Starbucks CEO: "We are not the McDonald's of anything"

Critics have long derided Starbucks as the McDonald's of coffee, notes this Associated Press story. Now some chuckle that drive-throughs just make them look more like it. Starbucks CEO Jim Donald bristles at such a suggestion. "We are not the McDonald's of anything," he says. "The drive-through is another convenience for our customers as we want them to enjoy a great cup of coffee." (Associated Press)

Comments

[Patrick]

If I put Starbucks' logo and a McDonald's logo in front of me, I think of several comparisons, and many differences.

Comparisons:
Convenient food and beverage service
Global brand identity

but the comparisons for the most part end there...

Starbucks emphasizes the customer experience, it promotes a relaxing casual, refreshing customer experience and provides that atmosphere in the majority of the stores. Employees (partners) are paid well and rigorously trained. I can go on and on....

McDonald's to me, is fattening, unhealthy, a quick meal to go that adds to global obesity problem, and by far no where near the quality customer service that Starbucks offers.....

The only argument a critic can safely claim comparing the two is in the numbers of stores located....everywhere...

can anyone argue this?

[Ivy]

I love Starbucks, because I love the convenience of a good cup of coffee almost anywhere I am. I iove to hang out at the one by my home and drink an Americano and read the Sunday paper.

But the drive-thru to me is the beginning of the end. I saw one this weekend, not off the highway, but in a suburban commercial strip, and it freaked me out. Starbucks does serve a lot of fattening drinks in Big Gulp sizes. And their bakery comes in huge portions, too. You can't deny that.

A nonfat venti mocha w/ whip cream and a slice of pumpkin bread = 700 calories*

A grande mocha frappuccino with whip and a blueberry scone = 880 calories!*

Couple that with sitting in a car and not even getting out to get the food... and you have an even fatter America.

* (check out the nutrition facts at starbucks.com)

[Busy Mom]

If it weren't for drive-thrus, some of us with kids would never get to go there.

[Ivy]

My parents always managed to get me and my brother in and out of fast food restaurants without needing the drive-thru, and a lot of times we were with only one parent. (This was back in the '80s)

With drive-thrus, especially ones that aren't anywhere near a major highway exit, Starbucks has basically thrown up its hands and said "let's be part of the problem."

Americans have gotten lazy. We're going to convenience and time-save ourselves to death.

[Sue in Seattle]

Fast food stores don't have a thousand little things to break (demitasse cups, bags of coffee) while you're waiting for your food trying to control your children. Drive through espresso is a convenience that I look for.

My drink - Caramel Non-Fat Latte - 230 calories, 0 grams fat

Kids drinks - Hot cocoa with light whip - 225 calories, 6 grams fat. Dairy fat is great for growing brains and skinny kids.

We share one cinnamon roll evenly between the three of us about once a week.

I'm not lazy, nor do I have a weight problem. Nor do I eat McDonalds. Their food has almost no nutritional value and is full of preservatives and artificial flavorings. Read Fast Food Nation and you'll see there is no comparision.

[Christy]

Another HUGE distinction as far as I'm concerned - McD's markets specifically to children.

Starbucks, markets to adult yuppies who are old enough to make an informed choice about what they choose to eat or drink.

[deusx]

I don't get people who can't keep their kids in line for a ten minute visit to somewhere. What do you do that makes them think so little of you telling them to stay right here and not to touch things?

[NorVa barista]

I rarely suggest anyone order a venti milk based beverage.

Some of our patries are enourmous, namely the Apple Fritter.

The loaf slices are appropriately sized for their price.

Cookies are large too, but that's marketing.

We offer several healthy options.
Fresh Fruit
Lower fat pastries
Many hot and cold beverages with little to no sugar nor calories.

All of our coffe cakes are reduced fat (and delicious). Cinnamon, Blueberry, and the the new Marble coffee cake will hopefully blow marble -loaf- out of the water.

"Starbucks, markets to adult yuppies who are old enough to make an informed choice about what they choose to eat or drink."

