Anonymous wrote:change.org petition to keep it--

https://www.change.org/p/federal-realty-keep-barnes-and-noble-in-downtown-bethesda?recruiter=310557&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_page&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

It seems very short sighted not to treat B&N essentially as a loss leader for the rest of Bethesda Row. Without it you basically have that weird stretch of Wisconsin Ave in Friendship Heights--a bunch of high end stores that people don't actually visit that much.

Please. If half the people signing that petition actually spent $ regularly at B&N it wouldn't be closing.

Anonymous wrote:The reason Kramerbooks at Dupont survives is because there's no place to sit down and pretend you're in the library. And that's a good thing.

It also has a restaurant attached to it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think the sadness over BN closing is emblematic of a larger issue: we as a community value quality public spaces but they are few and far between. Rise up folks! Civic spaces are the heart of a community. Places where people gather to read, drink coffee, meet others. Libraries, community centers, arts space. How valuable would that be in a place like downtown Bethesda. That's what BN is to a lot of folks.

Yeah, but BN needs to turn a profit. Too many people have treated it like a library. It can't be a "third place" like the places you've mentioned above when it's a business. I used to work at Olsson's (which a PP mentioned) and when we announced we were closing people kept saying to us "I'm so sad Olsson's is closing... I love it here!" I felt like saying, "Yeah, I know. You come in every day, buy a coffee from the connected coffee shop which BTW is a separate business, and then peruse the place and scribble in your Moleskine notebook about the titles you're interested in. And then you go buy them from Amazon. That's why we're closing." But I didn't. I kept my mouth shut and smiled.

+1 I'll miss B&N too. But I went there a lot on my maternity leave and was struck at how empty it is was at practically every hour of the day. And how $$ the books were--a book that cost 5$ on Amazon was marketed at full price at B&N for 15$. That's just not a sustainable model for a high rent area.

Would be a great spot for a yoga studio

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Federal Realty is to blame. The rent skyrocketed. Like they need to libe their pockets with even more money.

It's amazing that bookstores, which are attractive to a healthy, safe community and serve as a window to worlds unknown, are disappearing. It's sad commentary in this day and age. No one cares that this place is what made Bethesda Row so appealing to people. A place to peruse, to discover new reads, a place for kids to see actual books and reach for them instead of being some abstract on the screen of an iPad. Why must this happen? It's not right. It's not healthy for a community. I'm hoping for a Hail Mary pass here that someone has a change of heart. I bought all my magazines, children's books and novels there. Simply because I can't stand anymore to read things on an iPad or kindle. After awhile everything looks the same. There is no feeling to what I've read. I prefer to hold an actual magazine and completely disconnect, or a physical novel in my hands, and let my fingers touch the paper...

Agree 100%

If you want to, I am sure Federal realty would be happy to sell you the property and you can then use your money to do what you think is best for the community and be blind to the economic realities.

+1. I love how people have all these great ideas about other people's property. LOL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of information is not publicly known about the original lease and the alleged rent increases and decreasing sales.

Barnes and Noble across the country put out a mandate to negotiate lower rents due to sagging sales. The one thing B & N is good at is PR, They are tossing the blame on Federal Reality and making them look bad in in an effort to have local leaders and residents put pressure on them like the did in NY when they were closing a store there that eventually became an Saks off 5th.

What I heard is B&N had a 20-year lease, due to expire 12/31/16. When they signed the lease 20 years ago, the renewal terms were negotiated then.

When it came time to renew, B&N wanted to deviate from that agreement (lower the rent). FR wanted to stick with the existing deal. Thus, B&N did not renew. FR did not push them out.

I think where FR is not thinking strategically is B&N is the anchor tenant of that whole area. For example, we go there on weekends and buy kids books, then go eat lunch at restaurants that are part of that complex, like Nando's. If B&N isn't there, we'll have no reason to be in that complex at all and eat elsewhere.

For us, when our kids want a B&N fix, we'll now just go to Tysons. Just then I get suckered in to paying $5/head for that little train ride in the food court.

