burningprophets's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/301868/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/129413-is-borders-cutting-inventory-too-much?source=feed#comment-454773 454773
-10.8%: Comp-store decline of superstores, 2008

-8.2%: Comp-store decline of books, 2008

$166.5 million: Reduction in book inventory, 2008

~from PW, "Borders Books by the Numbers"

But don't worry: Marshall is just going to whip the stores with threats, write-ups, and terminations until ALL we are selling are the new "make" books. Nothing else matters besides selling "City of Thieves" and "The Middle Place"; sales of these titles are the only measurement by which the stores are now judged.


On Apr 04 07:15 PM User 283977 wrote:

> This is a classic example of what is wrong with executive management
> teams in many companies today. The discussion focuses entirely on
> the economic benefits of reducing inventory costs which results in
> cash flow increases. In other words, they want to reduce the average
> shelf time for their titles. They also want to reduce their order
> cycle times, and even mention the business buzz term "just in time"
> inventory system. This all sounds wonderful… but what is glaringly
> missing from the discussion is what do the Borders customers think
> of these changes?
>
> What are the customer centric consequences of reducing in-store inventories
> to mostly best selling titles? If less traffic enters the store,
> how much impulse buying will be reduced? Many people don't go into
> a books store to purchase a specific title, they go in to browse,
> they go in to look at shelves of books in specific areas. Many of
> the more expensive books carried by book stores do not blow off the
> shelves. My guess is that the average profit per sold title would
> drop as a result of only carrying a limited selection of "best sellers".
> If I can't get my hand on the title today, why not just buy it on
> Amazon?
>
> Just in time supply systems works well in manufacturing because you
> know how many units you plan to build. With the exception of books
> such as the Harry Potter series, its very difficult to know the demand
> for most book titles in advance, so you run the risk of missing a
> portion of the first wave of sales for a surprise best seller. The
> second goal of reducing the shelf time for titles means they intend
> to mostly carry books that inherently move rapidly. That pretty much
> eliminates a good portion of highly expensive, highly profitable
> titles that move slower, and who's sales are highly dependent on
> the presence of a substantial number of IN-STORE titles in the same
> subject area.
>
> Amazon is killing these guys with inventory. The challenge to Borders
> and Barnes & Noble is to INCREASE store traffic. They need to
> increase the number of eyes and wallets in the store. Local stores
> have huge advantages over Amazon because of zero shipping costs,
> the ability to hold and touch the books, the ability to make an impulse
> purchase and take it home NOW, and the presence of knowledgeable
> and personable sales staff. Having a great snack bar with comfortable
> seating and low priced goodies also brings people in the store, and
> that is the name of the business in retail sales. Add to that an
> inventory of books oriented to needs and wants in their selling area,
> and stores designed to increase social meetings in particular subject
> areas and you have a business strategy oriented towards maximizing
> customer satisfaction. If you manage to maximizing customer satisfaction
> in each selling area, profitability will increase. Cutting inventories
> is an inherently defensive business strategy and will very likely
> result in a spiral of lost customers and ultimate bankruptcy.
>
> I used to spend a lot of money in Borders on technical books. They
> reduced their inventories, and as a result, I have not been in a
> Borders for quite some time.]]> Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:21:14 -0400
-10.8%: Comp-store decline of superstores, 2008

-8.2%: Comp-store decline of books, 2008

$166.5 million: Reduction in book inventory, 2008

~from PW, "Borders Books by the Numbers"

But don't worry: Marshall is just going to whip the stores with threats, write-ups, and terminations until ALL we are selling are the new "make" books. Nothing else matters besides selling "City of Thieves" and "The Middle Place"; sales of these titles are the only measurement by which the stores are now judged.


