A really interesting article that shows why Barnes and Noble is not Blockbuster
I don't disagree that print media is dying a slow, painful death. I stopped in a local Border's (BGP) the other day and the place was a disaster. Everything was laid out poorly. There was very few consumers in there. Tons of things were on clearance sale. It just seemed like a ghost town.
Barnes and Noble (BKS) is better than Borders, but the many still believe that it is in big trouble as a result of industry trends.
As many have said, eBooks are likely the way that the industry is headed. I just pre-ordered the new Amazon Kindle myself. I expect it to arrive some time in September, at which time I doubt that I will ever purchase a paper copy of a book again.
I just came across a really interesting article about Barnes and Noble. In it, the author, Geoff Gannon talks about his reason for buying stock in the company at $15/share. I don't think that there's enough of a margin of safety in terms of liquidation value here for me to pick this stock in CAPS, let alone in real life, but the author's thesis that two major investors who control the majority of the company's shares will pay a premium to obtain shares from other shareholders to get enough stock to support their bids for the company is an interesting one.
Print Is Dead: So Why Am I Buying Barnes & Noble Stock?
I'd love to hear others thoughts on Barnes and Noble or eBooks in general. Do you have a Kindle, an iPad, or a Nook? Do you like them?
I personally went with the Kindle because it's smaller than the iPad, its battery lasts longer, it isn't back-lit (I stare at enough monitors all day and I'd like to be able to read it in the sun), its battery charge supposedly lasts for a month, and it only costs $139 versus five hundo for the Pad. I already have an iPhone and a laptop if I want to surf the web or watch movies, why do I need a third thing in the middle of those two to do that. I just want to be able to read books more cheaply and easily than I am able to right now.