Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

https://twentytwowords.com/all-of-these-stores-are-closing/

ll hail Amazon. All hail Amazon. The overlord that are online retailers are taking over, and that spells trouble to big box stores trying to thrive in 2019. Dozens of public brands have already filed for bankruptcy (and not in the Michael Scott way), and there are likely more on the way. Just this past week GAP announced that they were spinning off Old Navy into its own company so that Gap and Banana Republic can die in peace.

But they're not the only ones facing a tough time. According to Business Insider, hundreds of retailers across the country have announced store closures for 2019 and beyond, and in an effort to keep you ahead of your favorite stores closing their doors, we're going to break those closures down from most stores closing, to fewest – at least of those that have been announced so far...

So prepare for one a barrage of going out of business sales as we dive into this new year.

https://moneywise.com/a/retailers-closing-stores-in-2019

https://www.businessinsider.com/stores-closing-this-year-2019-2

The staggering rate of store closures that has rocked the retail industry over the last couple years is expected to continue in 2019, with roughly the same level of closures expected this year.

Retailers closed a record-breaking 102 million square feet of store space in 2017, then smashed that record in 2018 by closing another 155 million square feet of space, according to estimates by the commercial real estate firm CoStar Group.

I thought this was going to be about the jungle. I am dissapoint.

After the wealth going there way got obscene, I have been avoiding Amazon.
It is nearly as easy to find Amazon stuff on fairly-local sources, even if a lot of them are web-based.
Either that, or I go directly to the source. If an Amazon product is also sold by the manufacturer, I buy from them.
Shops are a pain to get to, but If I'm passing, I'll at least try to buy off the shelf. Stores don't hold any stock any more though, so the end for them is nigh.

The same with Steam for games. I usually end up with a Steam key anyway, but that's their choice.

It isn't just for niche products, as the articles state. Stuff you thought would be standard stock can be hard to get on the high-street.
I tried to get a PC monitor a while ago. The big stores had 2 models at most, and the little ones had to order it in. It wasn't even that special.

It doesn't help traditional retail that the USS Amazon is owned and captained by people dedicated to building what is effectively a new economic paradigm at almost any cost, while old school retail appears increasingly to be owned and operated by people more interested in breaking their own ships for scrap so they can sell the berthing spot before the crew can mutiny (e.g. sears, toysrus, etc).

The fact that gargantuan shopping malls are no longer the massive auto-profiting tax shelters they used to be doesn't help either.

On a personal note, if Amazon will guarantee me delivery in two days of anything I want that I dont need right this minute, without me having to deal with pants, shopping center parking lots, checkout lines, stockouts, other people, etc, at a similar or lower price, well, it's hard to say no.

If I go to two malls, and four other stores to find a simple thing like a whetstone (knife sharpener) over three days, and still can't find what I'm looking for that isn't 10x what it should be priced at, then it's no wonder Amazon is destroying retail.

I always try and buy local. But when I spend 3 days of my time, and half a tank of gas to find something that any place that carries kitchen utensils should have (Williams-Sonoma was the only place that had one in stock.....for $300....) it's far less trouble to stay home and have the thing the following day.

Technology is rapidly changing the retail landscape, and retailers are stuck in 1986. The times and technology have changed but retailers seem to think that the same methods for driving sales still apply when the don't. Not at all.

It's when an industry can't adapt that it fails or collapses.

The only brick and mortar retail I frequent puts its stock online and always answers the phone. The majority of retail is pretty terrible service and non-existent stock and worse yet have the balls to try and sell you something else you didn't want because they lack stock of what you do want . Amazon has come through with every order and got it to me within 48 hours with one exception and that was when amazon was forced to interact with canada post instead of their couriers. I don't like bezos, but amazon has been incredibly reliable so far. If I need a mission critical piece of equipment they can get it to me often in 24 hours reliably and that's why they're eating everyone's lunch. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

 Frazzled wrote:
I thought this was going to be about the jungle. I am dissapoint.

I thought it was gonna be about some amazing woman who came, saw, and dominated and that I'll never be interesting enough for.

