The only time in the last decade I’ve bought something other than wrapping paper from Waterstone’s was when last winter’s snow prevented my Amazon order showing up in time for Christmas. Two hardbacks cost me a whopping £22 more than I had paid online. Short of forking out £50,000 for a super-injunction I can’t imagine a less satisfying transaction.
Last Friday’s news that the chain has been bought by one of Russia’s poorer oligarchs was greeted rapturously by the book industry; its new managing director James Daunt (founder of the upmarket book chain) hailed as a messiah with excellent taste in bookshelves. But the notion that this takeover is going to provide any more than temporary relief from Waterstone’s problems is wishful thinking in the extreme.
The hope is that Mamut’s milions and Daunt’s expertise can revitalise a business that has suffered from ineffectual management and lack of vision. Over the years, Waterstone’s massive losses have been variously blamed on:
1) The ineptitude of its booksellers
2) The incompetence of its supply system
3) Its embarrassing rebranding
4) Failing to engage with local communities
5) Promoting celebrity memoirs over more literary fare
6) Its three for two offers starting a trend for discounting
Some of these accusations (the disaster of the Hub, for instance) are legitimate; others (the intelligence of its staff) are a tad unfair.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in