Don't know which SBUX you frequent, but at the ones I hit there are tons of tweens & teens blowing mom and dad's money too.

[Dimitri Hazegeorgiou]

NO STARBUCKS ISN'T AT ALL LIKE MCDONALDS. IT'S WORSE. Please do you know how much fat is in a Frappuccino? What about those low fat pastry they offer in the morning. Donut anyone. Please

not that calorie counts have anything to do with this.. but my drinks
tall non-fat latte- 170 cal
tall coffee frapp- 150 cal.. there are healtier options you just have to look;)
personally.. the dt is nice

[lucky mcbucky]

NO STARBUCKS ISN'T AT ALL LIKE MCDONALDS. IT'S WORSE. Please do you know how much fat is in a Frappuccino? What about those low fat pastry they offer in the morning. Donut anyone. Please

Frappuccinos come in light form or regular so if you are concerned about calories or fat, go light. They are quite tasty. Low fat pastries mean 3 or less grams per serving. Reduced fat is the tricky one......25% less than the regular recipe,

Is there a lolw fat mcnugget, or a reduced fat big and tasty? Big macs come with less sodium?
At Starbucks you can CHOOSE your ingredients. Health conscious people have MANY options at Starbucks, its up to you not your barista, or the menu.

Can someone explain this kid thing to me? I'm being serious, because I don't have kids.

When I was a child, I was one of three, each three years apart so we represented a wide range of ages. We were expected to behave appropriately. We didn't run away from our parents, we didn't handle everything, we didn't shout or create a scene. Of course, if we did, there were consequences. The pinch came first, and if we didn't shape up, my mom would simply leave and, once back in the car, we got the lecture and, once home, time alone, in our rooms. It worked and I'd say about 70% of the time, we behaved as expected.

Why on earth do you have to have a drive thru in order to go anywhere? Are your children that poorly disciplined? (And I'm not talking about beating your children, I'm saying disciplined as in able to stand still and behave like young adults.)

[txbarista]

I opened a store with a drive-thru and was terribly disappointed...until I was talking with a mom who had triplets all age 2. She said that if it weren't for Starbucks, she would have lost her sanity. And if it weren't for drive thru, she wouldn't have Starbucks. It took her 10 mins to get them all out, another 10 to put them all back in -- making it an altogether unpleasant experience.

However, my least favorite customers are the ones who do drive thru, have never been to sbux, and want a detailed description of every single item because they "aren't sure if they like coffee."

*sigh*

[Christy]

Only a non-parent would expect 3 year olds to "stand still and behave like young adults".

Don't worry, you'll lose the feeling of having all the answers when you have children of your own.

[-m]

"Don't know which SBUX you frequent, but at the ones I hit there are tons of tweens & teens blowing mom and dad's money too."

I seriously doubt that. There are a few hours in the afternoon when some highschool kids will come in and treat themselves to fraps. For the most part, we cater to adults. Our demographic is over the age of 30. Personally, I don't like the fact that some kids will come in and order highly caffinated drinks...but what can I do?

[KH]

I think the demographics of the town are really going to affect the above statements about the demographics of Starbucks or other coffee places. I live in a college town with about 50% college students, so it is no surprise to me that over half the people i see at sbux or other coffee places in town are college kids studying or talking. I am sure it is very different in a suburb or downtown coffee shop.

[deusx]

Christy I'm a parent and my children stand in line and behave. They do this because if they don't they know they won't get to go anywhere again for a while. They do this because they have been taught that getting to go out to restaurants is a privelege, not a right.

[-m]

Deusx, if my wife and I have kids, can we hire you?

[geoff]

The comparison drawn between McDonald's and Starbucks is not one based on nutrition alone. Starbucks, like McDonald's, capitalizes on location (customer convenience in the getting a consistently "great" cup of coffee whether in Manhattan or the Forbidden City, if you will). With the long-term goal of 30,000 stores worldwide there are no other chains that can compete with the universality of Starbucks.

