Passion Tea

I’ve got to admit it: I will always be a Starbucks Coffee drinker. I love their Chai Lattes like I love my mom (and that’s a lot). I like the atmosphere. I like the holiday cups, the reusable mugs, and the ca-ching sound every time I lose more money out of my bank account to put towards Starbucks.

I think this is the story most Starbucks Coffee drinkers will tell you. It’s not like the company sells bad coffee, it’s just expensive. Maybe it’s a kind of Keeping Up with the Jones’s mentality: if everyone else is drinking it, I should too.

But I think there’s a lot more to be said about the Starbucks story. How did we even get here? When was there a time when everyone wasn’t obsessed with Starbucks?

In 1971, three friends started Starbucks in Pike Place Market in Seattle. It wasn’t

until the 1980’s when the trend of “going out” for coffee really picked up, according to The Medium. Ironically, Starbucks didn’t end up selling anything more than coffee beans to its customers. It wasn’t until Howard Schultz introduced the idea of making and selling beverages to customers did Starbucks start to gain its popularity. The early part of the 2000s saw sales of around $2 million. By 2007 that number was over $9.4 million. In other words, Schultz was the powerhouse and the mastermind of Starbucks. He knew how to revitalize the company during the 2007 recession. He knew what Americans wanted.

Americans like a story. They also like progression and change. Starbucks Stories recounts how Schultz introduced health-care benefits for any full-time and part-time employees. He trained young people to become better baristas and prepare them for the business world. He promised to employ 10,000 veterans. And, Schultz has offered to help pay the tuition of baristas who are getting their bachelor’s degree. Not only does this keep the employees coming back, but it keeps the customers interested in the inner-workings of the company. Americans are invested in the Starbucks story. They feel like they are a part of it, and that’s what makes Starbucks powerful.

It’s not just me who sees the wonderfulness behind Starbucks. Mae Rice of Vox recounts her experience with spending $20,000 at Starbucks over twelve years. She gets a drink there every day. She argues that, though spending this amount of money might seem irresponsible to a lot of people, she sees it as responsibly spending on something she likes, something for herself. To her, recognizing something you like, something you want to spend your money on, is inherently responsible.

I like the way she puts it. Possibly because it supports my own personal Starbucks cravings. Or, because I think Starbucks Coffee is the place to indulge. If you like it, there is no shame in it. Starbucks is ingrained in our culture and is representative of the American Dream. The fact that tasty coffee drinks come with it is just a plus.

Starbucks, a cult favorite, makes very strong coffee. It’s always been known as the “real coffee drinker’s” home because of that fact. But, how has this impacted their brand and its popularity? Why do non-coffee drinkers still drink Starbucks? And how has the strong coffee flavor of Starbucks shaped the entire coffee market?

According to an article from the Spoon University, a simple black coffee from Starbucks will give you 330 mg of caffeine. For the average adult, the healthy limit for caffeine in a day is just 400 mg or 70 mg more than what Starbucks will give you in a medium-sized coffee! That is undoubtedly a high amount of caffeine for any drink.

But, that’s the norm at Starbucks. Most of its most popular drinks contain large amounts of caffeine. But, to become marketable to a majority of coffee consumers, Starbucks had to master more than just their coffee strength or taste. In fact, the brand has lots of secrets revealed in Fast Company’s interview with Starbucks’s vice president global creative, Stanley Hainsworth. The article recounts his actions to make the company the powerful behemoth that it is today.

First, the company knew that it had to make itself something that everyone wanted, even if they didn’t know why. As the title of the interview suggests, Starbucks transformed from being just a commodity that some coffee drinkers liked, to a specialty drink maker that appeals to the masses. Hainsworth claimed the main role of his job was connecting with Starbucks consumers and making them want more of it. Arguably, he did a very good job.