On Apr 04 07:15 PM User 283977 wrote:

> This is a classic example of what is wrong with executive management
> teams in many companies today. The discussion focuses entirely on
> the economic benefits of reducing inventory costs which results in
> cash flow increases. In other words, they want to reduce the average
> shelf time for their titles. They also want to reduce their order
> cycle times, and even mention the business buzz term "just in time"
> inventory system. This all sounds wonderful… but what is glaringly
> missing from the discussion is what do the Borders customers think
> of these changes?
>
> What are the customer centric consequences of reducing in-store inventories
> to mostly best selling titles? If less traffic enters the store,
> how much impulse buying will be reduced? Many people don't go into
> a books store to purchase a specific title, they go in to browse,
> they go in to look at shelves of books in specific areas. Many of
> the more expensive books carried by book stores do not blow off the
> shelves. My guess is that the average profit per sold title would
> drop as a result of only carrying a limited selection of "best sellers".
> If I can't get my hand on the title today, why not just buy it on
> Amazon?
>
> Just in time supply systems works well in manufacturing because you
> know how many units you plan to build. With the exception of books
> such as the Harry Potter series, its very difficult to know the demand
> for most book titles in advance, so you run the risk of missing a
> portion of the first wave of sales for a surprise best seller. The
> second goal of reducing the shelf time for titles means they intend
> to mostly carry books that inherently move rapidly. That pretty much
> eliminates a good portion of highly expensive, highly profitable
> titles that move slower, and who's sales are highly dependent on
> the presence of a substantial number of IN-STORE titles in the same
> subject area.
>
> Amazon is killing these guys with inventory. The challenge to Borders
> and Barnes & Noble is to INCREASE store traffic. They need to
> increase the number of eyes and wallets in the store. Local stores
> have huge advantages over Amazon because of zero shipping costs,
> the ability to hold and touch the books, the ability to make an impulse
> purchase and take it home NOW, and the presence of knowledgeable
> and personable sales staff. Having a great snack bar with comfortable
> seating and low priced goodies also brings people in the store, and
> that is the name of the business in retail sales. Add to that an
> inventory of books oriented to needs and wants in their selling area,
> and stores designed to increase social meetings in particular subject
> areas and you have a business strategy oriented towards maximizing
> customer satisfaction. If you manage to maximizing customer satisfaction
> in each selling area, profitability will increase. Cutting inventories
> is an inherently defensive business strategy and will very likely
> result in a spiral of lost customers and ultimate bankruptcy.
>
> I used to spend a lot of money in Borders on technical books. They
> reduced their inventories, and as a result, I have not been in a
> Borders for quite some time.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/111083-borders-alternate-model-makes-sense?source=feed#comment-333643 333643 Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:31:24 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/108719-borders-ceo-jones-not-responsible-for-sins-of-the-previous-management?source=feed#comment-322213 322213
Twisted logic from you. Why would you believe in the success of a company that employed such people? Your post lacks content; just supposition, and judgment of other posters' content. Write your own bull opinion. Waiting to hear it.]]> Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:17:31 -0500
Twisted logic from you. Why would you believe in the success of a company that employed such people? Your post lacks content; just supposition, and judgment of other posters' content. Write your own bull opinion. Waiting to hear it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/108719-borders-ceo-jones-not-responsible-for-sins-of-the-previous-management?source=feed#comment-320255 320255 Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:39:27 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/98837-borders-interview-with-ceo-george-jones?source=feed#comment-310339 310339
i guess that means that the suspension of the company match on my 401(k) is "permanent". funny, we were all told it would be "reviewed on a quarterly basis". in fact, they posted a notice about the "continuation of the suspension" after the second quarter.

well, at least i don't have to wait till next week to find out what the outcome of the next "review" will be--now i know it's all just blowing smoke...]]> Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:14:27 -0500
i guess that means that the suspension of the company match on my 401(k) is "permanent". funny, we were all told it would be "reviewed on a quarterly basis". in fact, they posted a notice about the "continuation of the suspension" after the second quarter.

well, at least i don't have to wait till next week to find out what the outcome of the next "review" will be--now i know it's all just blowing smoke...]]>