The drive-through is an extension of this convenience - one in which Starbucks can reap further sales. However, I would argue that the drive-through flies completely in the face of providing customers with a [Starbucks-influenced] "third place." (Which, interestingly enough, is NOT an idea unique to Starbucks. The Neo-Marxist German philosopher, Jürgen Habermas in his The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, pioneered the theory of the third place.) It could be argued that the third place is established with the moment of contemplative serenity offered by a venti non-fat sugar-free vanilla no-foam caramel macchiato in the cup-holder of a luxury SUV, and I would agree with that to some extent (I surely enjoy that). So, do away with my third place argument then for the purposes of this post, especially considering it is not one of the six guiding principles in corporate decision-making listed in the Starbucks mission statement.

The drive-through satisfies all of those principles. Or does it? I wonder just how profitable these stores are in the grand scheme of things. Obviously they are making more immediate sales, but at what cost? Not only does Starbucks lose the ability to promote retail products, hook people onto Hear Music, and push XM Radio, but the long-term image of the brand is at stake with something so incredibly not coffee-house-like such as the drive-throughs. The brand is now being compared in national publications to McDonald's and that could prove to be more costly than profitable in the long run.

[Christy]

"Christy I'm a parent and my children stand in line and behave. They do this because if they don't they know they won't get to go anywhere again for a while. They do this because they have been taught that getting to go out to restaurants is a privelege, not a right."

Deusx:

I agree with you completely. I was referring to the anonomous remark made that children should be acting like "young adults". Kids should behave like *well-behaved kids* in public, not like miniature adults.

-M: I think it has to do with the fact that the one I frequent is located within walking distance of a well-to-do neighborhood with an elementary, middle school, and high-school... You see less of the middle-school - but especially at the beginning and end of a day, there are quite a few teenagers there. Sometimes with mom or dad, but often just there, cell in hand, waiting for caffeine. But several other stores I go to don't have high teen traffic.

[-m]

" I wonder just how profitable these stores are in the grand scheme of things. Obviously they are making more immediate sales, but at what cost?"

I managed a busy drive-through for about a year, so hopefully I have a little credibility here. First off, Starbucks did not want to go with the whole drive-though concept for the exact reasons you stated Geoff. The whole thing was driven by customer demand. Most of us thought that this was the begining of the end for our company. No so. The drive-through didn't end up taking customers from our lobby. Instead, our semi-regulars became daily regulars, and we added a lot of people who otherwise never would have been able to visit us.
I'll still admit that I am much happier running a busy downtown los angeles store instead of a portland drive-through.

[christhelibrarian]

I am a parent and so feel the urge to weigh in on the kids issue. Personally, I think in previous generations moms stayed home most of the time and kids' bad behavior took place behind closed doors. But today's moms are on the go, for a wide variety of reasons, so the childless see a lot more of the range of typical kid behaviors.

You might also be seeing the behavior of a special needs kid (autism affects 1 in 166 children - who appear "normal" to the untrained eye). So please try to be a little more understanding.

Reading between the lines, I am sensing in the comments on this site a breakdown in our sense of community. Why are we all being so judgmental - of the baristas, of parents, of kids, of the poor, of the homeless, of the tweens and teens, etc? Lighten up people and try being more patient. You want to be a "third place", or frequent one, you are going to see more than everybody on their best behavior all of the time. It's called "being human".

[Gerry]

Starbucks as a place to hang out and as the "third place" is negated if Starbucks proceeds to CLOSE as part of its renovation at a 5 yr old location(no joke,folks) -customer available toilet. They will rebuild without la toilette.. This they are presently doing at the Mililani Shopping Center (reason says the shift mgr.= too much graffiti to manage.)Translation= too much overhead. Alternatives nearby, virtually none. Starbucks has set up the Wi Fi thing saying "hang a while," and since coffee is a mild diuretic, I keep thinking the no public toilet plan is a bummer. Is this a trend nationwide I am wondering, and is it a sign of Starbucks getting less "classier" than the commenters have labeled it? I mean grande and venti froufrou etc...

