Talk:Starbucks/Archive 1

Reorganization and edit
I've gone through and reworked the organization of this article a good bit, combining sections and moving things around so they flow in a more logical sequence. I also whittled down the "Inside Starbucks" section a good bit (it included lots of insider detail that just got to be too much, IMHO). I added a few new details where I could as well. Jerry Kindall 06:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is totaly inacurate
There are various contradictions in this article, as well as places where there are incorrect statistics. I could rpove halft this article wrong. This article gives the number of locations in 5 places with five numbers. All five are about 45,000 too low. This article could seriosly mislead people. It's things like this that make some people not trust the info on wikipedia. Tobyk777 21:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Then why not point out these errors, and make an effort to fix them? It's things like this that make Wikipedia so interesting because information is so easily updatable if someone simply puts the effort into it. BMetts 01:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

No Menu
There is no mention of the actual menu of Starbucks in this article. I think this is a vital part of the article. Tobyk777 21:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure part of the reason for this is because the menu changes quite often with the addition and removal of drinks. Also, there are countless numbers of drink combinations, so to list every drink one could possibly order would be quite unfeasible. BMetts 01:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

True, but I think a little dictionary of all the weird Starbucks words (eg- Tall, skinny, venti, etc). --Andrew Eisenberg 01:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Contradiction
The introductory paragraph claims that there are 5,630 locations worldwide, but the 'company history' section cites 8,569 locations. Whether these figures refer to different dates or if someone simply made a factual error, I believe that the article needs to be improved.

There are other issues in the article that make it hard to read, including the redundant phrasing '**** of them in the 50 United States and Washington, DC and **** in other countries and U.S. territories.'

"Gourmet"?
Whilst I'm aware Starbucks call themselves `gourmet' coffee shops, this notion is laughable to many, particularly outside the U.S. (no offence intended!). Is is perhaps worth altering this to indicate that Starbucks call themselves this, but not passing comment on its accuracy? Andrewferrier 11:57, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

Yes, that was a ridiculous adjective, I've removed it. The thing about "intellectual discussions" is also absurd - I can only imagine that the writer was talking about Starbucks's reputation, so that's what I've changed it to. On the whole the article is surprisingly weak considering the strength of negative feeling against Starbucks in the States (or so I've heard). Isn't it accused of swallowing up a generation of privately owned coffee shops and replacing them with their own standard format? That was what made me look up this article. Palefire 11:40, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * There may be negative feelings, but there are plenty of people who buy their coffee and have made them successful here in the US. Plus, they have a well-cultivated reputation as a "caring" company.  Not caring enough to allow a union, however... Gwimpey 05:13, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)


 * Says who? They have a union at more than one roasting plant.  And the health coverage that Starbucks provides all its employees certainly says "I care" alot more than the union provided coverage which does not extend to domestic partners.  Just an FYI Mr Christopher 22:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The "negative feelings" against Starbucks are greatly over-rated. Otherwise the chain wouldn't be so successful. While they have no doubt "driven" any number of "Mom and Pop" independent coffee shops out of business, the fact is, before the advent of Starbucks, there weren't very many coffee shops in the United States. Certainly not on every block, in every airport concourse, and every grocery store, as is now the case. America used to be, for the most part, a vast wasteland of poor-to-mediocre coffee. Starbucks has undeniably played a major role in raising America's "coffee consciousness". Erik Neu Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, I removed the "intellectual discussion" part. Coffee shops are generally known as a place for meaningful discourse, but not necessarily all of them.--Dejitarob 05:03, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmm... Which Peet's?
Entrepreneur Howard Schultz joined the company in 1982 and started the Il Giornale coffee bar chain in 1985, whose outlets were rebranded as Starbucks in 1987 when Il Giornale bought the existing Starbucks stores from the original owners, who held on to the Peet's chain that Starbucks had merged with a few years earlier.

Is this the same as Peet's Coffee, based in Berkeley, CA? The Peet's of Berkeley company history doesn't appear to mention this transaction. --NightMonkey 08:41, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is. See Starbucks case history for the convuluted details. --Calton 05:55, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Nonetheless, the sentence is confusing. How about..
 * Entrepreneur Howard Schultz joined the company in 1982 and started the Il Giornale coffee bar chain in 1985, in his desire to recreate the Italian espresso bar.  The original owners of Starbucks decided to sell the Seattle chain in 1987 to focus on selling beans and equipment through their Peet's Coffee chain in the San Francisco Bay Area.  Schultz jumped at the chance to buy Starbucks and rebranded his Il Giornale stores.