Despite good marketing, most companies still falter under the extreme pressure of competition. Yet, Starbucks never did. Forbes addresses this in an article exposing the main reasons Starbucks has never fallen to the pressures of other coffee companies. First, the company is flexible. Unlike Dunkin’ Donuts, who focused heavily on donuts for years, or Wawa, Sheetz, and McDonald’s, which offer lots more than just coffee, Starbucks has been able to focus on the trends of consumers, and switch with them. This means that when consumers start asking for frappucinos or secret menu items, Starbucks responds. It is a specialty drink store at its core, therefore that’s all it has to be for its costumers.

That being said, Starbucks also uses food to boost its sales. In response to consumer wants, Starbucks expanded its food options to host more than just donuts or bagels. By doing so, it opened itself up for more business.

And finally, Starbucks does not and will not open a franchise. A franchise would be owned by a separate owner, unaffiliated with Starbucks, who would have all the business and property rights to the Starbucks name, for a price, but could open a store anywhere they wanted. By not doing this, Starbucks has complete control over the outcomes of its company, and the actions of its stores. Events like anti-bias training could not have happened if the store was licensed to franchisees.

The company is Goliath, but as of lately, there doesn’t seem to be a David in existence. And if Starbucks’s competitors come out with 350 mg caffeine coffee drinks to stay relevant, enjoy the caffeine buzz and blame Starbucks.

When did coffee get so expensive? Unfortunately, we probably have Starbucks to thank.

Starbucks is not known for cheaply brewed coffee. Looking at the prices of any specialty drink you will find extremely high prices considering it is just coffee and considering the relatively small amount. At Starbucks, according to Smithsonian.com, you can order a drink that costs more then $45! But, let’s examine the rest of the market.

I, a new college student, splurged on a Keurig. It might possibly be my new best friend. It brews specialty drinks within seconds in the comfort of my own room.

But, for a box of Keurig K-cups, which are the only coffee pods that work in the Keurig machine, typically cost upwards of $11.  For 30 ounces of coffee grounds from Folgers, I would spend less than $10.

The point of a Keurig and Starbucks is the specialty drinks that cannot be easily made at home. But for the price, I can’t help but question if this is really what I, a college student, should be spending my money on. Unfortunately, it seems as if Starbucks has set a precedent. People like special coffee drinks they can’t find anywhere else. And if they can’t find it anywhere else, the prices can just keep on rising.

The Starbucks precedent has seemed to have bled into the rest of the coffee industry as well. As I discussed in last week’s post, Pumpkin Spice Lattes have overrun the coffee industry this fall.

Dunkin’ introduced its own Pumpkin at Dunkin’ campaign. As Dunkin’ tries to catch up with the strides that Starbucks seems to be making in the coffee industry, their prices rise with it. This means that Dunkin’, a once notably cheaper coffee chain compared to Starbucks, now has to raise its prices to stay relevant.

This sounds as if coffee brands feel as if raising their prices will make them comparable to other brands. This might be because some people associate price with value. Dunkin’ is still brewing the same coffee they always have, but now, maybe, people will see it as a true player.

For Starbucks, the decision to raise already high prices wasn’t an easy one. In fact, the company cites the need to close all of its locations last May for anti-bias training (which I discussed a few posts ago) as the reason it had to raise the price of its coffee by 20 cents in an article with Fortune. Though it does not seem like that much of an increase, it is sure to add up over time. And, more than anything, if consumers to continue to buy Starbucks despite the increase, who is to say that Starbucks will not continue to push the limit.

Let’s face it: those of us who drink Starbucks are probably going to continue to drink it for a long time. The price increases are just subtle enough that we miss it. And c’mon… a little price increase for anti-bias training… I can’t be mad about that. Overall, Starbucks makes good, specialty drinks that I can’t make myself. If I have to pay 4 bucks for it, I guess that’s what I’ll do.

The first time my mother took me into a Starbucks she was mad. How was she supposed to know which size to order if the sizes weren’t small, medium, large? Why weren’t the names at least somewhat indicative of what size the drink was?