[MGR2]

Gerry, that's an odd story. You should probably write Starbucks directly a nice note telling them not to close the restroom. Rather than bringing it up here. They might actually do something about it.

[deusx]

-M

God no, I don't want to take care of yet MORE children;). Seriously though, 8 years experience dealing with my own children has taught me the key to kids. Start nearly from birth. Draw a line, set unpleasant consequences and always follow through, even if you end up being more miserable than your kid.
They are like wolves man..if they sense weakness they will move in for the kill!=) And don't be afraid to be a little scary, all children should have a small amount of healthy fear of their parent. Remember what often kept you out of trouble as a kid was that horrible feeling in the pit of your stomach worrying about "when your dad found out?".
My son is five and sure, he can get a little loud and boisterous. After all, he is a five year old boy, but when reminded that the situation isn't appropriate for play he knows to chill out for a bit. Of course, I might of just gotten lucky and my kids are the 1 percent of children NOT possessed by the Devil...dunno.

I think the question of whether starbucks is or is not like McDonalds misses the point entirely.

That being that Starbucks management for some reason views McDonalds as its main competitor and is making adjustments to compete with it.

The problem is that Starbucks management seems to think it can out McDonald McDonalds. It seems that the executives of Starbucks have no idea anymore what makes starbucks different and why starbucks was able to grow in the first place.

This current lack of identity has caused a among other things the systematic devaluation, and deexpertization of it’s workforce. They sacrifice personal touch for expendable labor, expertise in excellent coffee making for uniformity in taste which inevitable means lowering the quality to a sustainable easley reproducible level, and atmosphere for convenience.

This is good news for it’s real competitors, small coffee shops that will happily snap up the best starbucks workers, that can now dedicate themselves to producing the finest and most unique regional coffee drinks in each of their respective markets, that can provide the relaxing atmosphere which starbucks seems ever more interested in sacrificing. In fact these small coffee shops can no take over those lucrative customers which starbucks seems no longer interested n serving….

And why are these coffee shops starbucks real competition. Because the number of them is growing at the rate of starbucks itself. Starbucks seems to actually be wasting its capital and energy on opening new markets, markets previously never served only to be faced by direct competition by a local coffee shop. And these local coffee shops have the advantage of not being controlled by an unresponsive corporate plutocracy…. They can and must understand their community in a way that starbucks can’t rival and then must offer everything starbucks dose plus something else… which leaves starbucks more an more dependent on coffee consumers who don’t know and done value good coffee.

Now I am expected to believe that these customers… which by the way is the majority of Americans…. Would rather buy form Starbucks than from McDonalds?

I think not….

As of yet Starbucks doesn’t sell egg Mc Muffins with their coffee. Or have I missed something.

[GSFVA]

Actually, there are 30 stores in Seattle (and more in Washington DC) that do offer breakfast sandwiches, which consist of egg and cheese on an English muffin, with your choice of several meats. They are very similar to Mc Muffins, and customers often order them that way, ie, "I'll have a Venti Mocha and a sausage mcmuffin," which I find quite amusing.
Anyway, the breakfast sandwiches are much better than McMuffins, although they are more expensive and just as bad for you. If your local store doesn't carry them yet, they will be soon!

[Donato]

The biggest problem here is that we should all be about supporting our small, local coffee shops. I have the luxury of living about two city blocks away from one. Roasts their own beans right there. They need a little help with the brewing (as Starbucks obviously does not), but it beats supporting a monoply.

CJD

Why is supporting Starbucks a problem?

[deusx]

How is Starbucks a monopoly? Do you even know what monopoly means CJD? Why shouldn't I support whomever provides me with what I want in the most satisfactory way? Where is the logic of going to a smaller coffee shop just because it's smaller?