Now I don't even get to dream

I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

Pretty much this. I feel the same way when massive international publishing houses whinge about Amazon "killing the book industry" by...err...offering books at reasonable prices, allowing new authors a route to publish that doesn't rely on a bunch of pretentious gits or money-grubbers to give them the OK first(in exchange for 70%+ of the revenue), and ignoring or sidestepping all the bullgak "region locking" practices of trad publishing.

Amazon are scary as hell, as are all the big tech transnats, but the reason they've become one of those big tech transnats is the experience they offer is absolutely superior for most people and rather than address that, their traditional competitors just whinge and moan about how unfair it is. Same thing when cinema chains try to justify their timed exclusivity by saying they need it to remain competitive against streaming - yeah, so? How's that our problem?

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

I agree. Amazon have most hurt the big boys. If anything they have helped the small retailers by offering a route to market. People complain about the destruction of the high street, but I see a return to town and city centres being places where people live, with pubs, restaurants, coffee shops, barbers, hairdressers and specialty and impulse shops like sweet shops, butchers, and so on, and he high street will be much better than when it was filled with supermarkets, phone shops and the other dutritus of life. It may be hard on some retailers, and some old people will need to learn how to use the internet, but we can’t stop progress for a small few.

Amazon have also helped build trust in online retailers. Without them we would not have many of the other online shops we use every day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

Pretty much this. I feel the same way when massive international publishing houses whinge about Amazon "killing the book industry" by...err...offering books at reasonable prices, allowing new authors a route to publish that doesn't rely on a bunch of pretentious gits or money-grubbers to give them the OK first(in exchange for 70%+ of the revenue), and ignoring or sidestepping all the bullgak "region locking" practices of trad publishing.

Amazon are scary as hell, as are all the big tech transnats, but the reason they've become one of those big tech transnats is the experience they offer is absolutely superior for most people and rather than address that, their traditional competitors just whinge and moan about how unfair it is. Same thing when cinema chains try to justify their timed exclusivity by saying they need it to remain competitive against streaming - yeah, so? How's that our problem?

In my experience the big publishers actually quite like Amazon. People are buying more books than ever and without bookshops holding huge stock that then gets returned and pulped. Yes, amazon can be demanding, but nothing like the supermarkets. Most of the moaning is just a show to keep the small bookshops happy. Amazon don’t give a gak what a publisher says about them, but Mr Smiths Book Emporium likes to see a publisher saying in the news how they support B&M shops and that Amazon are evil, yet they keep on selling to them. The publishers could stop selling to amazon if it was that much of a problem and set up their own online store now, yet how many publishing houses let you buy direct?

Steve steveson wrote:In my experience the big publishers actually quite like Amazon. People are buying more books than ever and without bookshops holding huge stock that then gets returned and pulped.

I've read the opposite, Amazon would stock even more and return/pulp huge numbers of books if they didn't sell and really "abuse" the system. And do it systematically to squeeze out the last tiny bit of profit, costing publishers a lot of money and making predicting demand unreliable because they just ordered big and returned big. They don't have to care about shelf space unlike any other bookshop. Their warehouses were kinda like pulping mills: Get books, what doesn't sell gets pulped, use the credit for the next ridiculous huge order, repeat. I don't know if they still do that, I read about it more than a decade ago.

The only real victims of Amazon are the wage-slaves in their warehouses. If those got paid better, I'd have no problem with Amazon and its ilk at all.

Bran Dawri wrote:
The only real victims of Amazon are the wage-slaves in their warehouses. If those got paid better, I'd have no problem with Amazon and its ilk at all.

I guess I can't speak for Europe, but around here... I suppose I don't know all the details cause I haven't really looked super hard into it, but they claimed they'd raise wages across the board late last year.

Honestly Amazon and Ebay and online trading is only one half of the story. The other aspect is the dramatic rise in operating costs in terms of wages, rents and tax for highstreet stores. Basically whilst amazon can compete with just price, the whole other side of paying to run a store has gone insane to the point where many really feel the pinch. Heck even GW (and there is hardly any Warhammer sold on Amazon at all - and what there is is high price at least in the UK) had to slash stores from 3 or 4 staffers 20 years go (or so) to 1 today and also shifted many of their stores from prime locations to slightly outside of the prime retail zone.