My mom ordered a tall drink, only to find that the “tall” was the smallest size on the menu! Why? I guess we’ll never know. But really, that’s the Venti Footprint.

According to Reader’s Digest, the original CEO of Starbucks chose to use exotic size names to make people feel like they were drinking something more interesting than a regular coffee drink. Starbucks has never been one to follow norms, so their drink sizes are no surprise.

But, this past summer, controversy arose over the price and the size of Starbucks drinks. Everyone knows that the cost of a regular cup of coffee at Starbucks is relatively larger than most other coffee chain locations. The cost of iced drinks is no different. As summer rolled in, and iced drinks rose in their popularity once again, videos surfaced throughout social media questioning the value of iced drinks. Instagram uses shared that an iced venti, Starbucks’s largest cup size, had an equivalent amount of liquid as a grande without any ice. This sparked outroar. If Starbucks was already overpriced, why were we paying so much money for less than anticipated?

And that was the birth of the light ice movement. Rather than ordering a grande drink without ice, Starbucks drinkers decided to buy venti drinks with “light ice.”

All this means is ordering a drink that has less ice than normal. So, for the same price, they are getting less ice in their drinks and, theoretically, more of the liquid. Unfortunately, Starbucks baristas fill cups with the same amount of liquid each time, no matter how much ice someone gets in their drink. Unless you like a room temperature drink, it seems like this option doesn’t mean much for you.

A shining example of people’s frustration with the amount of liquid in each drink came when a Chicago woman filed a lawsuit again Starbucks, according to Spoon University. She claimed that the amount of coffee in her iced coffee drink was not the amount advertised. The author of the post on Spoon University put this woman’s claim to the test, and she found that Starbucks did advertise a greater amount of fluid ounces in their drinks than was actually there. This is disappointing, to say the least, because people are already paying a staggering amount for coffee, let alone paying for less than previously anticipated.

That is why Starbucks announced a “Trenta Cold” size for people who wanted a larger drink with a reasonable amount of ice according to Eater. Of course, the larger cup size comes at a higher price. But, if this blog shows you nothing else, it is that people will spend the money on Starbucks no matter the funky sizes and questionable amounts of liquids.

You might have noticed the new lids at most Starbucks locations. Currently, you would have to order a cold foam cold brew to receive your drink with the special, straw-less lid. But, the change in the lid shape will be standard by 2020 according to the “Starbucks Greener Stores Initiative”.

It seems to be the Starbucks method: appeal the Millenials. As I mentioned in last week’s post,  Starbucks does everything possible to stay current with political correctness and societal norms. Now, as seen in the recent climate strikes and media stories, the Earth is a hot topic in the teens and young adults populations.

But straw-less lids were just the first–and probably most noticeable–step that Starbucks has taken for a greener future. The brand hopes to make up the amount of electricity used in its stores through solar and wind power. It also hopes to decrease power and water usage while lowering waste and locally sourcing its products.

Though this movement for sustainable businesses does not belong to Starbucks, they are leading the force. If you think back to last year when the company announced its removal of straws from its franchises, straws had not yet been so massively thought of as environmentally unfriendly. But now almost everyone wants or has metal straws, and the campaign “Save the Turtles” (a no-straw campaign) has flooded Instagram.

By acknowledging climate change, Starbucks has not only become socially relevant to a wider pool of people, but it remains the company of the people. None of its competitors have publicly announced major renovations to their business model for the sake of sustainability like Starbucks has. According to The Motley Fool article, Keurig has come under fire for K-cups not being recyclable. Being proactive, Starbucks has made the necessary changes and continues to win over the Millenial demographic because of it.

This is not to say that Starbucks will not make money from these changes. In fact, there is a whole market made for high-value, sustainable companies. Starbucks is now a part of it according to Fortune. As stated in the article, Starbucks’ sustainable efforts will “create more customer and investor loyalty and sell even more coffee now and in the future.”

