Take this MediaPost article predicting the imminent demise of brick-and-mortar stores across the land in favor of web-only or web-primary shopping. Sample paragraph:
"Brick-and-mortar retail stores selling everything from clothing to high-ticket items like flat-screen TVs will turn into warehouses where consumers can touch and feel the merchandise. Web sites, supported by search engines and site search, will become the cash cow for the retail store."
Ok, somewhat reasonable. But here are a few reasons I think this is misguided (besides the fact that if I were ambitious enough, I'm sure I could dig up an identical article from 2002):
- People need things now. I'm fine with waiting few days for my new TV, but for less-expensive, more personal purchases (clothes, household necessities), I'm impatient.
- You go through the trouble and expense of building an amazing, interactive website experience. It's almost like touching the object. The shopper uses your site to find what they want...then hops over to a product search engine and buys it from a bare-bones site for 20% less.
- Less opportunity for cross-sell. Yes, sites like Amazon have amazing recommendation engines, but brick and mortar layouts force people to physically interact with other items they may not have been considering, which may not have any relation to their planned purchase (think IKEA's path layout).
I think this only has a real chance to succeed if the offline showroom and online website are integrated -- I pick my item in the showroom, then the friendly sales associate helps me put my order in right then and there. That way I can't just use the showroom, find what I like, and then buy from the lowest-price, no valued-added seller online. Plus, I'll see things I wasn't even thinking I needed. It also satisfies that innate desire to touch and feel items (especially tactile ones like clothing, bedding, etc.) that no website can ever truly reproduce.
