Starbucks to launch its own record label, eyes McCartney for the first release
The formation of Starbucks Records is something "that has been bandied about for quite a while," says one source. "They think they are empowered enough to do that." Unlike its Hear Music operation, which releases the Artists Choice compilation series that features musicians such as Sheryl Crow or The Rolling Stones selecting songs that influenced them, Starbucks Records is expected sign, record and produce its own artists rather than licensing songs from other labels. Starbucks is said to be close to making a deal with Paul McCartney. (New York Post)
no no no!!!! please don't do this! starbucks needs to go back to just doing coffee and closely coffee related things. can all the crappy merchandise and excess. i sincerely hope this doesn't go thru, because if it does, it just might be the last straw before i walk out on the company.
and will that myth about the "$5 cup of coffee" ever die?
Posted by: chi-town's best/angriest barista | March 11, 2007 at 02:14 PM
$5 cup of coffee no it will not die. Even the baristas on this site are arguing that there is a $5 cup. The music label stuff was started over a year ago with a VP of entertainment. STBX has mutated into something that is unrecognizable from just ten years ago, it will continue to morph as long as there are customers.
Posted by: | March 11, 2007 at 02:21 PM
I thought there was already a Starbucks label. Is that how they signed and promoted new artists like the little willies and currently Low Stars? What's the difference there?
Posted by: Magoo | March 11, 2007 at 05:01 PM
Coffee? You know, that black stuff made from beans? Hello, Starbucks? Please stick to what you do best :/
Posted by: Kat | March 11, 2007 at 05:53 PM
this venture will definitely improve the quality of their coffee product
Posted by: DC-CUSTOMER | March 11, 2007 at 07:24 PM
I like Paul. I love music in general (pro opera is my avid hobby). I don't generally love what I've heard at Starbucks on playlists, because I either run into people who think they've just discovered David Bowie, and other artists who have been around for decades. Which is not necessarily a problem to have a McCartney or Bowie on a playlist, because I like both of them. But it's not inventing the wheel, or doing anything groundbreaking. Some of the newer artists Starbucks has promoted have been really good, while others aren't even regularly playing small venues, anymore.
I'm not wild about the label idea. I'm really not. Do we really need another record label around? Really? How many more faux execs do we need around, telling us what we need to be hearing, under the guise of "I'm cool b/c I'm promoting act X for brand Y?"
Live music = yes in a coffeshop for me. More "labels," not in a million years.
Posted by: HopkinsBella | March 11, 2007 at 07:44 PM
Oh, COME ON. I'm one of the best suggestive sellers in my district (hello mug award, woo hoo!) but it gets harder and harder to buy some of the crap that comes out of my own mouth.
Starbucks... please. You're killing me. My customers trust me. I want to stand behind the things I put in that sacred brown bag for them. You're killing baristas like me that give your company a really great reputation, locally and globally. We are ready to walk on outta here everytime you shift the focus.
Starbucks, are you listening? FOCUS, Starbucks. COFFEE. Remember?
Coffee... :( :(
Posted by: atownsbuxrules | March 11, 2007 at 08:01 PM
I doubt this is true. Or at least it might not be approved by "daddy schultz" and if for some reason it does happen...Paul McCartney would make them a lot of money! You couldn't go wrong with a Beatle!
Posted by: EAGANASM | March 11, 2007 at 09:56 PM
oh i'm glad i've left.
fucking brand dilution to the nth degree. Wow. I couldn't possibly hope to pretend to be happy about this idea.
Posted by: DT | March 11, 2007 at 09:57 PM
I have a good friend that has started referring to us as Starbucks & Noble. Sigh...he's right too.
Posted by: anss | March 11, 2007 at 09:59 PM
ridiculous.
its almost as if they are trying to throw their brand away.
Posted by: iheartstarbuckslattes | March 11, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Things like this make me wonder where I'm working
Posted by: | March 11, 2007 at 11:38 PM
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Posted by: MILWAUKEE STARBUCKS REBEL | March 12, 2007 at 08:00 AM
ye gods and little fishies....
why oh why cant we just do coffee again! I had a customer come in yesterday and ask me "do you guys just have coffee..."
made me sad.
Posted by: averrycafinatedbarrista | March 12, 2007 at 08:32 AM
I want to 2nd the LIVE MUSIC opportunities we could have to create the experience. I don't know how I feel about the label, I mean, it makes sense as an extention to what Hear Music has started. AND don't forget that we have a lot of talented partners who probably would LOVE to have a record produced, so all of you baristas who sit on this site and complain, should pick up an instrument instead! Sheesh our brand dilution has more to do with baristas with major chips on their shoulders and a sad case of excess entitlement. Please, please go work at Wal-mart or something...
