Yesterday, I broke the news that University Village Barnes & Noble will be closing. (Seattle Times reported on this story last night. I’m sure the credit to Slog for breaking the news was somehow accidentally removed during the editing process. Right, guys? Right?)
This morning, I received a message from a Barnes & Noble U Village employee who would, for obvious reasons, prefer to remain anonymous.
They are not re-opening another location. The lease for the space was up and BN tried to low-ball UVillage management. UVillage management was asking the same price BN had been paying for years and BN corporate didn’t want to pay it. Part of this is that the store had steadily been declining in volume over the last decade. It used to make around $14 million/yr and now ~$9 million/yr. There will be a huge clearance sale but a lot of the product will be getting sent to other stores. The whole thing is sad. The BN local store management was completely blindsided by corporate and now ~50 people will be out of jobs. Many of my co-workers had worked at that location for over 10 years. The last day of business I believe is 12-28.
I just talked with someone from the Barnes & Noble publicity office in New York about this message. She said she could not comment until she spoke with their real estate department. I’ll let you know when I hear back from them.
It would do much better if it moved to some of the “density” in the forthcoming U-District LINK station.
Maybe, maybe not. Hopefully the U Bookstore will benefit from this and from Sound Transit.
It is pretty common in commercial retail leasing for the landlord to take a cut of the proceeds, or base a part of the rent structure on the store’s proceeds. It isn’t a flat rent like an apartment. So, if the U Village BN store’s proceeds have dropped dramatically, then it would be reasonable to negotiate a lower rent, at least as it relates to proceeds. That, and commercial rents around the city have fallen in general over the last few years due to high commercial vacancies (thanks, WA Mu).
Conclusion (assuming the note is accurate): U Village landlords are being unreasonable greedy assholes.
On the other hand, if the store’s revenues have fallen off so much, then they need to either find a cheaper location, or downsize.
Oh noes! How I will refill my Nook ™ ?!?!
Rumors are that it could be a Nordstom’s or an off chance (though unlikely) an REI.
My money is on Nordstrom’s.
@Reverse Polarity’s last sentence is the root of the problem. The store’s decreasing revenue just doesn’t justify its size in a mall that’s booming otherwise.
If B&N’s revenue has dropped like the post says (during a period when the site has become more valuable, the dispute has nothing to do with greedy landlords or greedy tenants. The math just doesn’t work.
This kind of reverses the “evil landlord” undercurrent of yesterday’s post. The thing is, there’s no reason for the Sloans to reduce BN’s long-term lease rate IF they think they can find another tenant at the current rate. Yesterday I immediately though it might be a perfect spot for an REI branch, but that doesn’t mean that it would make any sense financially for REI.
If anyone is confused about how successful U Village is, I suggest they try finding a parking spot there on an upcoming weekend during holiday-season shopping.