I’d rather support an independent, local bookshop. Especially if it has an old, dusty secondhand section. Borders et al have no soul and only seen to stock celebrity autobiographys and dreadful chicklit in smaller stores. I’m glad to see them go!

I think this is sad news, and would be interested in comments. Personally, I usually buy online if there is a specific book that I want, but I much prefer browsing and looking to see which new books are about in a bookshop rather than from Amazon or wherever.

Me too, on both counts. And this, I suspect, is why bookshops are finding it harder to stay afloat. As MsKitton says, the ones I’ll really miss are the dusty old secondhand shops. You just never know what they might be hiding…

I’m not surprised they went under. There used to be a nice little Borders at Star City in Birmingham, a mall/entertainment complex by the M6. I’d go there with my wife & we’d start off with tapas at La Tasca, then down to Borders for coffee & a cake, & browse round the shelves to find something we liked, to read & discuss over our coffees. Once suitably energised, we’d head up to the cinema to watch a film. Then they closed that branch. I protested about this- we could get to Star City easily, there was good car parking, and it fit well with our habits. If we wanted to go to Borders now, we’d have to go into the city centre. Birmingham city centre is a nightmare to get to by comparison. The parking costs a fortune, the bus services on a Saturday suck, especially on match days, and it’s Bedlam with the crowds. Plus, the city centre store though impressive competes with 2 huge Waterstones branches. What kind of idiot makes the decision to close a small but popular store in favour of a costly city centre one that’s a palaver to get to? I just think it’s symptomatic of bad management. They should have looked for the niches where they were offering something unique, but instead tried to be exactly like their established competitors. Stupid.

No one should be surprised, this company had no marketing concept at all!

If this was Waterstone’s, I’d be devastated. I love that place. But Borders is just a cheap copy, so I’m not really bothered.

Nicola, Waterstones is also a cheap copy of Waterstones these days.

I’d miss the 3 for 2 though.

I find either Bookfinder.com or Ebay are useful for finding books.

Oh, and if anyone does want to buy online in the UK, Book Brain is quite good for comparing prices.

They did not pay me to say that.

Good fucking riddance. They had no love of books, only a desire to be shifting units. They could have been flogging dog food for all they cared.

No, the likes of Tim Worstall and his fellow right-wing libertarians who can’t think beyond money may not like it but I’d rather support an independent. And you know what, given that they really cherish reading they produce better results than just celebrity shite.

I spend hours browsing in book shops – I love the tactile sensation of new books* – but then buy them from Amazon. I read a lot but I’m patient so I’ll wait a few days for free postage.

I like secondhand book stores though. Amazon is great for finding books you are looking for but you don’t get the sudden surprise of unexpectedly stumbling on something amazing like Bernard Wolfe’s ‘Limbo’ or Nigel Kneale’s ‘Tomato Cain & Other Stories’.

* I used to even like the *smell* of Penguin books but their paper is cheep and nasty now.

I saw the owner of Boarders interviewed on the TV once.

I thought it was a smug, arrogant fucker, who probably was not quite as clever as the he thought he was. This rather confirms my suspicions.

Damn. Their magazine selection is much better than WH Smiths.

I don’t like the Glasgow Borders so never used it much. Have you ever tried ordering a book from Waterstone’s? You wait ages to hear if it’s in and when you contact them you find they’ve put it on the public shelves. Amazon has more stock, is cheaper and quicker. I don’t need to browse books physically, I’m fine doing it on line which I found surprising at first.

Borders in Oxford Street had an amazing magazine section – the only high street shop you could browse totally obscure samizdat anarchist magazines you can’t believe are still going.

When Borders opened at the motorway interchange near Leicester, it was fantastic – the CD section had virtually everything in the ECM catalogue, for example (even difficult obscurities like the Evan Parker Electro-Acoustic Ensemble). Progressively, they’ve got rid of all the interesting and quirky stock (good news for me, as I’ve bought a fair proportion of it at cut price in their nearly everlasting sales), to the extent that these days their book selection is not much better than W H Smith, and their CD selection is restricted to major label budget titles, with about half the floor space now taken up by games and Paperchase. I won’t miss them.

Topping & Co. in Ely is what an enthusiast’s bookshop should be – every time I’m in there I find things that I didn’t know existed, or that I didn’t know were still in print. They also have a branch in Bath.

Far and away the best bookshop in London, with the widest range of books on display, is Daunt Books on Marylebone High Street. Some other branches too, though I have not been to those myself.

Very nice place to browse.

http://www.dauntbooks.co.uk/shops.asp?TAG=&CID=

And of course only troll/bot Sally could gloat over the failure of what was really not a bad chain. How charming.

Daunt is lovely to browse in, but it is by no means true that it has ‘the widest range of books on display’ of all bookshops in the capital.

the only good thing about Borders was the excellent range of magazines. Its staff knew nothing about books, the shelves were as untidy as those of a charity bookshop; it had a relatively wide range but only because its premises were so cavernous; more or less everything was overpriced unless you were willing to trawl very unfriendly discount racks.

It was a bad chain – not only were the shops in general not particularly good, but it was only started over here in order to try to squeeze Waterstones out of the market.

“No, the likes of Tim Worstall and his fellow right-wing libertarians who can’t think beyond money may not like it but I’d rather support an independent.”

Where did that come from? It’s exactly people like me who support your right to do anything you damn well want with your money: you want to shop at an independent then you go right ahead.

Why on earth would you think that a free marketeer would oppose your making choices in a free market?

As to Borders: technological change. Wouldn’t be at all surprised to see others go as well.

@18 – perhaps not the widest range, but the most interesting range

Yes, I think this is a shame too. IMO Borders was the best of the major chain bookstores, outstripping Waterstones by some distance. Of course, I’m as much to blame as anyone else, as I buy most books online (actually I buy most in independent second-hand bookshops, but I buy more online than at chain bookshops). But my general preferences are obviously different from the choices I make in a marketplace – another reason why free markets are flawed (unless Tim Worstall is going to advance some form of false consciousness argument here saying that the choices I make in a marketplace are more reflective of my true preferences than what I actually want!).

“(unless Tim Worstall is going to advance some form of false consciousness argument here saying that the choices I make in a marketplace are more reflective of my true preferences than what I actually want!).”

Well, yes, I am actually. It’s the concept of “revealed preferences”.

What people say about what they’d like or would do is rather less important than what they actually go out and do.

As an example, many say they’d be happy to pay higher taxes. Tens of percents of the population in fact when people go around with a clipboard asking them.

But the last time I checked the figures (2006 I think) there were in fact only 5 people who had paid extra taxes that year and four of those were dead.

In short, pay less attention to what people say and more to what they do.

That’s a terrible example. Clearly those who said they’d pay higher taxes meant that they would do so on the condition that others would pay higher taxes too, not that they would do so unilaterally.

Your model doesn’t allow for the possibility that people would like to have something available without necessarily using it. I’m not proposing this as policy, but it would be a coherent argument to say that “I buy books online most of the time, but I would like Borders to be subsidised out of my taxes so that it’s open for business should I ever wish to use it”. Your argument is the crudest form of a false consciousness argument I’ve ever heard.

“the last time I checked the figures (2006 I think) there were in fact only 5 people who had paid extra taxes that year”

So you’ve checked all the tax returns, accounts, receipts and bank statements for every single Self Assessment taxpayer for the year 2006?

Blimey.

I should also perhaps add that a free market makes certain choices for me by framing decisions in a particular context. It creates different rational choices than would exist in a more deliberative, democratic framework. I could have shopped more at Borders, but found it shut at exactly the same point in history because others didn’t follow my lead. Knowing that that is possible, I’m likely to choose cheaper options, (as the choice seems to be between paying less and seeing Borders shut, and paying more and seeing Borders shut; paying more and Borders staying open seems unlikely when I make my choice as an individual with little power) and so are others who might share my position but be prevented by the free market from exercising the choice they would like to exercise.

