I understand and you are of course right. Here's the question, though: what if everyone does what I do, i.e. look at the store and then buy from Amazon, etc? Isn't this the tragedy of the commons? Then BB will close (like Borders) or would have to radically adapt (like B&N, who currently carry half books half toys in most stores).

Luckily for all of us who enjoy perusing BB, they are (currently at least) avoiding both fates since (i) they are pretty much the monopoly in electronics stores and (ii) there are a lot of customers lazy or clueless enough to just buy their stuff there rather than online.

Then either BB will start charging an entrance fee, or they will start charging the manufacturers display fees. At that point they can reduce their prices to about that of online shopping (since you have the value added of being able to purchase the product immediately, but your time spent driving plus gas plus maintenance costs more than shipping).

I don't think he's saying they deserve success. Rather, that if you want them to still exist in the future, you should buy from that.

You could say this about any unprofitable business. It's the business's job to offer transactions to each individual customer that aggregate to the positive for the business. It's not my job to provide corporate welfare to ailing Best Buy.

You could use the same logic to criticize a listener for not buying a bad album from their favorite band.

Heck, even I waited until the price drop on Amazon MP3 to buy The Roots' new album today. (it was $8 last night)

We don't actually disagree. I'm just pointing out the consequences. There are instances where I buy things based on those consequences as opposed to what was best for me.