Ergo even without ANY competition from Amazon at all they still seriously feel the pinch on operating costs for a highstreet store. Online selling and Amazon is just speeding up a process that has been happening without online retail - it started with big out of down shipping centres and Tescos all-in-one supermarkets.

I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.

 LordofHats wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
The only real victims of Amazon are the wage-slaves in their warehouses. If those got paid better, I'd have no problem with Amazon and its ilk at all.

I guess I can't speak for Europe, but around here... I suppose I don't know all the details cause I haven't really looked super hard into it, but they claimed they'd raise wages across the board late last year.

They cut benefits to pay for it. While on average employees are better off, some are actually going home with less money at the end of the day because the amount gained in wages is less than the amount lost in benefits.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.

 LordofHats wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
The only real victims of Amazon are the wage-slaves in their warehouses. If those got paid better, I'd have no problem with Amazon and its ilk at all.

I guess I can't speak for Europe, but around here... I suppose I don't know all the details cause I haven't really looked super hard into it, but they claimed they'd raise wages across the board late last year.

They cut benefits to pay for it. While on average employees are better off, some are actually going home with less money at the end of the day because the amount gained in wages is less than the amount lost in benefits.

Haha! Good to know.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries at a farmer's market.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries direct from the farms.

If that were the case, that would be correct. Since one company doesn't own all the grocery stores, in reality, it is not even vaguely correct.

But weird and incorrect metaphors aside...
Does Amazon own b&n? No. So books and music can be had elsewhere (along with various other avenues for books)
Does amazon own iTunes? No, so no monopoly on music and movies. Plus, again, other chains and stores, even still
Clothes, no, there are still a lot of those around.
Various other things, some of which overlap with the above categories: Walmart, kohls, target, etc.


So... What actual monopoly are you referring to?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries at a farmer's market.

Err, no, if you can buy the same product from alternative sources that's the textbook definition of it not being a monopoly. And even if you can distort the definition enough to insist that it applies the grocery "monopoly" wouldn't have the same anti-competitive advantages of a true monopoly. They can't arbitrarily raise prices without losing customers to the competition, they can't hold down wages for specialized labor, etc.

As for your original complaint, how do you stop Amazon from being a "monopoly"? They aren't dominating the market because of anti-competitive abuses, they're providing a superior product and the competition isn't. What would you do, make a law that Amazon has to raise their prices so other stores can compete? Insist that a minimum of 10% of packages get random week-long shipping delays?

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries direct from the farms.

If that were the case, that would be correct. Since one company doesn't own all the grocery stores, in reality, it is not even vaguely correct.

But weird and incorrect metaphors aside...
Does Amazon own b&n? No. So books and music can be had elsewhere (along with various other avenues for books)
Does amazon own iTunes? No, so no monopoly on music and movies. Plus, again, other chains and stores, even still
Clothes, no, there are still a lot of those around.
Various other things, some of which overlap with the above categories: Walmart, kohls, target, etc.


So... What actual monopoly are you referring to?

I should have been more clear; I meant it is heading in that direction, not that it is even close to already there. My bad.

 Frazzled wrote:
I thought this was going to be about the jungle. I am dissapoint.

I am more dissapoint. I thought it was going to be about fierce female warriors.

Another point to consider is that Amazon itself doesn't actually sell as much as they make out; many of the products on their store are sold by 3rd parties. Some of which use their own distribution network others use Amazons. At this stage Amazon is closer to being a mall rather than a single store - they provide the grounds for smaller businesses to trade through them and a large amount of the products they sell are not Amazon direct sales from themselves.

It's a little like Ebay only without the bidding on prices element.



And lets face it Amazon has utterly shattered the old mail order speeds of "please wait at least 14 days/2weeks" into "Well you can have it tomorrow or in two days". Which is honestly faster than many highstreet stores can order an item in if they don't have it.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries direct from the farms.

If that were the case, that would be correct. Since one company doesn't own all the grocery stores, in reality, it is not even vaguely correct.

But weird and incorrect metaphors aside...
Does Amazon own b&n? No. So books and music can be had elsewhere (along with various other avenues for books)
Does amazon own iTunes? No, so no monopoly on music and movies. Plus, again, other chains and stores, even still
Clothes, no, there are still a lot of those around.
Various other things, some of which overlap with the above categories: Walmart, kohls, target, etc.