I mean, no one is really the villain. B&N had the right to try to renegotiate the deal, especially given their economic realities; FR had the right to say no. Personally, I agree that it's a little short-sighted, because it makes the retail market less diverse and people looking for a bookstore will just go elsewhere entirely instead of coming and then also spending money on meals, etc.

I am curious what impact this will have, but I think it is hard to say it is short-sighted because we don't know what will be going into the space.

I live nearby and am in that area quite frequently with my young kids. We would spend a bit of time in B&N with some frequency (particularly before they removed the train table a little while back), so I will miss it. But, I am not sure that will really lead me to coming into the area less. B&N was a side diversion, not the main destination, except when I needed a last minute b-day gift. Maybe it will affect my habits more than I expect, and maybe it is more of the specific destination for others. But I am not yet convinced it is going to make a tremendous overall difference to the popularity of the area, especially if the tenant(s) that replace B&N also work to drive traffic more broadly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of information is not publicly known about the original lease and the alleged rent increases and decreasing sales.

Barnes and Noble across the country put out a mandate to negotiate lower rents due to sagging sales. The one thing B & N is good at is PR, They are tossing the blame on Federal Reality and making them look bad in in an effort to have local leaders and residents put pressure on them like the did in NY when they were closing a store there that eventually became an Saks off 5th.

What I heard is B&N had a 20-year lease, due to expire 12/31/16. When they signed the lease 20 years ago, the renewal terms were negotiated then.

When it came time to renew, B&N wanted to deviate from that agreement (lower the rent). FR wanted to stick with the existing deal. Thus, B&N did not renew. FR did not push them out.

I think where FR is not thinking strategically is B&N is the anchor tenant of that whole area. For example, we go there on weekends and buy kids books, then go eat lunch at restaurants that are part of that complex, like Nando's. If B&N isn't there, we'll have no reason to be in that complex at all and eat elsewhere.

For us, when our kids want a B&N fix, we'll now just go to Tysons. Just then I get suckered in to paying $5/head for that little train ride in the food court.

I mean, no one is really the villain. B&N had the right to try to renegotiate the deal, especially given their economic realities; FR had the right to say no. Personally, I agree that it's a little short-sighted, because it makes the retail market less diverse and people looking for a bookstore will just go elsewhere entirely instead of coming and then also spending money on meals, etc.

Anonymous wrote:I've started looking at Amazon for reviews and then going over to Barnesandnoble.com to buy the book. I have a Nook not a kindle. It takes a little longer, but I've read enough about Amazon's pricing policies that I don't want to live in a world where Amazon sells me everything.

This is the same reason places like Penn Camera went out of business. I was actually in there buying something a few years ago and the store staff were complaining that people come in to test out their cameras and then buy them cheaper online. It's true, Penn Camera was paying rent on E Street while Amazon is shipping from their warehouses.

It's sort of a collective action problem (that's an economic term related to public goods and free rider issues). If we all want places where we can go and flip through books and try out cameras before buying, then we all have to be willing to sacrifice a few dollars to support the places that offer this.

I actually buy most of my books from Powell's for the same reason. I like being able to buy some things used, especially kid's books that my daughter will age out of, and I like that I am supporting a real store.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i think the sadness over BN closing is emblematic of a larger issue: we as a community value quality public spaces but they are few and far between. Rise up folks! Civic spaces are the heart of a community. Places where people gather to read, drink coffee, meet others. Libraries, community centers, arts space. How valuable would that be in a place like downtown Bethesda. That's what BN is to a lot of folks.

Yeah, but BN needs to turn a profit. Too many people have treated it like a library. It can't be a "third place" like the places you've mentioned above when it's a business. I used to work at Olsson's (which a PP mentioned) and when we announced we were closing people kept saying to us "I'm so sad Olsson's is closing... I love it here!" I felt like saying, "Yeah, I know. You come in every day, buy a coffee from the connected coffee shop which BTW is a separate business, and then peruse the place and scribble in your Moleskine notebook about the titles you're interested in. And then you go buy them from Amazon. That's why we're closing." But I didn't. I kept my mouth shut and smiled.