[CJD]

So I'm stretching the word a bit. I'd use the same word to describe Wal-Mart, which I don't shop at either. Of course, satisfaction with the product is key. And it would not be out of line to say, generally speaking, that mom-and-pop businesses will give you much greater care (and usually a better product), not to mention what free market economy is supposed to be all about — competitive prices and a willingness to compete with others when confronted with their competition. Merit, not monopoly, is supposed to win our pocketbooks.

The logic of going to a smaller coffee shop is one of principle (despite the fact that in my case, the beans are better) — namely, the principle of not supporting corporations who violate fundamental principles of capitalism.

[deusx]

Which fundamental principles of capatilism does Starbucks violate?
Not to mention the whole point of my post and by your own admission, the mom and pop place you referred to did not have a superior product "they need a little help with their brewing as Starbucks obviously does not". I don't go to Starbucks because I want to pay more than a local shop, nor do I got to Starbucks because their product is inferior. I go to Starbucks because they generally provide me better service and product than the local coffee shops especially without the pretentious attitude. If someone else provided a superior product with superior service, than I guess I would be going there, but they don't.

[deusx]

I can't leave this alone, as I find every parrot who is repeating what they are told...(typically by the IWW) refers to the concept that Starbucks in some how relates to WalMart.

Walmart is what is called a "big box retailer". They move into an open market and undersell all the local competitors. They can afford to take a massive loss for years on a business b/c they buy in such quantities. Once local business competition as closed up, they raise the prices a bit and bask in what truly can be considered a local monopoly. Walmart does not create markets for goods where there was no real demand previously, nor can other similiar businesses thrive near them.

Starbucks, while considered a chain, is a specialty retailer. I defy you to find an area Starbucks enters and is not immediately the highest priced vendor of coffee locally. So they cannot be accused of underselling local competition to make them fold.
Starbucks creates markets for demand of coffee products where there wasn't really one to start with. Take Columbus,Oh for instance. We had a few shops, but it was a select crowd who visited them. Now everyone I know has a familiarity with coffee drinks.
Unlike WalMart, local coffee shops can thrive in the presence of Starbucks. Seattle is a great example. Open a phone book, there are tons of small indy coffee houses. Heck, there are indy espresso STREET VENDORS even. Same here in Columbus, the local coffee shops have grown massively since Starbucks came. In fact, I can count at least five new shops opening since the arrival of Starbucks. Alot of people whine about Starbucks opening shops near other shops. Do you whine when McDonalds opens near a Wendy's? When a BP gas station opens across the street from an Exxon? There are shops there because its where the demand is at.

The tired cliche "starbucks destroys independant shops" is just that...a tired cliche. It's an uninformed comment not based on fact. Starbucks creates demand where there was little or none. Starbucks educates consumers and encourages them try recipes they never had in the past.

[deusx]

Oh and I forgot. Starbucks is indeed an evil empire masquerading as a coffe company. They realy are owned by Dr. Evil and one day you will all be wearing green and khaki and the only prayer allowed to be uttered will be "Live the way of being". God I hate that phrase btw. They may not be a monopoly or any of the silly stuff they are often accused of. But they are full of bullshit on some levels...sooo full of bullshit.

[MGR]

Deusx, you are amazing.

[Keyser]

I agree with the first post on comparissons and similarities. Starbucks employees are much better trained than McDs workers, and Starbucks employees speak english, which is a good thing in America. But Starbucks' female employees are no longer the hotties they used to be. There are too many fat and unattractive girls working there.

How come everytime I pass a Starbucks at night, there are ambulances parked out behind the store? Are they waiting for "customers"

hmmmmmmmmmm..........