No advertising in wikipedia
I don't think it needs to be specifically mentioned which telecom companies offer WI-FI in Starbucks. Anyone else agree?

--Sveden 02:25, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Starbucks in Greatland Targets
Seeing as it is mentioned that some Target Greatland have Starbucks, shouldn't it be mentioned that some of the Starbucks locations are in Targets? Possible as part of the rapid expansion section?

Starbucks enters contracts with various large corporations to license Starbucks locations inside theirs stores; that's why you sometimes see Starbucks in Barnes & Noble, Kroger, hotels, hospitals, airports, and more. Not saying their shouldn't be a mention about licensed stores, but it's not just Target. BMetts 18:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I've heard that all new Target stores (and all remodels) will have both a Starbucks and a Pizza Hut Express in addition to Food Avenue/Food Avenue Express. From what I understand, the locations are run by Target employees in Starbucks attire WillMcC 04:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

IHateStarbucks.com
I don't think we should keep this external link; it is poorly done, and is hardly "a part of a relevant and NPOV link collection". &#9999; Sverdrup 00:44, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * No indeed, it's just a chatroom. Still, we don't cover the notable anti-starbucks movement well (I added a bit, but there's probably lots more), and there has to be a decent, well-argued site criticizing the company somewhere. -- John Fader 01:12, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Having an NPOV link collection doesn't mean that all our links have to be NPOV, simply that both sides should be represented. That said, if ihatestarbucks.com isn't notable or relevant, it should be removed. --205.206.139.41 18:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Website to represent distaste of Starbucks
www.revbilly.com is the site of a New York City based activist group, headed by actor and activist Bill Talen, that has an on-going anti-Starbucks campaign and carries a lot of information regarding that movement and that point of view. I am personally part of that group (a member of the choir) so feel a bit compromise about putting the site on wikipedia myself. However it is a good site to represent one aspect of what Starbucks means. What do others think?


 * To whoever wrote the above: there's now an article on Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping, with a link to the group's website. The article mentions Starbucks as one of their primary targets, and indeed, Rev. Billy is probably one of the highest-profile anti-Starbucks activists around these days. (There's not much detail in that article now, I need to find more references, but basically his group goes into Starbucks shops, among other places, and preaches an anti-corporate message to whoever's there until the police remove them; there's been at least one restraining order against them.) So maybe the Starbucks article should at least mention them. In fact, I think the subject of criticisms of the company is currently presented in a scattered and confusing way here; there's quite a bit about labor disputes, and then a misleading section called "Globalization" that lumps together complaints about all sorts of subjects, not just globalization. One of the leading criticisms of Starbucks' business practices is that they deliberately drive out local businesses by opening more stores in one area than are really profitable (e.g. three stores at one intersection in New York), and that's not mentioned here at all - though I want to make sure it's documented before I add it.  &#8592;Hob 04:42, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

The D&#283;1ocàt0r link
DreamGuy removed a link to a site which aims to provide searches for coffee shops that aren't Starbucks. I think he was right to do so, as the site in question clearly isn't a relevant link for Starbucks. Moreover, it seems its inclusion here was part of a Googlewhack attempt to bind its name with that of Starbucks (boingboing post). We should have an exlink or two for the anti-starbucks movement, but neither this nor ihatestarbucks is really informative. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 17:39, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Heraldry
I was in the Lithuanian National Museum this last summer, in Vilnius, and was flabbergasted to see the Starbucks logo on clay tiles, right next to the Lithuanian Vytis and the Polish eagle. These were from the 15th/16th century, part of a large room furnace/heater that was dug up during renovations of the building next door. Anyone here aware of any on-line photos or sources for this bit of heraldry? I'm not sure of the connection, it may be a herald from Ruthenia or possibly Bavaria or Sweden ?? No, it was definitely not the Coat of Arms of Warsaw, which is a single-tailed mermaid. This was the original bare-chested, twin-tailed starbucks mermaid. linas 06:47, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Hear Music
I recently discovered that Hear Music, according to their website, started as a mail-order company before it partnered with Starbucks. While it's a Starbucks brand now, does this mean it could be made into a separate (more complete) article? --Hersch 22:05, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Starbucks Everywhere
I added the guy who has been going around the world trying to take pictures of every Starbucks. http://www.starbuckseverywhere.net/ Pretty interesting, I think. Plus it's a great resource for anyone who wants to see what Starbucks around the world look like.--Tyugar 02:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Advertising
I remember last year they used Eye of the Tiger about some guy named Glen. Now they're using a song about a guy named Hank. Could someone please tell me the name of the song they use on my Talk page? Thanks, Redwolf24 06:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

More info?
Maybe we should add, with some restrictions, some examples of the more popular drinks (the difference between Latte and Cappuccino, for example). Also, a little more about how Starbucks work: the different working stations, the different "levels" of baristas (barista, shift, assistant manager, manager...).

