Oh. Sorry about that, then. In that case:
I was speaking more from the viewpoint shared by some authors I know than from that of the law or Barnes & Noble. The authors wanted people to buy their books; B&N seems to be accepting people reading them rather than buying as an acceptable substitute.
Not just accepting customers reading without buying, B&N encourages it. They have big comfy chairs, tables, employees are told not disturb patrons, etc. Naturally this results in fewer people actually buying the books. As B&N shows no signs of changing its practices, B&N patrons won’t change theirs. If few sales result from B&N distribution, why do publishers continue to send them books? Why haven’t the authors spoken to their publishers on this matter? Why haven’t publishers and authors come up with some incentive to either buy the books, or buy them from a non B&N source?
The patrons are breaking no laws, nor violating any store policies. The blame lies with B&N, with publishers for accepting the practices of B&N, and with authors for not working together in order to change things.
And these same morons don’t damage merchandise to the point of being unsellable in other stores? If B&N didn’t allow reading without buying, he wouldnn’t have left greasy fingerprints on books while trying to find the title he wanted? He wouldn’t have left fingerprints on the book while doing a quick flip through to be sure it contained the information he wanted and that the writing was of acceptable quality?
It means you can complain to Barnes and Nobel, perhapse even point out to them that their policy means you can’t buy the book that you want, or ask for a substantial price cut because the book is now second hand. Sure bitch about the person who messes up a book, but acknowledge that it is up to Barnes and Nobel what they allow to happen in their shops. Perhapse start to consider that Barnes and Nobel sells both new and second hand books at the same price, the books may not have been sold before but many have been handled as much as library books.
My point was that this hypothetical person’s rude, inconsiderate behavior is not excused by the fact that B&N allows it.
B&N may allow it, but I’d feel creepy about doing it.
I agree with that completely. Bbut the hypothetical chap isn’t treating B&N like a library so is quite some way from the OP’s action.
I agree with this. And I would recommend going to the nearest B&N, taking lots of magazines and books off the shelves, spilling coffee on them and covering them with oily fingerprints and greasy residue while dogearing them and cracking the spines, then picking out the ones you want to buy and then going to your local independent bookshop and purchasing them.
No Reading On A Toilet
I take some of the forensics students to B&N to find books/scripts (normally no more than one or two people besides myself). Every. Single. Time. We have had to plop down on the floor- why? Because every table has one, ONE, man spread out with his coffee and book and paper and ant farm and George Foreman Grill. We must sit on the floor to pick out the books because some people decided to use the book store as a library. (And I know they are sitting their READING the unbought book because, an hour later when we leave, they are still there grillin’** away).
**Ok, maybe they aren’t grilling, but maybe- just maybe- a free hot dog would woo me.
My point was that their greasy prints rendering a book unsellable would happen in book stores that don’t allow reading. Their greasy prints are in no way due to B&N’s policies.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing, but it’s something I wouldn’t personally do if only because I don’t think a cup of coffee entitles me to park my butt in a seat more than a minute or so.
I would feel extremely cheap if I did what you did, astro. That’s my hang-up, not yours. As others have said, it’s part of BN’s business model, so have at it.
I’d like to point out that I have no problem buying a dog-eared book with greasy fingerprints on it. I’m probably just going to drop it in the bathtub anway. The only reason I’d buy a book new is that I couldn’t find it used, and I’m all for greasy books if thats the price I pay for having a bookstore to park myself at while I have a few hours to kill on a rainy afternoon.
On the impact on author royalties. I don’t have a big enough book budget that I can always justify buying a book on Amazon because a brief review sounds intriguing. Most of the time it’s taking a thorough look at book that persuades me to make a purchase whether at an independent, B&N, or Amazon.
I’ve only ever been to a Barnes and Noble once and it’s not a place I’d like to spend more than ten minutes. But if someone wants to sit there all day and read one of their books, the books that belong to Barnes and Noble, and that Barnes and Noble doesn’t mind them reading, I have no judgement to make about it.
I bought the Tao te Ching there and I never read it. Really, if someone read it before I bought it, that would be better. That way the trees wouldn’t be wasted. If nobody read it before I bought it, then my six dollars really went down the tubes. If I threw it out the car window the next time I was at the liquor store, and then someone found it and read it, would someone be getting ripped off then?
I think the reason publishers and authors really don’t give a crap is that they do believe in gving out samples. They give out samples like crazy. I am tangentially connected to the publishing industry and I have advanced reading copies and regular free copies all over the place here. To make things extra complicated, I hardly ever read them either. Then I give them to the Salvation Army and someone buys them and the author sees zippo. Someone could go downtown and yell at all the drunks at the Sally Ann on behalf of Vince Flynn because they’re sitting pretty on his dime over there.
My view of it is that Barnes and Noble would put a live sex show in the store if they thought it was going to sell more book, and they’d take out the very shelves if they thought it would improve traffic flow towards the impulse buys. They know how to sell more books. They have experts on the case. So anything they do for more than 3 months, it’s because it worked to sell more books. Otherwise they’d change it. So if they let people read there all day, it’s good down the line for everyone trying to make money from books, including the author.
I avoid reading too much of a single item, but I sometimes look at quite a few possible purchases. And I never soil a book, or open it really wide. It’s not like a library to me, but they should at least let you see if you really want to buy a book, considering how expensive new books are. In the end, they usually end up with a couple of purchases a month. If I couldn’t browse, I probably wouldn’t go there.
You’ve made a faulty assumption. B&N cares about profit, whether that profit comes from book sales is irrelevant. They sell music. Most stores contain a Starbucks. If a store sells only five books in a month, but makes a sizable profit from music sales, and their cut from Starbucks, they consider it a good month. If they sell five books in a year but make a good profit from music and Starbucks, they consider it a good year.
Not if Barnes and Noble isn’t trying to make a significant profit from the books.
Hmmm… interesting, I wondered how that model worked. Their CDs are rarely discounted. My daughter spends about 60 a month on various esoteric CDs that aren't readily available elsewhere (which I pay for), I also have a B&N 10% off card ( cost = 30.00) and so do most of the people buying food and books. Still it’s a BIG store. I’m amazed that music sales and food will do all that. People do seem to be buying a fair number of books, but the Starbucks is always hopping in there.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve bought books with dog-eared pages, broken spines, pencil or pen marks, and a variety of stains.
But, as you suggest, such books were always purchased used. If i’m paying new-book prices, i want new-book condition.
This is standard practice at any bookstore. It’s one of the (few) perks of being a book slave.
Half the books I check out from the library are already coming apart at their bindings…and these are mostly hardback. The library also frequently doesn’t stock very new books, or may have only a few copies that are all checked out.
That being said, I wouldn’t feel comfortable doing what the OP does, either. I’ll pick up a book and read a chapter or two, but if it grabs me I’ll typically buy it and take it home. But, as others have pointed out, Barnes & Noble openly encourages these practices with their business model; they’re in business to sell coffee and music, and the occasional book sale (as often as not spurred on by an author reading) is merange, not filling. This is, more than anything, the reason other chains and many local bookstores have choked up and died; they rely exclusively on selling print, a commodity that is progressively being deflated, my personal, substantial contributions to the literary economy aside. It’s a shame, particularly in regard to used bookstores (which are dying off in LA like well-endowed blondes in a Friday the 13[sup]th[/sup] sequel) but that’s the lumps.
Stranger