Does this relate to fallout from Sarah Palin’s recent book signing event at Border’s in Ohio?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk&feature=fvst

There’s only one “revealed preference” if I prefer to shop somewhere, but then it closes down because not enough other people also prefer to shop there – and that’s the overall preference of everyone else put together.

In the example of someone who prefers shopping at Borders and will seek out a Borders rather than go in a different bookstore, they now won’t shop at Borders because a decision has been made for them.

Now, in the case of Borders, overall it’s not that big a deal – it’s not a niche market, so people have other options. In a niche market, however (under free market conditions), if there is not much demand for a service, then that service will be few and far between or non-existent for the people who do want to use that service.

And I think that would be a huge shame in a lot of cases (though obviously you can’t prop everything up).

“Clearly those who said they’d pay higher taxes meant that they would do so on the condition that others would pay higher taxes too, not that they would do so unilaterally.”

No, the question usually asked is along the lines of “Would you be willing to pay more taxes for a better NHS/education system/more international aid?”.

It is not asked as “would you be willing to pay more taxes if everyone else did?”

“but it would be a coherent argument to say that “I buy books online most of the time, but I would like Borders to be subsidised out of my taxes so that it’s open for business should I ever wish to use it”.”

No it wouldn’t. Why bring the tax system into it at all? Coherence would be “I don’t buy much at Borders but I like the fact that it’s there which is why I go in and slip a fiver into the till now and then.”

An alterative coherent statement would be “I buy books online most of the time, but I would like Borders to be subsidised out of everyone else’s taxes so that it’s open for business should I ever wish to use it” but that’s, while coherent, not a statement likely to garner a great deal of support.

“So you’ve checked all the tax returns, accounts, receipts and bank statements for every single Self Assessment taxpayer for the year 2006? ”

Most droll. No, The Treasury keeps statistics on how many people make voluntary donations to the Taxman. And you can too if you’d like! Simply send your cheque to “The Accountant”, 2 Horse Guards Road, London, SW1.

They’ll even send you a thank you letter.

“I should also perhaps add that a free market makes certain choices for me by framing decisions in a particular context. It creates different rational choices than would exist in a more deliberative, democratic framework.”

Erm, if not enough people share your predeliction for Borders existing then how is a “more democratic framework” going to help? Only 8% of the Great British Public buy a book each year so how are you going to get 51% support for subsidies to bookshops?

“In a niche market, however (under free market conditions), if there is not much demand for a service, then that service will be few and far”

So a service that not many people want is provided by not many people? And the problem with this is?

Most droll. No.

Well, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and all that, Timmeh. But I’m glad you admit you’re talking out of your hat!

“It is not asked as “would you be willing to pay more taxes if everyone else did?””

You can’t seriously be suggesting that people believe they are being asked if they personally would pay higher taxes while every other person’s taxes in the UK were kept the same/lower.

I’m happy to compromise on “our” taxes rather than “my” or “everyone else’s” taxes if you feel that makes the statement more coherent. The point is that often people would like to exercise a choice that’s contingent on other people doing likewise. Slipping a fiver into the till at Borders now and then (essentially what I’m doing if I buy a book there rather than through Amazon does not guarantee that other people will do the same; support through an instrument like taxation would, which is why I brought it up. (Again, I’m not proposing that we prop Borders up; it’s just an example.)

“if not enough people share your predeliction for Borders existing then how is a “more democratic framework” going to help? Only 8% of the Great British Public buy a book each year so how are you going to get 51% support for subsidies to bookshops?”

If not enough people share my predilection for Borders existing then it won’t help. But it’s entirely possible that, like me, there are enough people who rarely or never shop there who want Borders to exist (perhaps they want it to be there just in case, or they have relatives or friends who use it). A purely market-based framework can’t tell us the answer to that, but a deliberative framework could. Your argument seems to be that if they really wanted it to be there, they’d use it, which I’ve shown is not necessarily true.

Now, I’ll repeat that I’m not proposing that we prop Borders up. I’m just using it as an example to make a point.

“In a niche market, however (under free market conditions), if there is not much demand for a service, then that service will be few and far”

So a service that not many people want is provided by not many people? And the problem with this is?

