starbucks - “$5 for a squirt of liquid and milk”
“When you see them pull a carton of something out of the refrigerator, it reminds me I’m paying $5 for a squirt of liquid and milk,” said Hannah Boyd, 16, who lives on the Upper East Side.
I would suggest that is not music to the ears of Starbuck’s chief, Howard Schultz. The New York Times reported yesterday that “the drink-making employees, known as baristas, were told to dispense espresso into shot glasses instead of cups. They were urged to check the color of each shot. They were urged to pay more attention to the particularities of steaming milk.” And how “Howard D. Schultz, the company’s recently reappointed chief executive, has spoken of regaining the “soul of the past” and improving the experience of Starbucks customers.” Soul of the past??
It’s odd how Starbucks has fallen from its pedestal. I noticed a marked decline in service and the ‘value’ on offer when I was in London in January. Unlike the baristas making espresso drinks at Starbucks’ London competitors, Cafe Nero, the Starbucks servers were pressing buttons on an automated machine. No packing down of fresh coffee into the lever before the hot (not boiling) water is forced through the coffee, followed by steamed milk being aerated and brought to the right temperature before being added at the perfect consistency so as not to dilute the espresso’s rich taste. Nope, none of that just the pressing of a button, hence the comment above “$5 for a squirt of liquid and milk.” All you need to know about the perfect espresso is here.
Amazingly, for someone who embraced the concept of the third place, Shultz appears to have overlooked the popularity of low price and free internet access - hello McDonalds. [The third place concept is the idea of a place that is neither home nor work but a third one that has a communal aspect to it.] Originally Starbucks’ service was exemplary but once that began to decline the customer has to value the product more and also perhaps question the very third place that Schultz embraced. Business folks and office workers are the biggest customers for Starbucks and they need to access the internet to work while having their coffee so it was always a puzzle to me that there was a barrier to entry put in place - an account with T-Mobile was required to gain internet access. [Starbucks does have its hook up with iTunes giving one the abilty to purchase music downloads directly by selecting the T-Mobile wireless network but I'm unsure if this requires a T-Mobile account.] Schultz appears to be sincere when he says he will turn his company around but as we head into a recession that cup of joe, it’s price, it’s value and the third place will be under scrutiny from a penny-pinching public.
Crystal Fighters - I Love London
February 28th, 2008 at 11:30 am
I was working for the buck when they became ‘wired’. Compared to the competition, they were a good year ahead of the curve on internet access- they simply made the wrong call by getting into bed with a provider (T-mobile). I’m guessing the deal was to help curb the incredible cost of supplying hardware (and it was, in it’s day, a very nice set of hardware they were putting into each store). In hindsight it was an incredibly bad move.
The automated machines crank out very solid product when calibrated regularly. The guidelines in the manual for checking and adjusting the machines are generally every half hour or hour. I’m guessing most baristas don’t check it much though as the connection to the product is less tactile and personal on those machines. I was very skeptical of them at first but soon became quite a fan as the constant irritation to the tendons in my carpel tunnel disappeared almost immediately after switching and it was just so much more efficient. A good shot on those machines takes about 15 seconds. The baristas are supposed to be timing the shots. If you notice the shots are flying out faster they are most definitely weak. If they are much longer the espresso is going to be bitter. With those machines the subtle differences are very noticeable in the taste of the coffee.
I think the main problem with Starbucks’ is that it was started on the passion for finding a ‘perfect’ product but has since joined other big business models in it’s emphasis on speed. Training in coffee history and attention to detail was a cornerstone of the early stores but I noticed as the company expanded rapidly our training became more oriented toward promotions, retail display, and pastries. I feel this is due to middle management, who’s bonus is predicated more heavily on sales then on quality of service and product. Obviously blame needs to start at the top though.
I will also point out that Starbucks continues to provide one of the best health care packages in the land to people who are working 20 hours a week or more. They cover ‘domestic partners’ and have since I can remember. In many respects Starbucks is still a model company when compared to other companies of it’s market size. I’m not an apologist, I just see most haters of the ‘buck’ seem more focused on Starbuck’s yuppie image (and now rapid rise to mass appeal) to denounce the company rather than actual objective data.
mmmm. this whole discussion has made me thirsty for a cup.
*heads out to Stumptown*
February 29th, 2008 at 8:00 am
The best starbucks experience I ever had was at a counterfeit in South Korea called ‘Bucks. Of course, in addition to REALLY good espresso, they also served liquor and had obscure films playing. heh…
February 29th, 2008 at 9:45 am
liquor. it tends to improve pretty much any beverage experience.;)
March 13th, 2008 at 6:51 am
[...] 6. Starbucks: “$5 for a squirt of liquid and milk” says it all (via pampelmoose). [...]
March 15th, 2008 at 10:57 am
I think the quality is shit for the price.They really need to rethink it all. The beans are over roasted makes for horrible coffee. The frappuccinos are a chemical mess. The only thing bux’s has going for them is “convenience” and I say that literaly as the lines are ridiculous.
They are rolling out free wifi which is great considering you are paying for that service with premium coffee prices.
Oh new cafe near me with a $10 drip coffee on the menu!!!!!
March 26th, 2008 at 8:34 am
[...] Corporate coffee colossus Starbucks (whose deplorable absence of freshness and authenticity was recently the topic of a rant from my blogger/bassist-uncle Dave Allen) apparently owes it’s hardworking baristas over $100 million in back tips. Apparently the profit from the five-dollar ‘squirt of liquid and milk’ doesn’t quite cover the overhead of recent faux-techie-hipster attractions [...]