+1

I make it a point to buy books from Kramerbooks because I want them to stay in business. If you like to browse but never buy, you're part of the problem. Your "love" of the business doesn't pay the rent.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of information is not publicly known about the original lease and the alleged rent increases and decreasing sales.

Barnes and Noble across the country put out a mandate to negotiate lower rents due to sagging sales. The one thing B & N is good at is PR, They are tossing the blame on Federal Reality and making them look bad in in an effort to have local leaders and residents put pressure on them like the did in NY when they were closing a store there that eventually became an Saks off 5th.

If all the people who are upset about this actually bought books instead of sitting in the store reading them and then putting them back on the shelf they probably would be ok but from he very beginning that spot was way too big, too expensive to maintain, too expensive to stay there long term.

They got extended after Cheescake Factory said no to the spot and decided to go to Montgomery Mall after White Flint closed.

No, it can't be anything but the evil, evil landlord is being mean to a longstanding tenant. How can you let facts get in the way of the prevailing sentiment, ironic as it is since B&N is also a large business, not some mom & pop.

B&N has been scaling back around the country. It may have asked for a reduction in rates. It may have only been willing to sign a shorter-term lease. If either of those were the case, it would be quite reasonable for Federal to say no. It would also be reasonable for Federal to be wary of renting to a company that has a real chance to go bankrupt in the coming years. In bankruptcy, B&N could terminate the lease and leave federal looking for a tenant with relatively little notice. It is understandable they might have wanted to have an orderly transition.

And maybe Federal really did increase the rate considerably. But, even that isn't necessarily wrong. Commercial leases are usually for extended periods so it would make sense that rent would be a lot higher than it would have been 5,10 or 20 years ago. If that is the prevailing rate, they are entitled to find a tenant who will pay it. If it isn't the prevailing rate, it will sit empty and they will suffer the consequences.

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the job corps program has a budget for stuff like that. Or a federal grant of some kind.

Or the property owners could offer it up as a tax offset for other stuff. There's always a way.

If nothing else, I'd be fine with the county eminent domain'ing it and taking it that way, if no other deal could be worked out.

Eminent domain to establish a jobs corp program in the heart of downtown Bethesda???? I am hardly a raging conservative, but that is insane. You do realize that we ultimately have to pay to take something by eminent domain or for a federal grant or for a tax offset.

There is a limit to how much the county can simply keep raising taxes, especially for a fantasy project such as that.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of information is not publicly known about the original lease and the alleged rent increases and decreasing sales.

Barnes and Noble across the country put out a mandate to negotiate lower rents due to sagging sales. The one thing B & N is good at is PR, They are tossing the blame on Federal Reality and making them look bad in in an effort to have local leaders and residents put pressure on them like the did in NY when they were closing a store there that eventually became an Saks off 5th.

What I heard is B&N had a 20-year lease, due to expire 12/31/16. When they signed the lease 20 years ago, the renewal terms were negotiated then.

When it came time to renew, B&N wanted to deviate from that agreement (lower the rent). FR wanted to stick with the existing deal. Thus, B&N did not renew. FR did not push them out.

I think where FR is not thinking strategically is B&N is the anchor tenant of that whole area. For example, we go there on weekends and buy kids books, then go eat lunch at restaurants that are part of that complex, like Nando's. If B&N isn't there, we'll have no reason to be in that complex at all and eat elsewhere.

For us, when our kids want a B&N fix, we'll now just go to Tysons. Just then I get suckered in to paying $5/head for that little train ride in the food court.

Anonymous wrote:Perfect spot for a Dave & Buster's. Exactly the entertainment the Bethesda crowd craves.

Have you been to Dave & Busters?

Perfect spot for a Dave & Buster's. Exactly the entertainment the Bethesda crowd craves.

Mostly all those stupid, educated people who know how to read.

Not your crowd.