I could add up more information, being a shift myself. how hard is it? and, if I do, can someone go over what I add? maybe someone with experience?

Retail?
Additionally, what about adding somethign about the retail aspect of Starbucks? From rebranded espresso machines to tumblers to "bearistas" this is a sizable chunk of the brand.

Whole-bean coffee
Also, we could have more information about the different beans offered (AMJ, Breakfast, Italian Roast, etc.)

I do think something like this would be helpful and relevent, but the problem is Starbucks has so many rare and seasonal offerings that it is hard to keep up with what we do and don't have. There is a page on the Starbucks web site (Our Coffees that has information about most of the coffees. BMetts 18:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Personally I'd like to see here an explanation of "starbucks esperanto" (double halfcaf venti whatnot). Stuff about latte, cappuccino etc should be in the corresponding articles (or in some general coffee shop article).  I'm not sure we need any more info about the "levels" etc.  The reail and whole-bean stuff sounds interesting. -- Finlay McWalter |  Talk 17:18, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

I agree that something like this may be helpful, but I also feel like it is something that may be better off in its own article. I remember one time seeing an exhaustive website featuring information about all of Starbucks' drinks and how to order them, but I can't remember where it went. I am a barista myself, so I wouldn't mind helping on such an endeavor. BMetts 18:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Citation requested
This statement is pretty bold and should be backed up by some statistics: Starbucks pays its producers some of the highest rates per pound in the world.

Is there anyone out there who can validate this? If not, then I suggest it be removed.

Also, this statement is misleading because it implies that paying high rates to the producers will trickle down to the farmers who actually grow the beans. Is this true? I think it should be clarified.

--Andrew Eisenberg 19:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I removed the line. If anyone can properly cite it, then please do so.

--Andrew Eisenberg 03:25, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Drive through
I heard somewhere (I don't remember where) that Starbucks was going to start putting up drive-throughs? Anyone know about this, and if it's true, add it to the article?

Starbucks has had drive-through stores for several years (I work in one). Just another tactic to make it easier for customers to get their fix, not something I really see as that noteworthy. BMetts 18:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: More Info
Further to Finlay McWalter's request; I was a former Store Coffee Master so perhaps I could offer some insight into coffee, espresso, the starbucks vocabulary, and more?

The Way I See It
Since there is a section about The Way I See It promotion, perhaps it would be acceptable to make a minor mention of cup #43 (Armstead Maupin's quote about being gay), and the outrage it drew from ultra-conversative groups? BMetts 18:53, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I started that section, fine by me. :) However, you changed the whole section to be all about the controversy... it might have been better to have just added it, like you said above. -- NatsukiGirl \talk 07:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

What is this paragraph meant to convey?
Starbucks in Israel Starbucks' failure in Israel (as well as its popularity in the Arab world) given the company's owner, Howard Shultz's record of support for pro-Israeli organizations led to Starbucks being the subject of anti-settlement protests in London when thirty demonstrators dressed as badgers held a sit in at the company's Oxford Street store.

It seems to be implying two opposite ideas or perhaps it is just sarcasm?


