Forbes: Why Best Buy Is Going Out Of Business

[JBHuskers]

Here's a great read in how Best Buy is shooting themselves in the foot.

http://onforb.es/t22cfc

[morsdraconis]

As great as it is to see an article DESTROYING Best Buy even more than it does, already, to itself, the article is also one GIGANTIC circle jerk about Amazon.

Don't get me wrong, Amazon is GREAT, and I buy quite a bit of stuff from it, but it certainly has it's issues as well, unlike what the article likes to make it out as.

[JBHuskers]

I doubt a writer at Forbes has an agenda to pimp Amazon, he's just comparing models of business.

[JeffHCross]

While I don't agree with his conclusion that Best Buy is absolutely on the way out, I will agree with his frustration about up-selling. My thinly-veiled contempt for it is why I never worked at Best Buy, despite multiple interviews.

[CLW]

I've been saying this for some time now that Best Buy is the dead walking. However, they may get some "chemotherapy" (if you will) in the form of Amazon oddly apparently consenting to start collecting state sales taxes. Not sure I really get that one as it's a MAJOR draw to online retailers over brick and mortar stores. However, even with sales taxes Amazon still often beats Best Buy on the bottom line and I have NEVER had a problem with Amazon so assuming they subsidize and keep most/many items with free shipping they will still be able to kill BB with ease.

[skipwondah33]

Yeah I heard about that Amazon situation a few months ago. Alot of the retailers or so thought it was unfair and that they had an advantage. Thought it was a lawsuit of some sort

[ram29jackson]

best buy cant go under, people still want a physical store to go to, and its the only one I know of around here

[JeffHCross]

Not sure I really get that one as it's a MAJOR drawI think you're incorrectly suggesting/implying/thinking that Amazon is doing this by choice. I think they got backed into a corner over it. I know they started collecting state taxes for certain states over the last year.

Also, FWIW, most states (I would say all, but I don't know that to be 100% true) require tax payers to calculate the taxes they "didn't pay" and then pay that at tax time. So the consumer, if they are following the letter of the law, shouldn't really see any change.

[morsdraconis]

I think you're incorrectly suggesting/implying/thinking that Amazon is doing this by choice. I think they got backed into a corner over it. I know they started collecting state taxes for certain states over the last year.

Also, FWIW, most states (I would say all, but I don't know that to be 100% true) require tax payers to calculate the taxes they "didn't pay" and then pay that at tax time. So the consumer, if they are following the letter of the law, shouldn't really see any change.

All I know is WV hasn't passed it yet (thank god). The hoops that Amazon must have to jump through to send the taxes to the correct states must be ridiculous. Fuckin' brick and mortar stores with their damn lobbyists.

[psuexv]

I think you're incorrectly suggesting/implying/thinking that Amazon is doing this by choice. I think they got backed into a corner over it. I know they started collecting state taxes for certain states over the last year.

Also, FWIW, most states (I would say all, but I don't know that to be 100% true) require tax payers to calculate the taxes they "didn't pay" and then pay that at tax time. So the consumer, if they are following the letter of the law, shouldn't really see any change.

Yeah I don't think it's up to Amazon at all. I know for us if we have nexus in a state we have to charge sales tax to anyone purchasing from that state. I'm assuming that's true with retailers as well.

[JeffHCross]

The hoops that Amazon must have to jump through to send the taxes to the correct states must be ridiculous.Not really. What they currently do is charge sales tax based on where the package is being shipped. If it's being shipped to a state that they must charge taxes in, it gets charged. It shouldn't really be any more complicated (especially for a large company with someone decently knowledgeable handling their taxes) than any brick and mortar corporation that has stores in multiple states. Sales per state get paid, or something reasonably simple like that.

Fuckin' brick and mortar stores with their damn lobbyists.I don't think it's the brick and mortar stores, unless you have something backing that. I've been under the impression that it's the states wanting the tax money.

[morsdraconis]

I don't think it's the brick and mortar stores, unless you have something backing that. I've been under the impression that it's the states wanting the tax money.

It's been my impression that it's more than just the states wanting the income tax. WV hasn't passed the bill yet it's been put up for proposal twice now (I think). You would think if it was something as simple as just wanting the tax money, it would be passed with no issues, but it certainly doesn't seem that way.

[JeffHCross]

It's been my impression that it's more than just the states wanting the income tax. WV hasn't passed the bill yet it's been put up for proposal twice now (I think). You would think if it was something as simple as just wanting the tax money, it would be passed with no issues, but it certainly doesn't seem that way.Well, I think there are some ramifications from passing the bill, based on the articles I've seen. There might be some concern about overreaching boundaries or potentially running off other businesses (since I think they wouldn't be able to pass a bill that targets Amazon alone, but would have to include all businesses).

My comment was mainly in terms of where the initial idea was coming from. Your post suggested that it was lobbyists employed by the brick and mortar stores who were behind it -- that may be true for the rumors I've heard about a federal regulation that would require Internet vendors to charge and pay sales tax (The Marketplace Fairness Act, apparently) -- but I've always been under the impression that it was solely a question of states wanting the revenue. This article (http://www.bna.com/amazon-agreement-state-n12884907275/) says that Indiana believes you're talking $20 million a year or so. Seems to me that lobbyists wouldn't have to be involved for that to be talked about at a state level.

It's certainly possible that brick-and-mortar lobbyists are behind it, I just didn't think that was true -- originally. It may have morphed into some kind of monster though, since they've been talking about Internet sales tax for what seems like a dozen years by now.