Bookseller James Daunt has received widespread praise for turning around Barnes & Noble since being named CEO in 2019, following its acquisition by private equity firm Elliott Management. B&N estimates that the total number of stores it will open in 2024 and 2025 alone could reach 120. And while no one on the publishing side of the business is unhappy to see the bookselling giant back on its feet after years of uncertainty, some publishers are happier than others.

For well over a year, independent publishers have grumbled, mostly among themselves, about how hard it has become for houses with midsize market shares and under to work with the largest bricks-and-mortar bookstore chain in the United States. B&N lists, many say, tends to ignore their lists as it devotes most of its attention to selling books published by larger corporate publishers, particularly the Big Five.

“B&N narrowed their selection and got rid of some of the depth, and this has hurt indie publishers,” the owner of one well-known literary press said. Though the publishers PW spoke with concede that the major houses may have bones of their own to pick with the bookseller, the situation is much more dire for indies. “The Big Five are protected,” another independent publishing executive told PW. “They know B&N has to buy their big titles.”

A flash point for some independent publishers came earlier this spring in the form of an interview with Daunt on the TED Fixable podcast. The bookseller told the hosts that one of the secrets behind B&N’s turnaround was his decision to cut the “boring” and “tedious” books—descriptors he has used in other interviews—from its stock, pointing to, among other things, how-to manuals and noting that such titles can easily be purchased on Amazon. One publisher who spoke with PW saw the remark as a swipe against smaller houses, as well as an indication of Daunt’s lack of interest in working with indies. In another part of the podcast, Daunt acknowledged that B&N has reduced the amount of new inventory by about 20%—a figure indies believe comes mainly from their lists.

Daunt told PW that improving the selection of books that B&N carries remains his top priority. “We have some bad books on the shelves we shouldn’t have and there are an immense amount of titles that we should have but don’t,” he said. To make more room for the “better books,” as he called them, he acknowledged that B&N “has whittled away” at some categories but denied that buying decisions were based on the size of the publisher.

Instead, Daunt argued that, given the resources available to larger publishers and the book business’s decades-long evolution into a corporate enterprise, the Big Five and other major houses will have “better books” than their smaller competitors. The difficulty in marketing midlist titles in the current environment, he added, also makes B&N less likely to carry those titles. And he’s not afraid to say so: “It is my job to tell a publisher his book is an ugly baby,” he explained.

Love lost

Nearly every one of the dozen well-established independent publishing leaders interviewed by PW said that their business with B&N has dropped since Daunt took over. Some indies said that the bookseller is no longer even their second-largest account—after, of course, Amazon—with one noting that it now does more business with independent bookstores as a whole, and another pointing to Books-A-Million as its second-biggest client. A third publisher disclosed that, while Amazon ordered 5,000 copies of a recent lead hardcover title at his press, B&N only ordered 200—a clear indicator of how far B&N has fallen off in importance at his company.

At the heart of the problem, publishers said, is the reduction in the number of buyers in B&N’s New York City office, as well as what some said are constantly changing priorities at the bookseller. With the number of buyers cut, both frontlist and category buyers are covering too many categories and favoring authors and subjects they know best, publishers said. The head of one specialized nonfiction publisher, whose business with B&N has steadily dropped, said that he has nearly no contact with buyers at B&N now—whereas in the past he could appeal to the buyer of his particular subjects.

“The frontlist buyers are buying across so many categories, it would be impossible to understand each one,” another publisher said. “They don’t have a chance to identify possible sleepers from indie publishers, because they’re overwhelmed.”

The frustration among indie publishers at their inability to reach B&N’s buyers—let alone develop relationships with them—has become widespread. While none of the publishers interviewed by PW were opposed to using markup notes on the digital catalog platform Edelweiss to pitch their titles to B&N, they also uniformly resented the fact that interacting almost exclusively via Edelweiss has dramatically limited their ability to reach B&N buyers. (Daunt said that, in order for buyers to make decisions “more effectively,” it is best for them to rely on less, more streamlined information than is sometimes provided by sales reps.)

The heads of two publishers said that the lack of contact with B&N has fundamentally altered the way they work with the chain. One CEO said his sales and marketing team used to spend hours coming up with possible pitches to B&N in the pre-Daunt era but now “barely spend any time at all.” The second said his team still talks about ways to better connect with B&N’s buyers, but given the very limited results, he is seriously considering devoting his resources elsewhere.

B&N has also largely abandoned its long-standing practice of ordering titles that have done well in other outlets but were initially overlooked by its buyers. Before Daunt, the bookseller often ordered an overlooked title if a publisher could prove that it was selling well at other stores; now, publishers allege, that is rarely the case. And in something of a catch-22, if B&N overlooks a book that sells fairly, but not spectacularly, well at other outlets, the chain may still decline to pick it up, citing lackluster sales—sales that might well have been better had the book been carried by B&N in the first place.

Daunt’s ongoing claim that giving more authority to store and regional teams has been a key to turning around the chain also irks independent publishing leaders. While they agree that the new-look B&N stores are more appealing than the older shops, they allege that, contrary to the company’s public messaging, managers at those stores have told them that they can only buy books that have been bought in New York—though they have agency over how many copies of those titles they buy.

The policy, publishers said, makes it pointless to pitch a book to any B&N manager based on its regional appeal, let alone to headquarters. Daunt said in fact stores can place their own orders provided “that they are cautious with titles that aren’t carried in our distributor centers.” He acknowledged that B&N has tightened its policy about what books can be pitched, explaining that it was instituted in part to prevent “sales reps from browbeating” store employees.

All indie publishers that spoke with PW stressed that they are glad B&N remains in business. One even said that he has seen something of an improvement in working with the bookseller on select titles compared to a year ago, and all expressed hope that some sort of rapprochement with the retailer can be made.

Still, the publishers’ frustration with the B&N of today is palpable. “Daunt’s entitled to running his business as he sees fit. Opening more stores is good. Sales being up is good. What he is doing is working—it’s just not working for us,” said the president of a nonfiction publisher. “I don’t want to come off as sour grapes, but there is a lack of representation of indie publishers. And it’s not just because some sections are smaller.”

This article has been updated with further information.