home \ writings \ art \ quotes \ links \ pictures \ InfoCity



Why Starbucks Does Not Suck

by Susie

Being a barista for Starbucks, I receive a lot of glares and dirty looks when imparting upon others a description of my job. It is true that there are times when people say, "Oh cool, I love Starbucks, is it cool to work there?" Other times, though, I hear, "Yeah, we got a Starbucks in [such and such city] and it drove my favorite local coffee shop out of business" or "I refuse to pay 5 dollars for a cup of plain ol' coffee" or "Starbucks is a huge, evil corporate empire." There is a wanna-be punk band who sings a song called "Starbucks Sucks." I beg to differ.

First, Starbucks cannot drive any coffee shop out of business by itself. It isn't as though Starbucks shows up and says, "There ain't room enough in this here town for the both of us" and then challenges the other coffee shop to a dual. Starbucks shows up, and because Starbucks' products are superior, they attract the other coffee shop's customer base. Seattle, where Starbucks is based, has come to be known as the coffee capital of the world--obviously Starbucks doesn't drive EVERY independent coffee shop out of business. To compete with any business, though, you have to offer a superior product and service at a competitive price. If your favorite local coffee shop can't keep up with the competition, they will go under.

A competitive price when coffee's five bucks a cup? Surely I jest--but I don't. The reason that Starbucks coffee is so expensive is that we spend more money to make the customer happy. I know that sounds like a line and a half, but it's absolutely true. When I first went in to start training my manager told me that when it comes to making the customer happy, cost is not an issue. If they don't like the drink, make them a new one, free of charge. If something is wrong with the drink, make them a new one, don't even ask questions. Don't use foam to fill up a cup to save milk or use milk that isn't absolutely fresh, sample often and don't worry about the waste, cut a deal to make a sale (i.e., offer a pastry to sell a cup of coffee), brew new coffee on demand, and if all else fails, give them a free drink coupon if they aren't going to leave happy. All of that cost adds up after awhile. Besides, a venti coffee of the day is only $1.70, not five bucks. (That's 20 oz of coffee, mind you.)

Now, I realize that you can go to a gas station and get 20 ounces of coffee for like, a dollar or less. Other than cost defrayment for product quality and customer service, that extra seventy cents or more also pays for coffee production. Starbucks uses 100% arabica beans, which are more difficult and expensive to harvest. Starbucks also roasts their beans longer; the "Starbucks roast" terminates between ten and twelve minutes for most roasts, unless the roast is intended to be darker. "City roast" coffees, which are your run of the mill grocery store coffees, only roast between eight and ten minutes. They are more acidic. Some people prefer the city roast coffees, and that is fine; the point is that Starbucks spends more to produce their coffee and therefore must charge more. Starbucks also uses filtered water to make their coffee and not tap water, for which we must also pay extra. Also, Starbucks doesn't brew a pot and let it sit there for 12 hours on the warmer. We sometimes waste a lot of coffee to provide you with a fresh product. I realize wastefulness is bad, but do YOU want a cup of coffee that is mostly grounds and tastes like hot water? Didn't think so.

Finally, I would love to address the appellation of "evil corporate empire." For one thing, is this not America, the Land of Opportunity? What is so evil about creating a large corporation if you don't do anything illegal or immoral to do so (Bill Gates, ahem)? I'm sorry again that Starbucks drove your favorite coffee spot out of business, but like I said before, it was the choice of the customer base to switch their business. Also, Starbucks is not "evil." Not only do we at Starbucks not believe in pinching pennies for quality (at least, we aren't supposed to, that's company policy--if your local workers do that, that's their thing, not Starbucks'), but Starbucks is involved in numerous charity organizations. In 1996, the Starbucks Foundation was established, which benefits literacy programs in areas where there are Starbucks stores. They helped out with the program "Out of the Parks, Into the Books" with Mark McGwire in 1999, helped put a clean water system in Guatemala, and formed a $1 million partnership with Jumpstart, which pairs college students with Head Start children for tutoring. Starbucks also donated $1.2 million to the September 11th fund. Starbucks also goes out of its way to use recycled products. For a complete rundown of everything Starbucks is involved in, visit this page on their website: http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/csr.asp. Starbucks is evil? Hardly.

So, for the Starbucks bashers out there, I pose this final question: I've given lots of support for why Starbucks does NOT suck; where is yours for why it does?