[Gerry]

I suggest that S-bucks is really not like McDonalds. A Big Mac is a big Mac is a big Mac. A Starbucks espresso drink is a variable commodity at a premium,big premium, price. The pastry (and that might be a local thing) is so bland,boring, and incidentally overpriced for me that I bring my own snack.Skinflint/frugal,whatever... Commonality and commoditization is not a virtue when it takes so much money for what is essentially a lot of milk,flavoring, and "Can I Get Something Started for You.".. a production operation,with mediocre pay,ask the help. I mean,seriously, would Maestro Ludwig have wanted to meet his score publisher in eine Starbucks?..Followup to the elimination of the john thing: The toilet closing-locked in deal- I mentioned is only tangentially related to this topic I know-coffee is as we know, a mild diarrhetic-no I have received no response to my writen and e mailed queries to the CA franchise that owns all these 50 stores. They care,and have their reasons,(druggie hangout)but most of their customers are in and out military. I speculate that customers with their malt substitute,what is it called,oh yes caramel brandy mocchiattos, haven't enjoyed nor seek a real coffee shop experience. Another chain is coming in strong- Coffee Bean and Tea. It isn't that S is a bad guy so much as not so really good at all. Just irks that it wants to be seen as so much better than it is for the big money it scoops in. Give me a plain Dunkin Donuts java and sinker..

[-m]

Wow Gerry. Your non-sensical ramblings would be more at home if they were smeared in shit on the walls of the psych-ward.

[Gerry]

I can use single syllable words,young Neanderthal. (Never mind, unimaginatively personal and abusive,and really banal language tells that M is a teen,and can be ignored; part of the herd that actually savor scratching and thus defacing mirrors (with his reform school devil head grad ring) to aid in desecration of public use facilities. (Wow that felt good)... Moving right along. Breaking news: No answers to my e mails,but... the state 54 outlet operation,announced today, will have a new owner. And guess what, the new owner will be Starbucks of Seattle which had only a 5% interest in the local operation. Now I have a shot at influencing some policy changes vis a vis "comfort" facilities. Don't we love euphemisms. As to the quality of drinks, here is a secret I read in the NYT. Order a short latte,it gives 8oz and thus a stronger more consistent drink. On balance, I applaud the Starbucks concept. Just not the execution. Happy trails.

[Gerry]

"We have built a whole new ritual of coffee in this country." says Howard Schultz, the man who invented Starbucks. When he visited Milan in 1983 and fell in love with the ambience of that great Italian institution. " It was about excellent coffee,but it was more than that," he says in passionate tones. " It was about conversation.About community. About human connection. And fine coffee was the link. I thought,You know,we could do this in Seattle." (National Geographic, January 2005," Why We Love Caffeine." pg 31

I swear at one leadership conference in Seattle that one of the leaders of Starbucks stated to the entire conference that Starbucks would love to be on every corner...just like McDonald's. The long story short, Starbuck's would kill to have as much real estate as McDonald's.

[Rishad]

Hi All,

Is anyone able to tell me why Starbuck's have decided not to allow McDonalds a contract to serve Starbucks coffee? Any inputs regarding this would be highly appreciated.

Thanks very much.
Regards,
Rishad

[Rishad]

Is there any reason(s) why Starbucks have decided not to allow McDonalds a contract to serve Starbucks coffee??

[Riley]

i work for starbucks and i will say that i chose not to work at one with a drivethru. While it may provide a very convenient cup of coffee, that is not what starbucks is here for. Starbucks coffee company specializes in customer service. Partners (employees) are not allowed to wear name tags because we are supposed to get to know all of our customers. as far as the whole starbucks verses mcdonalds thing, that is rediculous. i also used to work at mcdonalds and the comparison doesnt exist. yes we have fattening pasteries at sbux, but as someone else posted mcdonalds does not have low fat double cheese burgers or lower sodium big macs. Starbucks has non fat lattes and light frappuccinos which are both great options for people who are concerned with their weight situation. Starbucks advertisement is geared towards adults but teens come in too. about 90% of our customers are 20's and up though. bottom line is that we have low fat options for the responsible american and for those who choose to get the fattening marble loaf and the latte made with steamed heavy cream we have that too. being fat is a decision that people make. when they eat mcdonalds and drink fattening frappuccinos with extra whip they can expect to get twice or even three times the calories than they are supposed to have.