 * I wonder. I probably should just have chopped it out altogether when I created the controversies section, but I was hoping someone would expand and correct it. (Likewise, the labor issues section is too long and contains minor incidents). The fact that Starbucks pulled out of Israel should probably be mentioned, though, simply because it was about the only market where they weren't initially succesful. So I'll take it out now. ProhibitOnions 10:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The way the article read a few days ago bared little resemblence to what I wrote when I initially created the section. I had been without internet for the last several months and I returned to find the entire section re-written with (in my opinion) blatent POV, despite it being rooted in fact (I have no idea, I hadn't heard of any demonstrations). I think the information should be included, due to the unique situation and that another American coffee chain (The Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf) has experienced success in the country and is currently in a period of growth. --Hersch 13:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Metric system, not
Here's a complaint I heard from some baristas in Germany, which I saw repeated by some Canadians online: Starbucks uses US measurements in all its outlets, requiring baristas to learn ounces, pints, etc., rather than simply using the metric system. (The drink and cup sizes are all US-based, so for example a large coffee is advertised as 473 ml, rather than, say, 500 ml.) Can any baristas outside the US shed some light on this? ProhibitOnions 10:51, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Well in a way I'm proud - I really must say it. If they aren't funding PP any more I'd be glad to shop there (not that I drink too much coffee). One thing I can say though is I doubt it'd be to hard for the Germans to use the US-based measurements, because while checking out the de.wikipedia I noticed they sometimes gave the metric measurement and then its length in Zoll, implying that someone knows it. Chooserr 08:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Inches are used in a handful of cases (pipe widths, television screen diameters, bicycle frame sizes, car wheel diameters) in a lot of places, but that doesn't mean the whole system of ounces, pints, quarts, etc. is understood at all. Me, I'm willing to overlook Starbucks' use of retrograde measurements, and their stratospheric prices, because it's one of the few places in Germany where you can have something to drink without gagging on tobacco smoke. Have a nice day... ProhibitOnions 17:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well that is a plus...Anyway as I posted on your talk page it appears to me that they do use the metric at least in part...so maybe next time you stop in one you could ask them and see what they say. Chooserr 08:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No, they don't; the link you cite shows that Starbucks sizes are all in US liquid measurements, despite being listed in milliliters only:


 * Short = 237 ml (in other words, 8 US fluid ounces)
 * Tall = 355 ml (12 fl oz)
 * Grande = 473 ml (16 fl oz)
 * Venti = 592 ml (20 fl oz)


 * These confusing sizes are also given in the stores.


 * OTOH, rational metric sizes would be, for example, 250 ml, 400 ml, 500 ml. (Go into a German Kneipe and beer will usually be sold in 300, 400, and 500 ml sizes.) ProhibitOnions 12:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

My mistake sorry. Chooserr 18:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

"with a reputation in the US as a center for socializing"
"Socializing"? Unless people come in already knowing one another, I never observe people at Starbucks socializing. Rather, most are in their own worlds studying or using their laptop. There has, in fact, been a television commercial parodizing this lack of convival atmosphere in large chain coffee shops like Starbucks.


 * I concur in your criticism; the statement is ridiculously false. Whomever put that in has obviously never visited a Starbucks in the U.S.--Coolcaesar 01:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I edited the main page to remove the statement about socializing. It still says that Starbucks is popular among students and Yuppies. --Maande10 06:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll leave the statement alone, but will note here that Starbucks locations may vary at least regionally. We have a patio outside of the first standalone location in Arkansas, which gets fairly regular groups of friends from spring through late fall catching up with each other in conversations over coffee, tea, lemonade, and whatever else one can find there.  Also, though it hasn't come to our local locations yet, Starbucks has been known to publicize business networking events at some locations via its website and in-store publicity. Granted, that's not a lot of "socializing", but it's something. — ArkansasTraveler 18:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Starbucks Australia
Is there any sense in having separate articles for slightly different Starbucks variants in different countries? Rather than lots of new stubs, I'd suggest this article should cover the notoriously global operation in all countries. --Whouk (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That certainly makes sense. Palmiro | Talk 15:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Cmprince 23:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Could not agree more strongly. — ArkansasTraveler 18:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I strongly agree as well. BMetts 18:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree strongly also. Figaro 22:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more. Duff 12:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I also agree. Iola  k  ana |(talk)  18:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Early intertwining w/ Peet's
I added info about the company's early history with Peet's. I thought this to be important, as Peet's was the inspiration for Starbucks. Also the original founders wanted Starbucks, prior to sale to Schultz, to follow a more 'Peetseque' approach, with a strong emphasis on beans and being a retailer of coffee beans not a 'coffee bar'/provider of drinks (I did not include this w/ the edit though it is ?perhaps? relevant).

Vancouver
I think the first store in Vancouver was opened in April 1987, while Schultz was still running Il Giornale, not after Il Giornale became starbucks

Question about the original location
One editor has expressed the belief that the location currently operating at Pike Place Market is not the original Starbucks location, despite widespread belief to the contrary; please see the discussion at Talk:Seattle%2C_Washington. Postdlf 23:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)