Posted by: | March 12, 2007 at 08:58 AM
wow, money=great.
but this doesn't seem like the right move, especially following the memo...
Posted by: barista lane | March 12, 2007 at 08:59 AM
Our local neighborhood store has local artist art (this includes baristas) and local music on Fridays and Saturdays...works well.
Posted by: C | March 12, 2007 at 09:04 AM
By the looks of this thread, anything post-memo is going to be considered 'commoditization'. Pause for a second, and let's try and be logical here.
This story itself is good news. Starbucks isn't going to stop selling CDs. Ever.It's too good an idea: give people another chance to connect with the brand, and feel ownership of the experience they come to Starbucks for (the same can't be said for DVDs since these aren't played in store, so people won't associate with them with the brand). So it makes sense for the company to be producing the records instead of licensing them - they stand to make more money out of the same product, and will have more control over making the album consistent with the brand.
Maybe I find it easier to get my head around because I'm in an international market, and these tend to have less merchandise than in the States. We have a tiny discrete stand with 2 of the albums currently being played in store - no wall of CDs here.
And the other thing to consider is that Starbucks owning a label isn't going to affect your job. They won't be cutting labour on the floor, to get baristas to produce albums in the back room. Likewise, partners won't be dragged out of the roasting plant to sing backing vocals.
So don't say "focus on coffee", or "this will harm quality of the beverages", because that's not really contributing to a reasoned deabte.
All this story means is that of the CDs already sold in stores, more will be from Starbucks. And as mentioned by other posters, it's consistent with the existing Hear Music operation.
Posted by: mister_barista | March 12, 2007 at 09:28 AM
Mister_barista,
I know that you were not addressing me personally with your post, but allow me to address your post, personally. My argument against the label is not based on further commoditization of the Starbucks brand: hell, if they want to sell office supplies, it is their prerogative as a company to do so. My argument against is based on the current state of the recording/music industry, with the tendency for labels to further neuter and shorten the list of acts they nurture and promote with the tendency to feed nothing more than label pocketbooks. And turn out musical crap in a lot of genres (classical included).
Since you brought up the concept of the international market, it is amazing to me how much variety is out there, and how little of it gets mainstream exposure in the States. The lack of exposure occurs for a variety of reasons--reasons which cross the responsibility barriers for both label and listener/consumer. Even within Hear Music, the selection of artists unknown in the U.S. is woefully small. I had heard of most "new" artists from the Hear Music promos PRIOR to Starbucks ever announcing/marketing them. I am not a coffee elitist, but I am DEFINITELY a music marketing/label elitist.
Again, it's Starbucks's absolute prerogative to commoditize however they want. I personally do not find a lot of silver lining in the recording industry, period, no matter who is starting a label, in terms of music quality and variety. I also don't believe that focusing on music will "harm the coffee," but I don't go to Starbucks for the music. Never have, probably never will.
Posted by: HopkinsBella | March 12, 2007 at 09:57 AM
I don't really see much of a future in trying to be more of a player in the music industry. To me, this smacks of top executives desperately trying to throw crap at the wall in the hopes of propping up the price of SBUX common stock. I doubt it will work...Wall Street wasn't born yesterday.
That said, I'm all for live performances in-store, and showcasing local artists. My regular Starbucks has been very active, thanks to one of the shift supervisors who cares about such things - hanging the work of local artists on its walls, and getting local musicians to play there. They do this even though the store is small and oddly laid out.
Posted by: Tall Drip | March 12, 2007 at 10:53 AM
as a musician, i find it great that starbucks might consider signing artists. nowadays, the music industry is very competitive and having a career in music is nearly impossible. you're one in a hundred. there are so many underground bands in the states with the same labels looking for new artists that can sell.
starbucks will be a new competitor and has way better taste than your common "music labels."
Posted by: scrot | March 12, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Another nail in the Starbucks coffin...
Posted by: COFFEE NOT MUSIC | March 12, 2007 at 01:02 PM
I'm finished, Howard i hope you read this, i once thought Starbucks was heaven now i will go way out of my way to go to Peets or an indie shop.I love great coffee and great coffee you don't have anymore. You sold out when you brought in those horrible automatic machines.
Posted by: customer | March 12, 2007 at 01:42 PM
The problem with Starbucks is they have gone on the cheap to help with margins. The good coffeecake has been dumped and then the apple fritter was changed to a real loser. Bring back the quality or I'm heading for Dunkin Donuts.
Posted by: paul | March 12, 2007 at 01:50 PM
Just because they CAN does it mean they SHOULD?
Has anyone else been reading the blogs of former Sbux marketers
1. John Moore @ Brand Autopsy
http://brandautopsy.typepad.com/brandautopsy/on_all_things_starbucks/index.html
and
2. Paul Williams @ Idea Sandbox
www.idea-sandbox.com/blog/
They are responding to the section of Howard's email where he addresses the merchandise. They've spoken on other topics as well.
Series Review & Preview
• Introduction post
• LOSS of COFFEE THEATRE
• LOSS of COFFEE AROMA
• LOSS of STORE SOUL:
• LACK of MERCHANDISE FOCUS
• LOSS of IDENTITY: coming soon
Webmaster, please be advised that this is NOT SELF-PROMOTION by one of these men, I am just another reader perusing the many Starbucks bloggers...and have enjoyed their insights.
Posted by: | March 12, 2007 at 02:40 PM
Scrot,
If Starbucks was really interested in developing new musical talent in its label, Sir Paul who is a noted multi-platinum artist over and over again wouldn't be Starbucks' first label act to sign. It's about the money, not about getting new music out to the masses. Sir Paul does not need the money. Starbucks really doesn't, either.
It's a lot harder to market unknowns/up-and-comers to mass audiences in the U.S. than it used to be--which is partially why so many individuals are considered by the consuming masses as flashes in the pan, even if they have great artistic integrity, and remain very active musicians. So many small labels are out there, trying to convince whomever they hear that they will be the not just "one in a hundred," as you said, but the "one in a million" acts who has true longevity in terms of career, or memory of career. It doesn't happen often, for a variety of reasons--never has, never will.
You're new to the nature of the music biz, I take it.
Yeah, it got slightly off-topic. Sorry.
Posted by: HopkinsBella | March 12, 2007 at 04:25 PM
Starbucks formally announced in a press release this afternoon they are indeed coming out with a record label.... about a week prior to their annual shareholder meeting.... hmmmm
This is pure speculation, but I'm wondering if they already have a deal with Paul McCartney in the bag and they're holding off on announcing it till the annual shareholder meeting - hell.. maybe Sir Paul will be there himself - all in order to give their stock a much needed boost.
Posted by: Pure Speculation | March 12, 2007 at 05:53 PM
so DT you did leave after all? last i knew you were staying on part-time...
Posted by: jabanga | March 12, 2007 at 05:56 PM
Although if something big were to be announced... why did Mr Behar sell 100,000 shares last Thursday ( March 8th ).... right after the infamous Schultz Memo about getting back to their "roots".
Posted by: Pure Speculation | March 12, 2007 at 06:01 PM
jabanga
well I never heard back from my DM, and my job-search has been going better than expected. I havn't formally been terminated yet (yay for $1.80 quad espressos), but I havn't worked any shifts in the past what...2 weeks?
either way...even if I was PT, I would consider myself "gone" at least mentally.
Posted by: DT | March 12, 2007 at 06:43 PM
there is no need for another record company.......
starbucks record label = k-tel
yeah ..the person who said it was just in time for shareholders meeting..is right........at this point...WHO DOESN'T have their own label?
this is not new ..this is not exciting...this is boring...there is music avaiable EVERYWHERE..by EVRYONEWHO CARES IF THEY HAVE ARECORD LABEL? this is more junk for us to deal with..that we HAVE to PROMOTE......please write me up for never promoting or upselling that is not COFFEE!!!!!!!!!!!!
seriously.....
like rodgers waters has said....
'We have amused ourselves to death"
Posted by: Texas 1 | March 12, 2007 at 09:23 PM
Pure spec:
Often those large stock sell-offs are planned months in advance. Hard to read anything into that, although he certainly could have been trying to stay ahead of the curve. The McCartney bit, though, is some brilliant foresight. They've been wanting to spice up the shareholder meetings for the last couple years.
-ISTB
Posted by: i spill the beans | March 12, 2007 at 09:35 PM
DT you should try to pick up a shift or two here or there before 30 days is up...assuming you were officially demoted...just to be on the safe side.
Posted by: jabanga | March 13, 2007 at 03:35 AM
actually I should call my DM back. Whether it was about my demoting myself or the call I made to standards of business conduct on my (ex) SM.
needta do that tomorrow
Posted by: DT | March 13, 2007 at 02:12 PM
just wondering if this new division would be looking for a new hot Rock/Soul artist?
& would the right peeps be reading this?
If so, please check her stuff out.
Heres a bit about her
Niki Saletta
Recognizable
Actress/Recording Artist/Songwriter
Aftra/ Sag/ Ascap
Most known as playing “Deena” on 7TH Heaven, 5 Seasons
Recently wrapped the Feature Film "Rockin Meera" Filmed in India
To review her Bio, Music, Gallery, Videos & Most Recent Movie Trailer
Please visit http://www.myspace.com/carynmoss
Thanks!
Caryn Moss
Posted by: Caryn Moss "Moss Entertainment" | March 18, 2007 at 11:23 PM
All you non-working, wish I had a pot to piss-in, got nothing better to do but hate success because you'll never get there-er's, Stop hating, stop procreating, get a job and get a life!
Posted by: smithers | March 22, 2007 at 01:45 PM
MEMORY ALMOST FULL
ADVANCE TRACKLISTING
1. To Be Said
Based on the poem. A short string quartet piece. Delicate.
2. Bring the Dawn
Huge production number, mellatrons to brass, booming drum.
3. Memory Almost Full
Nice pop song (see Driving Rain), likely first single. Some electronica.
4. Love Hear My Thunder
Stones-like rocker. Peak Wings.
5. Robber of Soul
Funky jazz/brass number, unlike anything in catalog so far.
6. Cracks in the Earth.
Elec piano ballad, sounds like a chaos track.
7. Buy the Farm
Solid rocker, Steve Miller-ish.
8. It Happens Every Time
Tight tight rocker, best song here.
9. Silent Water
Piano/organ/electronica song- nice lyrics.
10. God Damn Rock 'n Roll
Sounds like a BTTE outtake- almost punk.
11. Pizza and Fairytales
Most Beatle-esue- reminds of Return to Pepperland.
12. Pictures in Song Suite
Almost 15 minutes- a true song suite, divided into four movements- most people won't get how good this is.
Posted by: appleworm | April 09, 2007 at 09:58 PM
I went to my first starbucks coffee shop, and I was not IMPRESSED AT ALL! no one knew what was served their! I could not see, or find, the Menues, to see what they had to order?
and their was NO MUSIC Playing at all! I was Appalled! and no Paul McCartney cd.'s to purchase either??? what kind of buisness are they running their? that know one knows what is served their? they didnt even know the ingrediants in the food they sell there? I am alergic to some foods.
and they said they had no Music, and NO XM was offered their?? they stated to me, we can't get the cd music to play???? its broken! Inexcusable! I shall not ever return to Starbucks! I will go where I can see a menue and educated employees know what they have to sell their! I was Outta Luck their, so I went someplace else! to their competitor. where I felt Like I was wanted as a potential customer. they were very kind to help me out with my coffee.
Posted by: lindamacca | April 10, 2007 at 08:33 PM
THERE is more than one way to spell THEIR!
Posted by: Derek | April 10, 2007 at 09:15 PM
Menu has no extra e
Posted by: joel | April 11, 2007 at 07:26 AM
derek and joel, you guys crack me up! Funny when you have people complaining like mad that do not even know how to spell, put 'em in check boys! hehehe
Posted by: Darleen | April 11, 2007 at 07:32 AM
Okay... f.... off the cofee... lets get the BEATLE!
Posted by: Who wants cofee? | April 12, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Okay... f.... off the cofee... lets get the BEATLE!
Posted by: Who wants cofee? | April 12, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Well,
The major labels have gone from promoting and selling artist's works that were created on the level of the album. Since the 80's, the focus has been on selling hit singles, and making fast cash. This has eroded the little structure that used to exist in the recording industry, and since the product has been dumbed down, the people have revolted and will not buy crappy, one hit albums. So, people buy one song at a time off of itunes. The labels got what they deserved. Has Starbucks gone the same route- lost their identity for good coffee by selling cd's? Not necessarily. As long as one doesn't compromise the other. I'd love to be on Starbucks label. For one, they have a greater distributership than almost any other record retailer. That's great from an artist's point of view. Should the band GeTSeT be on the label? Go to myspace.com/getset1 and let them know. If Starbucks offers great music, and great coffee, what's wrong with that?
Posted by: cocobass | June 23, 2007 at 02:38 PM
To my Native New Yorker Chairman,
How can I own a starbucks in my NE area of Washington, DC, to have a job for young and elderly members of my church to invest and commuity service?
The area is up for change, the neighborhood is mixed economics and they are great. Can you please provide information to a fellow New Yorker.
Even if you or Magic decides to establish one on a heavy traffic area of N.E. WE NEED ONE HERE.
I like the design established in Nnew Zealand, and Dallas, TX wth a lounge area.
Posted by: crystal | January 22, 2008 at 05:07 PM