So... What actual monopoly are you referring to?

I should have been more clear; I meant it is heading in that direction, not that it is even close to already there. My bad.

That still doesn't fly. Nothing indicates Amazon can or is even interested in acquiring any of the competitors I mentioned (let alone the small fry) and I've seen some reports that some of them are gaining ground in their speciality areas (or in the case of Walmart/target, in general areas).

The fall of some old style brick and mortar outfits isn't a sign of a coming monopoly. In some cases (like toysRus) it isn't even related (that was bookkeeping nonsense by their owner, not sales related, they were purchased and the owning company's debts were pushed on the toysRus unit)

Amazon does a lot of questionable crap, I'm sure, but the monopoly accusation is a big deal to throw around, it isn't a substitute for 'I don't like them'. Which is a problem with the paranoia of the thread title and the OP's source article.

The biggest problem with amazon in my opinion is its creeping invasion into consumers privacy under the guise of 'convenience'

Alexas, amazon smart doorbells and the like. no thanks.

How much of Amazon's fortune is made by selling stuff these days?
Amazon seems to do:
Server hosting, used for antivirus updates, cloud servers, website hosting, etc. Probably number-crunching services and database hosting too, but I haven't looked into that.
TV, through Firesticks and such. Amazon Prime does a lot of original programmes.
Push-button ordering, which they just phased out. The convenience of ordering loo-roll by pressing a button must tell them more than just which account ordered it, but also when it was done and where from.

So, Amazon is far bigger than just a website selling goods. All of it feeds into their data stores. They can sell that to advertisers and marketers too, for even more money.

 Skinnereal wrote:
How much of Amazon's fortune is made by selling stuff these days?
Amazon seems to do:
Server hosting, used for antivirus updates, cloud servers, website hosting, etc. Probably number-crunching services and database hosting too, but I haven't looked into that.
TV, through Firesticks and such. Amazon Prime does a lot of original programmes.
Push-button ordering, which they just phased out. The convenience of ordering loo-roll by pressing a button must tell them more than just which account ordered it, but also when it was done and where from.

So, Amazon is far bigger than just a website selling goods. All of it feeds into their data stores. They can sell that to advertisers and marketers too, for even more money.

As of late 2017: 67% Amazon retail; 17% income from 3rd party sellers; 9% web services; 5% Prime and other subscriptions; 2% 'other'.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-amazon-makes-money-2017-12?r=US&IR=T

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

I agree. Amazon have most hurt the big boys. If anything they have helped the small retailers by offering a route to market. People complain about the destruction of the high street, but I see a return to town and city centres being places where people live, with pubs, restaurants, coffee shops, barbers, hairdressers and specialty and impulse shops like sweet shops, butchers, and so on, and he high street will be much better than when it was filled with supermarkets, phone shops and the other dutritus of life. It may be hard on some retailers, and some old people will need to learn how to use the internet, but we can’t stop progress for a small few.

Amazon have also helped build trust in online retailers. Without them we would not have many of the other online shops we use every day.

Have you been to a downtown in the US lately, it is all paper-pushers (Accountants, insurance, real estate agents, etc) and food businesses. There is no small retail anymore. As a entrepreneur myself who has looked at the numbers, there is NO WAY I would ever open a brick and Mortar retail store in this environment. The only thing that can make a small margin is restaurant/food service jobs and the afore mentioned paper pushers who have almost no overhead and live on trailers. Small retail like toy stores, clothing, shoe stores, etc just does not exist after being hammered by Wal-mart/chain retail and now Amazon. This is a huge challenge for small to mid-sized towns as these types of businesses use to be a big driver of employment and tax revenue. Without it, the towns have to turn to other revenue drivers such as fines/fees and property tax increases. You can see how this becomes a vicious circle really fast.

As for book publishing, most authors I know (which is not that many, maybe a half to a dozen) tell me how much Amazon sucks. Sure you get more exposure, but you have to sell 3 to 4 times more books to make it break even with other venues. It is a bit of a catch-22. The most profitable way is to direct sell off your site or book signings/readings.

