Drip by drip, Starbucks lost what made it shine

I "dumped" Starbucks early on (in the mid-1990s), when their corporate business decisions helped put a popular Evanston neighborhood bakery out of business. I figured if that's the loyalty attitude we have here, we are in for just another same-old same-old.
Power to the nieghborhood cafes!!

Enjoyed reading your sentiments, though I share some from the early days. Starbucks is being exceptionally responsible and facing their mistakes and stepping back to move back to the front. A sign of success, we'll be drinking our lattes. Best,Starbucks Mama and Her Buck-A-Roos

I was never a fan. heir business practices are beyond shameful. Bribing landlords to end other cafe's leases like they did in the 90's wasn't competing, it was cheating. I'll never forget all the great cafes we used to have here, like Scenes on Clark street. Well, what comes around, goes around- and Starbuck's is reaping what they've sown.

A longtime customer calls it a "tragedy."

Blessings to you for the joy of not knowing the meaning of the word tragedy.

A true definition of "self-absorption" if there ever was one.

In my opinion, the real problem is that all of this carrying on about coffee suggests a deficit of some type in the world of the speaker.

Note to writer: Get a life.

who cares? it was bound to be victim of its own popularity. the "culture" that it claimed it had, couuldnt handle haveing 16,000 stores. It was against what those claiming ot enjoy hated.

when you see one on nearly every block thats insane.

It was always a venti sized illusion. Welcome back.

The Pretentious serving The Uppity...caught up in the success pose...and then gas went to $4. When gal/gas = 1 latte, concept of "deserved/earned luxury" evaporates.

When the price of a medium cup of coffee went above $2 after tax, I stopped going to Starbucks for good...that small increase was the final straw. I also HATE the paper cups that dont keep the coffee hot and leak from under the lid when the cup is filled up too high. Finally, the fact that they charge so much for wifi when every other coffee house provides free access just strikes me as an anti-customer policy. I go to McDonalds and DD nowadays, will never go back to Starbucks, they lost me forever.

I have visited 5 different Starbucks around Naperville and Plainfield and ordered the same drink at each, the doubleshot. Each drink tasted completely different from each other - it was horrible. I thought they closed down for a day to teach these people how to make coffee.

Can you say "Backlash"?

your first starbucks is what you remember from 1988? 1988!?!

and now you're blubbering about some lost "love affair"? oh, boo-freaking-hoo! drink it, don't drink it. no one cares.

meanwhile, the stock is about where it was five years ago (after a split). they're closing stores, shedding workers, getting lean. i think i'll go buy some shares.

and, fwiw, there's no such thing as "free wi-fi." obviously, the cost gets spread out over the customer base. so i would very much prefer to pay for my own wireless access and to not subsidize someone else's access. in addition to getting a life, you should also look into getting a better job so you can pay your own way through said life.

FWIW wrote:

and, fwiw, there's no such thing as "free wi-fi." obviously, the cost gets spread out over the customer base. so i would very much prefer to pay for my own wireless access and to not subsidize someone else's access.

Great, that $100 per month is spread out over 5k customers. You sound like you may or may not have taken a non-credit economics class or are one of the "personal responsibility" types misapplying a Rush Limbaugh argument used to get poor people to hate it when the government does something for them.

Hey buddy, I'll kick in an extra 2 cents to pay for your wifi at Starbucks.

If they offer it, it's because they think it enhances the experience enough to inspire people to spend more.

The stuff is over priced mud.

Gmee MacDonald or Wal*mart or Target's any old day!

Ain't that right Jane H.?

Independence Oink-Oinks to all, from,

Jack, the Piggy Old Buzzard of Rio Rancho, New Mexico

I, for one, am happy that Starbucks is putting the skid on expansion. Hopefully this means that Pilsen will be able to dodge the Starbucks bullet and we can enjoy an incredible cafe culture here: Jumping Bean, Mestizo, Aorta and Efebos keep the culture alive in this corner of the city. Kudos to them.

I have been a Starbuck's customer for at least 15 years. I pretty much stopped getting coffee there something like a couple of years ago. The coffee was often watered down or worse, burnt, or even worse, indistinguishable from the supposedly different blend they had the day before. In other words, I had become used to having my first sip and thinking, "WOW! Great coffee!" -- and I don't think that for many things.

That all stopped in the past couple of years, especially at the outlets run by other stores like at Target, WalMart, Dominick's.

So I mostly stopped.

When they shut down the shops for an evening of training several months ago, I thought, "Yeah, right...and that "Pike's Place Roast--it sounds like they should just call it "McDunkin' Donuts blend".

I didn't even venture in until maybe a month after that training night.

I've been really pleased surprised. As someone who goes for French, Italian, Sumatra, and Expresso roast, the Pike's Place blend--even the Pikes Place decaf is really good.

And I was pleased they introduced a smaller size cup for something like $1. There are times when I shouldn't have a lot of coffee and I can't help but drink the whole previous smallest coffee.

I think they are doing the right stuff. I think the article is too harsh on Starbucks. They have acknowledged their mistakes and are righting them.

Now how about the Chicago Tribune taking Macy's to task again. They've stopped reporting on what is truly a corporate screw-up that the management still denies. The corporate flub is most obvious here in Chicago, where I've had employees tell me that stores have dropped over 30% or more since they were converted from Marshall Field's. The CEO says there's no problem but the economy. He refuses to acknowledge poor product, service, ambience and cleanliness.

A chain like Macy's should be taken to task like this--not Starbucks. But of course, Starbucks isn't one of the Trib's major advertisers like Macy's.

stan wrote:

<quoted text>
Great, that $100 per month is spread out over 5k customers. You sound like you may or may not have taken a non-credit economics class or are one of the "personal responsibility" types misapplying a Rush Limbaugh argument used to get poor people to hate it when the government does something for them.

Just a reminder, the money government redistributes to poor people has been taken from me and you. Whilst your generosity may be limitless, mine is not.

The analogy Rush and many other fiscal Conservatives often make is that poor people would never expect, let alone demand, that their wealthier neighbors provide them with food and housing and health insurance.

Yet they have come to expect and eagerly accept such hand-outs from the government. It would bother me a lot if my neighbor came over and demanded I pay his health insurance premium. It doesn't bother me any less that the government forces me to do it anyway.

If you gave me Starbucks coffee for free I wouldn't take it. 3 pounds of great Costco beans cost 11 bucks here in montana, no sales tax. Much better than starbucks any day of the week. Ten bucks a pound for coffee won't fly in the comming depression.

Starbucks coffee has always tasted burned to me.