However, the money Starbucks will make from their investment in sustainability should not deter coffee drinkers from consuming the company’s products. First, Starbucks sells a lot of coffee. If their drinks are eco-friendly, that will have a great impact simply because of the breadth of their consumer base. Second, Starbucks is doing good by the environment. To positively affect the environment, it takes mass effort. Starbucks has found a way that they can help fight climate change. Finally, Starbucks has a large footprint on society and the environment in more ways than one. Since it uses so much water, electricity, and materials, it has a large ecological footprint. By removing their footprint, it could have great effects within our environment. Moreover, Starbucks has proven that it influences major social trends. Using its power for good, Starbucks can enact change within their company and the people who consume its drinks.

The “Greener Initiative” will be completed in 2025. Keep a lookout for changes to Starbucks stores and products in these coming years!

Today I am drinking an Iced Caramel Macchiato per Bayley Cook’s suggestion. Here is where I would insert a cool transition from the macchiato to today’s topic, but I came up empty. Besides, today’s topic does not need much introduction. We’re talking about the 2020 Election!

Last Friday, September 6th, was my eighteenth birthday (I am now a registered voter!) so I figured now would be the best time to talk about the political footprint Starbucks has left on our society. Unfortunately, on my birthday, Howard Schultz, the former Starbucks CEO, dropped out of the 2020 Election. Schultz cited that the “risk of reelecting President Trump” was one of his reasons for leaving the race, in an article from Washington Post.

Despite his disinterest in the Trump administration, Schultz is similar to President Trump in that he is not a politician. But Schultz has been more inclusive in his ideals and plans. For example, according to a QSR article, Starbucks planned to employ refugees in 2017 under the jurisdiction of Schultz, which came right on the heels of the refugee crisis in Syria. He claimed that he took issue with American politics. His attempt to spark social change through Starbucks was mirrored in his campaign promises.

But, Starbucks has become the center of multiple controversial news stories through its attempts to be more forward-thinking. For example, the truth behind Starbucks’ inclusivity was called into question through their wintertime red cups.

The image shows that over the years, Starbucks has progressively changed the design of its cups to include less Christmas connotations. In 2015 the cup was just plain red. Schultz, who stepped down from being CEO in 2017, was part of this decision. The lack of a wintertime design created an uproar from the Christian community. A leader in that group, Joshua Feuerstein, said that Starbucks was “caving to political correctness.” But, Starbucks was following the movement of society to be more inclusive of a wider range of religions and holidays. By following cultural trends, Starbucks remained relevant around the world.

Another example of the controversy that follows Starbucks is the Race Together campaign, which began out of tense racial relationships within the company. In response, Schultz remarked on his “concern” for American politics and began the first discussion of him running for president. Though the Race Together campaign did not last long, it was thought to bring about discussions of political correctness again in the company. Again, it kept the company relevant. Starbucks found its niche through social trends and movements. By finding a spot in the company to highlight social issues, Starbucks gained popularity by its relatability to the everyday person’s struggles. Its popularity gives Starbucks the platform to influence the political climate.

It becomes obvious that through Schultz, Starbucks embarked on the journey of social justice. It can be argued that in recent years, many controversial events would go against that claim. But, Starbucks has mastered the art of damage control. And by doing so, the company remains King of the Coffee Industry simply because it knows the topography of the social environment. Whether it be, as the ABC News article states, supporting same-sex marriage, refugees, or racial bias training, Starbucks makes sure to stay up-to-date with the times (and guarantees to publicly announce this, too).

The inference can be made that Schultz ran for president, or at least attempted to because he made his company the brand of the people and he wanted to be the man of the people himself. As an independent, he wouldn’t be tied to party interests, instead, he could fight for the public. Despite dropping out of the race, Schultz’s short-lived run for president did bolster Starbucks’ political footprint. He reminded the American people that Starbucks is here to listen to them. And more than anything, he reminded us that Starbucks is not just a coffee chain, it is a coffee chain with a whole lot of political influence.