Blog Archives
No surprise on Borders
Janine Melnitz: You’re very handy, I can tell. I bet you like to read a lot, too.
Dr. Egon Spengler: Print is dead.
-Ghostbusters, 1984
By now, you have heard that the nation’s second-largest retail book chain is shutting its doors. Borders was already bankrupt, but was hoping for a reprieve. It didn’t come.
In some ways, this story has been one long in the making. Borders failed to evolve with the times. The stores were big (bigger than Barnes and Noble in most cases) and were getting cut by Walmart and Amazon. The later two discounted books, while Borders sat idly by.
The biggest non-move was Borders slow-to-the-jump effort into the tablet market. Think about it. While Barnes and Noble unleashed the Nook in 2009 and Amazon offered up the Kindle in 2007, Borders partnered with e-reader maker Kobo in 2010. According to VentureBeat.com, Kindle estimates from 2010 projected that the company sold more than 8 million units in 2010. Amazon also said late last year that it held around 70 percent of the e-book market, while Barnes and Noble said the Nook had 20 percent of the e-book market late in 2010. That leaves only 10 percent for other e-readers, like Kobo.
The bottom line is that, with any business, you need to adapt. You can’t settle on early success because there is always someone waiting to overtake you. In this case, Borders was passed by the brick-and-mortar Barnes and Noble, and Amazon’s ability to offer more for less online.
What are your thoughts on Borders closing? Let me know in the comments.
What’s in a name… and does it really matter?
“In order to really create a new category of devices, those devices are going to have to be far better at doing some key tasks. We think we’ve got the goods. We think we’ve done it.” -Steve Jobs, Jan. 27, 2010
On Wednesday, Jan. 27, Apple unveiled to the world its long awaited tablet, calling it the iPad. The device has a nearly ten inch touch screen, is a half-inch thick, weighs 1.5 pounds and comes with 16, 32 or 64 gigabytes of flash memory storage. It comes with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connectivity built in. The battery will last 10 hours and can sit for a month on standby without needing a charge (..and my head just exploded).
Since the announcement, the reaction has been all over the map as to the product itself AND the name. Some are panning the name, while others done mind it. The day of the announcement, I was on Twitter and getting a sample of people’s thoughts. I saw that my buddy @mikinzie said this:
“Better names for the iPad? iNote, iDoc, iTab, iBook….but the iPad? C’mon Stevie. You should know branding by now..”
I replied to her, saying it didn’t really matter what is was called, she would buy it. Her reply:
“Heck yes, I’d buy it if I didn’t need to go rob a bank first!”
Regardless of what Apple has named its tablet, it is going to sell a TON of units. When first released in 2001, Apple sold 125,000 iPods. During the period from January 2004 to January 2005, the high rate of sales caused its U.S. market share to increase from 31% to 65%. People scratched their heads a bit when the iPod first came out, but now it seems like everyone has one. In my opinion, Apple could have named the iPad the iScreen and it would be a hit. I didn’t seem the same furor over Amazon’s “Kindle.”
So, does it really matter what Apple named the iPad? And if it does, will sales be affected? Chime in!
