Blockbuster - Another High St store in administration
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
BoRED S2upid said:
Amazon takes another scalp!
To be fair I think the reality is that they've been given another scalp rather than taken one. This was yet another hideously badly run business saddled with massive debt.JonRB said:
I can't say I'm in the least bit surprised.
Blockbuster's entire business model is pay-per-view on demand films. The physical media is just a storage & transport medium to allow that. You can now do that just as easily with streaming over the internet as NetFlix / LoveFilm / Sky On Demand have demonstrated. So what is the need for expensive bricks & mortar buildings with all the staff, rent and business rates that entails?
Quite frankly it's amazing they have lasted as long as they have.
I think it's a shame, as I have one of these at an out of town location which is pretty close to my house. I use it to rent DVD's and blue rays, I recently got a pre-owned Xbox 360 accessory there and I also buy my video games there (since they tend to be price fixed anyway, and blockbuster opens for midnight releases, and it's local).Blockbuster's entire business model is pay-per-view on demand films. The physical media is just a storage & transport medium to allow that. You can now do that just as easily with streaming over the internet as NetFlix / LoveFilm / Sky On Demand have demonstrated. So what is the need for expensive bricks & mortar buildings with all the staff, rent and business rates that entails?
Quite frankly it's amazing they have lasted as long as they have.
Edited by JonRB on Wednesday 16th January 15:26
Will be a shame to lose that shop, but not a real surprise. It was advertising a "shop share" not too long ago. I think the idea was to split the retail space and share the rent costs with another business, but that didn't end up happening. Also, as people have pointed out, if you've got decent broadband then you can stream from one of the many on demand services very easily. This isn't so good for anyone without good broadband. I suppose the postal arms of Love Film et al will still cater for this to an extent, but you have to order your films in advance - whereas with blockbuster you just go to the shop and pick something up on the day depending on your mood.
mrmr96 said:
I suppose the postal arms of Love Film et al will still cater for this to an extent, but you have to order your films in advance - whereas with blockbuster you just go to the shop and pick something up on the day depending on your mood.
True, but that is an unsustainable and shrinking market. I agree that some of the spontaneity is going if you have to order in advance, but that only applies to people with insufficient broadband bandwidth, and that's improving all the time. I can see a time in a not-too-distant future where poor bandwidth will be looked upon in much the same way as gas, electricity and water; an essential service that you would be shocked to discover was lacking when evaluating a house for purchase.
JonRB said:
mrmr96 said:
I suppose the postal arms of Love Film et al will still cater for this to an extent, but you have to order your films in advance - whereas with blockbuster you just go to the shop and pick something up on the day depending on your mood.
True, but that is an unsustainable and shrinking market. I agree that some of the spontaneity is going if you have to order in advance, but that only applies to people with insufficient broadband bandwidth, and that's improving all the time. I can see a time in a not-too-distant future where poor bandwidth will be looked upon in much the same way as gas, electricity and water; an essential service that you would be shocked to discover was lacking when evaluating a house for purchase.
Fittster said:
So who are the landlords of these high street stores? Why do I have a feeling it's going to be the nationalised banks.
Chances are its a property fund run by one of the big insurers if its a nice high yeilding high street property.Not the sort of thing the Banks tend to have directly on their book.
ellroy said:
Fittster said:
So who are the landlords of these high street stores? Why do I have a feeling it's going to be the nationalised banks.
Chances are its a property fund run by one of the big insurers if its a nice high yeilding high street property.Not the sort of thing the Banks tend to have directly on their book.
littlegreenfairy said:
WHSmith are probably kept buoyant by the sheer number of kiosks at train stations. The ones in town appear confused as to their purpose and sell all sorts.
They may be confused, but they're always busy when I'm in there. Confused is fine so long as people are putting enough money through your tills.Kermit power said:
They may be confused, but they're always busy when I'm in there. Confused is fine so long as people are putting enough money through your tills.
Sounds like the story of my life 
Another poster says Paperchase but they always seem busy and besides, I've just been shopping there!
Newc said:
Agree, I would think Smiths are safe. Mothercare and Paperchase though...
Mothercare??? Really???Given that they've been growing and profitable for at least every one of the last 5 years and have (some) cash in the bank, I would be very surprised if they were to suddenly fail!
Whilst they have faced challenges in the UK, they have a strong, growing international business which is helping them to fund moving from expensive, inefficient, low-profit High Street stores to better, more profitable out of town superstores.
All of this I found out in a couple of minutes looking at their annual reports, which I went to check out before foolishly saying "given that all pregnant women want to spend every moment of their waking lives in Mothercare whilst awaiting their first baby, and people will keep having babies, I reckon they're safe!"
Fittster said:
DonkeyApple said:
BoRED S2upid said:
Amazon takes another scalp!
To be fair I think the reality is that they've been given another scalp rather than taken one. This was yet another hideously badly run business saddled with massive debt.Du1point8 said:
Well since Labour gifted the poor/benefits peps with a laptop each, I think those that did not sell it on to cash converters, you could safely say that most households have a computer of some sort and thus internet access on the benefits.
You don't even need a computer these days, with the advent of "Smart TVs" that are computers in all but name. Kermit power said:
Newc said:
Agree, I would think Smiths are safe. Mothercare and Paperchase though...
Mothercare??? Really???Given that they've been growing and profitable for at least every one of the last 5 years and have (some) cash in the bank, I would be very surprised if they were to suddenly fail!
Kermit power said:
Adrian W said:
Radio yesterday saying the hedge funds are going for WH Smiths and DSG, so reckon one of those will be next.
Dixons wouldn't surprise me at all - after all, they're pretty much an over-priced, redundant dinosaur these days, with much cheaper prices online, and much better service at John Lewis.WH Smiths, on the other hand, I would've thought was a pretty decent business model still? Yes, you can get some magazines and stuff in supermarkets, but only a fraction of the choice. They always seem to be packed when I go in?
Newc said:
The company itself is probably ok, but I think the sector is an absolute gift for a properly organised online retailer. "Hey - new mums! Do you want to spend what little time you have spare in the day slogging into town and traipsing round the shops while carrying a newborn, and then have to get all that bulky stuff back home, or shall we just deliver it to you tomorrow morning ?" And it's high margin stuff for the most part.
The cost of post would kill that dead they are bulky your not going to cover the cost of posting nappies and formula Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff