Here's the e-mail exchange between your STARBUCKS GOSSIP webmaster and a Starbucks spokeswoman:
Starbucks Gossip webmaster Jim Romenesko: Deb, What is the status of the hot sandwiches? Will they continue to be served in the stores? Or, will they be discontinued this fall as previously announced?
Starbucks spokeswoman Deb Trevino: Hi Jim- Thanks for the question. Customers tell us they want a selection of breakfast items to complement their morning coffee, and we want to be sure they can get that at Starbucks. As you know, we'll be launching new, nutritious breakfast items in the fall, but we can’t share any details just yet. Best, Deb
So, does that mean the warm (or hot) sandwiches will remain on the menu? Your guess is as good as mine.
I'm a manager for a Starbucks Cafe in the northeast, first time commenting - long time blogging.
Hi. :)
I have a bit of information on the food program -
Starbucks is in fact introducing a healthy food program. The new Berry Stella is one of the newest high powered, good-for-you breakfast treats released.
My District and Regional managers recently had a discussion about this program with me, and the information I got from it was that Starbucks Stores should see a new type of warming oven appearing in stores by the first of October. It is unlike the current type of oven, and is NOT a microwave. The idea is to warm the new healthy pastries being released, not sandwiches.
The company is getting rid of most of the pastries offered in-store. [This has already started]
and, replacing them with a new line of pastries with better ingredients.
Apparently we should start seeing everything from energy bars to unique and wholesome baked treats.
The food program is still under development and no information has been confirmed or denied by HQ yet. So consider my comment as inter-office gossip. ;)
Posted by: openyoureyes | July 24, 2008 at 06:04 PM
Colorado is 'relaunching' warming (aka Breakfast Sandwiches) August 11th. All stores that have ovens will be serving hot breakfast sandwiches until new product rolls
Posted by: Colorado SM | July 24, 2008 at 06:23 PM
Great. More equipment added to the junk pile.
Exactly how many pounds of scrap metal has each store generated this year?
Posted by: truth | July 24, 2008 at 06:23 PM
they should bring back Penza bars!!
(i think that was the name. i forgot already!)
Posted by: lattewizard | July 24, 2008 at 06:28 PM
Well, the info that I received is that breakfast sandwich v.2008 is here to stay "indefinitely." The corporate spin on the breakfast sandwich is going to be that a "suitable replacement" has yet to be found, and until such time (aka never) Starbucks locations with warming ovens will continue to offer breakfast sandwiches. Corporate does not want to admit defeat on this considering Howard's harsh public criticism of them, and therefore will continue to trot out this BS spin until the controversy slowly goes away.
Posted by: Westcoast Barista | July 24, 2008 at 06:42 PM
i think that the starbuck's rep. did some fancy foot work around that question. she gave just enough to inspire hope yet not enough to create a hype xD. i like the idea of the "better for you" approach, and i think the stella's are awesome!!!! looking forward to what comes out next^^
Posted by: pariah | July 24, 2008 at 08:22 PM
The save the breakfast sandwich site has over 160 members now - keep joining in support. Maybe they'll see so many people in support of keeping them and decide to leave them on the menu :o)
Jenn
Posted by: Jenn | July 24, 2008 at 08:44 PM
OPENYOUREYES is going to be on the money from what I can tell. Back in January Howard promised us *warm* breakfast items to replace the sandwiches, so it looks like warming is sticking around, but I don't think the sandwiches themselves are. For the first time since our beloved whole bean menu was axed, breakfast sandwiches are no longer on the menu board at my store! Still available, but only by customer request. We are selling about 33% of the amount we used to sell. Tons of markouts.
I vowed that I would outlast the breakfast sandwiches in my tenure. Hopefully I'll stay around long enough to once again brew Verona through close...
HS quoted on PBS Wide Angle this week gabbing about how much he loves Sumatra. Psst... so do Starbucks coffee drinkers!
Posted by: BAYAREABUX | July 24, 2008 at 09:03 PM
Oh dear Lord, please make Starbucks stop selling breakfast sandwiches! I really don't understand why some people are so into those Godawful sandwiches. They make the stores STINK! I remember the days when I would go into a Starbucks and just take in this big deep breath because I was just taken away by the smell of freshly brewed coffee and espresso. Walking into that store in the morning right before work would seriously put me in a great mood for the rest of morning. I've actually stopped going to Starbucks in the morning now because that's when the burnt cheese smell is the strongest. I honestly get nauseous from it and have left several times because of it.
I believe a true cafe is made up of these 3 key components:
1. Knowledgeable/skilled baristas.
2. Great vibe.
3. The sounds, sights and smells of the art of coffee.
These sandwiches hurt each and every one of these components. How can a barista be knowledgeable and skilled, especially those who are new to the company, when so much emphasis is being put on how to warm an egg sandwich rather than on what goes into an amazing cup of coffee? How can a Starbucks "cafe" have a great vibe when it's starting to feel more and more like a fast food restaurant? Most of the sights and sounds of the art of coffee went out the window a long time ago ever since the manual machines were axed, but at least the smell was still there. But there goes that too.
I once loved you, Starbucks. I was once a proud Partner, a proud Barista. But man oh man, have you let me down. Now I'm even happier than ever that I left and moved on. I still have hope for this company, but it's gonna take a miracle for it to become what it once was.
Oh, and Howard? Grow a pair!
- Former Brooklyn Barista
Posted by: Former Brooklyn Barista | July 24, 2008 at 09:29 PM
Exactly how much bandwith has TRUTH wasted this month?
Posted by: Crema the Crop | July 24, 2008 at 09:41 PM
Golly gee, the Kool-aid drinkers are out tonight. Must be a full moon somewhere.
News flash, just like I correctly stated about the updated ingredients of the breakfast sandwich v.2008, I will state again on this board that the breakfast sandwiches are here to stay INDEFINITELY, like it or not. Furthermore, do you, the opposition to the breakfast sandwich ever care to take a gander at the sales figures for your store and see how much of that is garnered from the "evil" breakfast sandwich? If so, you'd quickly realize that without that important secondary source of revenue, the beverage being the primary source, many more stores would likely be on the chopping block too.
Honestly folks, please try and take your ideological glasses off from time to time, or else the real world outside of Starbucks will eat you alive.
Posted by: Westcoast Barista | July 24, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Starbucks didn't have to rely on anything but coffee up until October of 2007 when those sandwiches were offered. If Starbucks stopped hiring any person from the street and actually taught their employees, they wouldn't have to rely on an egg sandwich to keep them alive. Anything for a dollar these days, huh?
Posted by: Former Brooklyn Barista | July 24, 2008 at 10:20 PM
I MISS THE GOOD OLE DAYS WHEN ALL THE PARTNERS WERE EXCITED AND PROUD TO BE A BARISTA & TO SERVE ONE OF THE BEST DRINKS AROUND - BECAUSE IT JUST WASN'T ABOUT THE DRINK - IT WAS ALSO ABOUT THE TIME WE WERE ABLE TO SPEND CONVERSATING & TRULY CARING ABOUT THE THIRD PLACE!
Posted by: energybolt | July 24, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Re: warming as a "primary source" of store revenue
I remember when I first started working at Sbux many years ago. I work in a cafe store and there was only one other store in town. Back then we didn't need warming to bring in sales. My store was soooo busy.
Now there are four stores in my town (3 cafes and 1 DT), and three DT's in the next town only 10 min away and we all have warming.
The point I'm trying to make: If we didn't need warming to keep stores open back then, then why do we need it now?
And if more stores supposedly do close over this, so what. There is so much internal competition because there are 1) too many stores, and 2) too many stores too close together.
As far as I'm concerned closing 600 stores is not enough. Only two stores in my entire region are closing! That's it, only two. Not near enough.
Posted by: Cali ASM | July 24, 2008 at 10:45 PM
CALI ASM:
"And if more stores supposedly do close over this, so what. There is so much internal competition because there are 1) too many stores, and 2) too many stores too close together.
As far as I'm concerned closing 600 stores is not enough. Only two stores in my entire region are closing! That's it, only two. Not near enough."
I completely agree!!
But on the other hand, if all these closely located stores are all financially healthy, why close them? We've got three 5-Midnight DT stores within 2 miles of each other located on the same street north of the city center area, and another 6 stores (incl another DT store) within another 2 sq mile area in the city center. There is only one store out of that entire bunch that would be considered slow. And that store is located immediately next door to the Safeway in which there is a licensed store to compete with.
Yes, there are some problems with company stores stealing business away from another, but the larger problem lies with the licensed stores being allowed to move, in many cases, within mere feet of an already established company-owned store.
As an employee and an investor, I would like to know who were the buffoons within the corporate structure who let this happen?
Posted by: Westcoast Barista | July 24, 2008 at 11:07 PM
I have no respect for anyone who uses the word "conversating," and it takes away any credibility you might have had.
Posted by: 10 Car Train for Concord | July 24, 2008 at 11:13 PM
1) New b-fast sandwiches
2) ALL stores getting warming
3) Yes, Oatmeal!
4) New lunch program
5) Same-old, same-old, snoooze
6) Stock continues slide to 10.50
7) Howard S replaced by end of year
Posted by: Jim C | July 24, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Cali ASM: If we didn't need warming to keep stores open back then, then why do we need it now?
Starbucks began serving breakfast sandwiches because they are an obvious complement to serving coffee. Even better, they largely represented incremental sales...incremental in the sense that most folks didnt come in for the sandwiches but, instead, for the coffee so every time a sandwich was sold, it was found money.
In the process, the breakfast sandwiches created a fairly significant revenue stream that, if not replaced when the sandwiches go away, will hit the company hard on the top line of the P&L. Hitting the top line of the P&L hard will result ina proportional hard hit to the bottom of the P&L where it says profit.
Starbucks isnt removing b-fast sandwiches because they were a poor seller or unprofitable...au contraire. The only reason they will go away, IF they go away, is because they interfere with Howard's pristine vision of what Starbucks should be...and smell like. Clearly, Howard is being forced to re-evaluate his decision as well he should...if they truly go away and their replacement(s) dont perform as well then there will be hell to pay.
Posted by: Joe | July 25, 2008 at 01:10 AM
This comment is somewhat related. Our Starbucks has a new pastry--introduced with no fanfare--the Berry Stella, which I've had twice. Unlike the other pastries, it's not too sweet, and it tastes like a real, home-made product! It's very good!
I had heard a new line of healthy food was coming out along with the Vivannos--is this part of that? Did other stores get new items besides the Berry Stella?
It has 17 g of sugar, which is not *too* bad (I could take it even tarter) and 6 g of fiber which is very good! Keep them coming like this please! Right direction!
Posted by: Marcus | July 25, 2008 at 06:35 AM
I think Truth provides a good set of counterpoints to discussions he or she is involved in. Just because you don't agree, doesn't automatically make Truth wrong. Grow up a bit.
My DM told us that we were going to be getting oatmeal, but not sandwiches. She made it sound as if the entire city is going to be that way.
Posted by: blindsided | July 25, 2008 at 06:57 AM
Wow, this PR person should run for office, that was a pretty decent job of not answering the question at all.
I can see an Obama/Trevino ticket now. They can impress and inspire folks, without really saying much of anything, but saying it very well!
Posted by: Ken | July 25, 2008 at 08:46 AM
"Wow, this PR person should run for office, that was a pretty decent job of not answering the question at all.
I can see an Obama/Trevino ticket now. They can impress and inspire folks, without really saying much of anything, but saying it very well!"
That's one of the funniest things I've read all week!!
The key to great spinning is to always answer the question you wanted asked rather than the actual question that was asked. I think Sbux in general is going to subtly reverse their decision so that the issue quietly goes away.
The problem with the Sbux corporate culture in general is that it breeds this blind idealism in its partners that tends to play havoc on their overall ability to rationalize and think critically.
Read my lips...breakfast sandwiches v.2008 are here to stay!!
Posted by: Westcoast Barista | July 25, 2008 at 09:23 AM
Howie telegraphed the b-sandwiches in the Portfolio article. Those things don't slip in by accident. Most likely, the company has editorial review pre-publishing, too. They could have scrubbed it out if they wanted.
The funny thing is...the b-sands just bring the company right back to McDonald's wheel house. No matter how far/fast they run, there's a decent cup of coffee and an egg McMuffin staring them square in the face.
sbux = McJamba?
Posted by: truth | July 25, 2008 at 09:50 AM
I've never personally had the sandwiches, as my area does not carry them, but I DO agree with offering some sort of additional food option instead of/beyond the sugar-filled nastiness that's current displayed.
I love Starbucks coffee as much as the next person, but if I'm in search of a suitable breakfast in the morning, it doesn't make any sense to visit Starbucks and THEN another breakfast haunt to satisfy both needs. If that's the case, I'll just go to McDonalds where I can get both semi-decent breakfast and semi-decent coffee.
While I'm clearly not a coffee purist, I am your average consumer. And the reality is that I'll take one trip over two (especially with gas prices). But I do have to say, I LOVE the new Vivannos because at least that is a step in the right direction of being a breakfast solution, not just a coffee solution. If you are satisfied to stick to just coffee, then the brutal truth is that more store closures will soon follow in the coming years. There are too many alternatives out there for the "average" consumer.
Posted by: CFLStarbucks Fan | July 25, 2008 at 10:01 AM
>>>>Most likely, the company has editorial review pre-publishing, too. They could have scrubbed it out if they wanted.
WRONG again, Truth. You're saying Portfolio let Starbucks read the cover story before it went to press? Ha! Not in a million years! I was profiled in that same issue of Portfolio and, believe me, I wasn't given "editorial review" prior to publication.
Speaking of editorial review prior to publication, I'm going to put your comments on "moderate," which means I'll review them before they're posted.
Posted by: STARBUCKS GOSSIP WEBMASTER | July 25, 2008 at 10:12 AM
I'm surprised there's no talk of yesterday's layoffs...
Posted by: BitchyBarista | July 25, 2008 at 10:22 AM
no offense, jim, but you don't carry the same clout as starbucks- I am sure portfolio didn't offer editorial review- but starbucks would be foolish to offer an interview and not retain control over what is printed.
Posted by: truck | July 25, 2008 at 10:53 AM
You're mighty clueless about how journalism works.
Posted by: STARBUCKS GOSSIP WEBMASTER | July 25, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Jim...
There is some truth to the "editorial review"... Starbucks PA is pretty anal about what gets written about them. Same goes for awards and affiliations... The Diversity group has turned down some awards from groups that it deemed "not a good reflection of Starbucks"...
I had a regular working relationship with PA so that's where my info comes from.
Please reconsider your stance on TRUTH...
Pat Nerr... Just sayin'
Posted by: Pat Nerr | July 25, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Pat -- The idea that Starbucks got to review the Porfolio article prior to publication -- or gets to look at New York Times or Wall Street Journal stories before they get printed -- is absolutely absurd. Anyone who believes that is, well, a fool.
Posted by: STARBUCKS GOSSIP WEBMASTER | July 25, 2008 at 11:14 AM
I loved the penza bars too! I wish they would come back!
Posted by: Coffee Soldier | July 25, 2008 at 01:53 PM
Pat...I'm sure if the publication offered Starbucks PA the opp to review the article pre-publication, they'd jump at the chance. But they can't demand it...the best they can do is refuse access to the reporter. Even then the reporter can still go out and write the story.
I've done a number interviews with reporters on behalf of clients (in fact I did another one this morning with Smart Money Magazine from the Wall Street Journal) and Ive never been given the opportunity to preview the story before it went up. It's always "I'll give you a call if I need anything else".
As the webmaster says, the idea that Starbucks routinely scrubs news stories is absurd.
Posted by: Joe | July 25, 2008 at 02:20 PM
WEB MASTER -- CALL PR AGAIN AND ASK FOR SOMEONE WHO CAN GIVE AN ANSWER
I don't know this PR manager, but it was handled lamely. Try contacting PR again. A simple YES or NO on sandwiches shouldn't be too much to ask us.
Posted by: Coffee Please | July 25, 2008 at 03:10 PM
"I think Truth provides a good set of counterpoints to discussions he or she is involved in. Just because you don't agree, doesn't automatically make Truth wrong. Grow up a bit."
I actually, in TRUTH, never accused them of being inaccurate. If he/she is entitled to express their witty retorts regarding postings on this board, then so am I.
Grow up a bit? This is an online message board.
'Nuff said.
Posted by: Crema_the_crop | July 25, 2008 at 05:38 PM
Westcoast Barista:
I understand what you're saying about my comment on store closures. I agree, if a bunch of stores are really close together and they're busy and profitable then yes keep them all open.
Joe:
I think what you're trying to tell me is that Starbucks shot themselves in the foot with this one.
Posted by: Cali ASM | July 26, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Wait, I just put two and two together. Are you Jim Romenesko of Poynter fame? Seriously?
From journalism gossip to Starbucks gossip. . . .I would have never guessed!
(sorry for this interlude; for those partners on here who weren't aware, the owner/author of this blog authors one of the biggest journalism gossip/perspectives sites on the web)
Posted by: Emily | July 27, 2008 at 11:59 AM
in the Wall Street Journal this morning, it said Starbucks was keeping the sandwiches but reformulating them to be less smelly. Different cheese, less butter.
Posted by: lw | July 28, 2008 at 02:19 AM