**

No problem at all, Tim.

I was merely postulating what a fun, erudite and culturally interesting world we’ll all live in when market forces dictate everything. God I love clone towns.

“The point is that often people would like to exercise a choice that’s contingent on other people doing likewise. ”

Great, have fun. That’s what the Women’s Institute, the Scouts, coffee mornings, the Great British Pub and all the rest of civil society are about. People do indede like doing things when others also do them. Not much fun in a solo Dib Dib Dib after all.

But what’s that got to do with you using the monopoly of violence we afford the State to insist that I pay for your desires?

“I was merely postulating what a fun, erudite and culturally interesting world we’ll all live in when market forces dictate everything.”

Having lived for a number of years in the rubble of a society (Russia) where market forces were specifically and deliberately excluded from influencing let alone dictating anything I think you’ll find that the fun, erudition and cultural excitement come from the market not its exclusion.

#32

It might be what all those things are for, but for some of us it’s also what the state is for. And it also suggests that there might be better ways of running things than liberal capitalism, which as I’ve suggested restricts people to a particular set of choices (a soft option might be a society based on co-operative values, for example, which would develop a further range of choices).

“And it also suggests that there might be better ways of running things than liberal capitalism, which as I’ve suggested restricts people to a particular set of choices”

More or fewer choices than those available under the tyranny of the majority which is what a “truly democratic” society would be?

For example, under liberal capitalism there are capitalist forms of organisation: as there are also co operative, mutual, not for profit, State owned and run and so on.

Which other system would offer more choice than this?

In most areas you don’t have the state competing directly with private companies and co-ops, mutuals etc, and in any case the choice under liberal capitalism is illusory, because it’s those with capital who have the power. Democratic socialism might mean that in the last resort, power resides with the majority, but that’s better than in liberal capitalism where power resides with a small, wealthy minority.

I suspect at this point our views may be irreconcilable ;p

“Having lived for a number of years in the rubble of a society (Russia) where market forces were specifically and deliberately excluded from influencing let alone dictating anything I think you’ll find that the fun, erudition and cultural excitement come from the market not its exclusion.”

Oh yes, sorry, I forgot. Not wanting market forces to dictate absolutely everything is exactly the same as Soviet Communism.

“Oh yes, sorry, I forgot. Not wanting market forces to dictate absolutely everything is exactly the same as Soviet Communism.”

Err, no, allow me to correct that for you:

“Oh yes, sorry, I forgot. Not wanting market forces to dictate absolutely anything is exactly the same as Soviet Communism.”

In this society we have, this liberal capitalism, market forces do not dictate absolutely anything. They don’t even determine most things.

See civil society above.

There’s a place for the market. We might disagree on where those are: but denying that there is any place for markets is exactly what does lead to the hellhole of Soviet Communism.

Timmy troll “In this society we have, this liberal capitalism, market forces do not dictate absolutely anything. They don’t even determine most things.”

Bullshit.

But then most of what you say stinks of the stuff.

Do you understand sarcasm, Tim?

“does anyone have suggestions about the best places or sites to discover new books?”

A good independent is usually best – most will have a fairly diverse stock, even the ones that don’t do second hand books. Though if you can’t find one of those were you live, the internets is probably better than chain bookshops.

Well, my local Books Etc is closing down, and I got two Jack Aubrey novels there to-day for £6.40 which is great. But I only really buy books I expect to read more than once, so a bookshop’s stock has to pass that test even before it gets to “why don’t I use abebooks.com” which is where any independent local bookshop that wants to survive will sell me a copy if it can, and I have the consolation of knowing I couldn’t have bought it cheaper elsewhere.

And if I really want to browse and perhaps buy up to £50-worth of DTF delights, my Freedom Pass will take me to the Charing Cross Road and Foyle’s…

“does anyone have suggestions about the best places or sites to discover new books?”

It’ll probably be no help at all, but, “the one in Notting Hill that’s closest to the station“. For £5 I got a veritable armful – sex, drugs and Primo Levi.