FYI.

This story is over 5 years old.

Tech

In the Future, Will We Pay a Fee to Browse Stores in Person?

The internet mocked a store for charging a "just looking" fee. But maybe it's not as ridiculous as it sounds.
Image: Wikimedia Commons

It happens every day: Someone cruises into a bookstore, a Best Buy, a record shop, a Nordstrom's. He looks around, maybe browses the staff picks, maybe furtively taps out a couple words on his iPhone's notepad app, maybe notes size or model, maybe tries out that new laptop to see if he likes the way the keyboard feels under his fingers.

Then he leaves, heads home, and buys all that stuff on Amazon. The practice, which is apparently called "showrooming" and is already quite ubiquitous, has finally fed up a retailer in Brisbane. So the owner posted the sign you see below, which immediately drew Reddit's attention. Yes, would-be consumers will now pay $5 just for the pleasure of perusing here, unless they make a purchase.

Advertisement

Reddit scoffed in unison, natch. "This store seems desperate to go out of business," Guidedbymonkeys wrote, with the top-voted comment. Twenty-five hundred people agreed.

–]GuidedByMonkeys 2456 points 2 days ago This store seems desperate to go out of business.

[–]JOHNNY_FUCKING_DEPP 991 points 2 days ago This policy is in line many other clothing, shoe and electronic stores who also face the same issue Is this real life? Who would ever think that electronic stores would have people just browsing them.

[–]chubbysumo 752 points 1 day ago I think im just going to make a store called "amazon display store", where I stock stuff, and sell stuff, but mostly just have the store for people to browse and go and purchase on amazon later(or maybe even in store?). oh wait, best buy already did that…

Those three posts pretty much encapsulate the full range of our response to this most modern consumerist predicament: what old-fashioned suckers, no, they have a point, no, resistance is futile.

And though our knee-jerk reaction might be to mock those quaint brick and mortar stores who stoop to hopeless and pathetic-seeming measures to fight an uphill existential battle against online retail, maybe our "just looking" penalizer is actually onto something. Maybe it's not so ridiculous, after all.

There's a distinct value in testing out an object before you buy it—whether it's a computer at Best Buy, a baseball mitt at a sporting goods store, or a blouse or shelving or a power drill. You acquire more knowledge about your purchase; you better determine its worth, you better understand whether or not you'll need it and how you'll use it. Why is it ridiculous that a store might try to recoup that value if it's going to lose a customer anyway?

Let's go further. In the near future, online retail will probably drive a good deal more businesses to bankruptcy. There will, therefore, be fewer and fewer places to try before you buy. Then, the premium on the practice of actually testing stuff out before committing to a purchase might spike, and suddenly, chubbysumo's idea up there doesn't look so bizarre.

Maybe the future of meatspace retail is nothing but a massive display room, with no stock on site, where people can drop in and try out various products at their convenience. Maybe we'll be willing to pay for the privilege, to ensure we're not buying some cheap plastic crap that's going to break in like ten minutes. Consider it an investment. Maybe in-store shopping will soon be the province of the rich, as it always kind of has been. Who knows. I'm no futurist—no one is—and I'm just spit-balling here. And obviously, it won't apply to every industry. Much as I love independent bookstores and music shops, I can find reliable "staff picks" online, and I don't need to take mp3s for a spin before I buy them.

But I don't look at that store policy and see a joke, I see an owner's earnest stab at reclaiming some of its value. Maybe, between the lines of that crummy printout is the germ of one possible future for brick and mortar retail.