilm, which is, surprisingly, used quite a bit still.
(I recently told a Kodak software rep that they should partner with Google to make browser-integrated capture software...they could call it Kodachrome! )

ApK

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by ApK

(I recently told a Kodak software rep that they should partner with Google to make browser-integrated capture software...they could call it Kodachrome! )

ApK

I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So mama don't take my Kodachrome away



Carol