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I do not have a problem with online beating retail, that is the nature of technological advance. What I have a problem with is Amazon being allowed to monopolize.
.

They don't really even vaguely qualify as a monopoly, though. I can get anything I'd buy off of amazon somewhere else. Not necessarily as quickly and I'd probably have to hit a couple shops before I found some of it (and going to other online retailers would be faster than driving an hour and hoping), but i can do it.

There are even some things (like hobby stuff) where Amazon is a pretty poor option. But there are other places to buy books or music or clothes or whatever (personally I don't buy food and properly sized clothing/footwear online at all), which pretty much negates any 'monopoly' status. They're probably cheaper or more convient, and likely the place I'll look first due to reliability, but not a monopoly.

If one company owns all the grocery stores that is a monopoly, even if I could buy those groceries direct from the farms.

If that were the case, that would be correct. Since one company doesn't own all the grocery stores, in reality, it is not even vaguely correct.

But weird and incorrect metaphors aside...
Does Amazon own b&n? No. So books and music can be had elsewhere (along with various other avenues for books)
Does amazon own iTunes? No, so no monopoly on music and movies. Plus, again, other chains and stores, even still
Clothes, no, there are still a lot of those around.
Various other things, some of which overlap with the above categories: Walmart, kohls, target, etc.


So... What actual monopoly are you referring to?

I should have been more clear; I meant it is heading in that direction, not that it is even close to already there. My bad.

That still doesn't fly. Nothing indicates Amazon can or is even interested in acquiring any of the competitors I mentioned (let alone the small fry) and I've seen some reports that some of them are gaining ground in their speciality areas (or in the case of Walmart/target, in general areas).

The fall of some old style brick and mortar outfits isn't a sign of a coming monopoly. In some cases (like toysRus) it isn't even related (that was bookkeeping nonsense by their owner, not sales related, they were purchased and the owning company's debts were pushed on the toysRus unit)

Amazon does a lot of questionable crap, I'm sure, but the monopoly accusation is a big deal to throw around, it isn't a substitute for 'I don't like them'. Which is a problem with the paranoia of the thread title and the OP's source article.

I suppose we interpret Amazon's actions differently. I think their behavior has made it clear they intend to take over the online retail market. I don't begrudge them or avoid them for this because it is more a product of the system than anything.

 Easy E wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd have much more sympathy for the "victims" of Amazon if they weren't also morally big corporations. Sucks to be their shareholders, but their business model is dead in 2019 and I will not miss it.

I agree. Amazon have most hurt the big boys. If anything they have helped the small retailers by offering a route to market. People complain about the destruction of the high street, but I see a return to town and city centres being places where people live, with pubs, restaurants, coffee shops, barbers, hairdressers and specialty and impulse shops like sweet shops, butchers, and so on, and he high street will be much better than when it was filled with supermarkets, phone shops and the other dutritus of life. It may be hard on some retailers, and some old people will need to learn how to use the internet, but we can’t stop progress for a small few.

Amazon have also helped build trust in online retailers. Without them we would not have many of the other online shops we use every day.

Have you been to a downtown in the US lately, it is all paper-pushers (Accountants, insurance, real estate agents, etc) and food businesses. There is no small retail anymore. As a entrepreneur myself who has looked at the numbers, there is NO WAY I would ever open a brick and Mortar retail store in this environment. The only thing that can make a small margin is restaurant/food service jobs and the afore mentioned paper pushers who have almost no overhead and live on trailers. Small retail like toy stores, clothing, shoe stores, etc just does not exist after being hammered by Wal-mart/chain retail and now Amazon. This is a huge challenge for small to mid-sized towns as these types of businesses use to be a big driver of employment and tax revenue. Without it, the towns have to turn to other revenue drivers such as fines/fees and property tax increases. You can see how this becomes a vicious circle really fast.

On this note, one things ive noticed of late is services replacing retail space. Instead of having TrendyMallChain#382 be replaced by GenericFashionOutlet#94 at the mall or downtown shopping district, an Alteration/Tailor shop, Brewpub, Escape Room, Cinnabon or Salon will move in instead, something that Amazon doesn't compete with.