Starbucks spokesman defends charging for Internet access

Free wireless Internet has become the standard at independent coffee shops, but Starbucks is sticking with -- and defending -- its subscription-required T-Mobile service. A Starbucks spokesman tells Advertising Age: "Some establishments may choose to provide free wireless access, but we believe the T-Mobile HotSpot service provides a much more rewarding experience by offering internet access in the comfort of Starbucks coffeehouses in far more locations." As others have pointed out in the comments section, Starbucks is not a real "third place" as long as it charges for wireless access -- especially when 98% of indie coffeehouses offer it for free. (Advertising Age)

Comments

[USMC]

Kinda stupid to charge for access... whenever a customer asks if we have access, I tell them you need to pay for a T-Mobile account, then I tell them to sit outside and they can access several wireless accounts for free. If they need to plug in their laptops, I tell them to simply go to the coffee shop across the street where they can use internet for free.

[Phil]

If they absolutely insist on charging for internet access why can't they offer 90 minutes of free use with any purchase? It is just ridiculous to charge people for a service that they can get for free almost everywhere else...

[USMC]

Well, Starbucks tries to make a dollar in every possible way. Just the nature of the business that they do. I don't take it personally, that's why I suggest free places the customers can go for access.

[val]

i don't know anyone who thinks of starbucks as the third place. starbucks is a place to get a drink... fast. or maybe sit around for a couple of minutes. clearly, by charging for t-mobile, starbucks does not want laptop users to hang out and do work.

[USMC]

We have a ton of regulars who come in for hours at a time to work on their laptops. But my store is also in a neighborhood, so we have many regulars who do think of this as their 3rd place. I guess it really depends on the location of your store.

[Tall Drip]

Man, I can't believe Starbucks is going to stick with this...it's ultimately going to be a losing proposition, a boneheaded move.

I once thought SBUX was a very secure company, but it's going to find itself with a real problem one of these days if it doesn't watch out...bucking the near-unanimous trend of free Wi-Fi strikes me as the attitude of an aging dinosaur that won't adapt or change to a new environment

[seattlesuburb]

While I do think that it is ridiculous how much starbucks charges for internet access (or t-mobile for that matter), I can only imagine how that would overcrowd an already overcrowded lobby w/ people that wouldn't even necessarily buy something. I went to one in NY on Park Ave and it was completely full of people using it as their office w/o the internet. I cannot imagine how many more it would attract if we did offer free wi-fi.

[Jake of 8bitjoystick.com]

Pay for Play internet Wifi was just as stupid when they rolled it out as it is now.

Their "AOL in the 90s"ish internet policy is one of the reasons why I almost never go to Starbucks.

[Barista to the Stars]

When I used to work in another industry that was introducing internet access, a company approached my employer and offered to lay all the necessary cable to make the entire property wireless. No charge to the company but patrons would be charged an access fee. My employer thought (shortsightedly) -- everybody wins! Those that want it, pay for it and I don't have to pay for installation!

Fast forward a few years: everybody offers it for free, but he's stuck. He'd have to remove the first company's equipment (at his cost) and reinstall someone elses to offer it for free.

I think of this whenever someone complains about the TMobile internet. I'd guess that TMobile was one of the first to offer to install the equipment for free and now, *$ is stuck. It'd be devastating to uninstall at this point.

Not sure if that's the case or not, just a guess.

Barista to the Stars

[Becca]

Our store offers free wireless because of a problem with the networks where our store is located. People spend 8+ hours at the store nursing the tall drip they got at 7 AM surfing the net. Then we get customers who want a place to sit but all of the tables are taken by the loiterers.
Oh and "Starbucks is not a real "third place" as long as it charges for wireless access"?? My first place (home) charges me for interet service, so why the heck can't my third place?

[STARBUCKSGOSSIP webmaster]

BECCA -- You're ignoring the real point: Starbucks is the virtually the ONLY coffee shop that's charging for Internet access. Caribou offers it for free for an hour; Argo Tea chain is free for an unlimited time. In Evanston, two young brothers bought a sleepy usually-empty coffee house across the street from Starbucks, started serving Intelligentsia coffee and introduced free wi-fi. The place is now packed -- often more crowded than Starbucks -- and considered the coolest hangout on the block.

[Lou Sussler]

I'm with Seattlesuburb. On the few occasions where I would like to sit down in the Starbucks for a few minutes, I would say 8 out of 10 times, there isn't a seat available.

Free wireless would exacerbate this. The place is already packed with people paying for it.

Regardless of the fact that they may be the sole player still charging for access, I don't think they'll make a move until they start experiencing lost growth to competitors over the issue or their contract w/ T-Mobile expires.

[johnmoore (from Brand Autopsy)]

SBUX charging for Wi-Fi gives all the other coffee shops opportunity to attract customers. Plus, keep in mind ... by charging for Internet access, Starbucks self-selects who it wants as customers.

Abercrombie & Fitch does the same thing with the music they play and the sound level they the music at. By playing loud music, some people choose not to stay long inside Abercrombie & Fitch.

BTW ... SBUX has never released financials on how much $$$ their T-Mobile Wi-Fi access generates. I'm interested to know how many customers have monthly passes and how many choose the day-rate option. I'm also interested to know how many customers expense their T-Mobile SBUX charges to the company they work for. All SBUX investors know is that the company has a huge footprint for Wi-Fi access ... they no virtually nothing about the revenue it brings.

[Joel]

You are all missing the important part of this... we live in an unsecured Internet age. Every day you hear stories about internet security problems... many of these come from unsecured (aka "free Wi-fi") locations. While I do think the t-mobile hot spot is to expensive it is backed by a the full security of t-mobile. You are safe on starbucks hot spots. You do have to pay for this security which many people do not think is that important. I would like to see some type of program that offers free Internet with store purchase but otherwise it is just to risky to offer free wi-fi and have it be profitable for starbucks.

[Joel]

I do realize that Internet security is a lame excuse for not having free wi-fi but it is a REAL PROBLEM. With wi-fi growing in popularity it is important that we offer safe Internet access. It is not an issue of whether or not it makes starbucks look popular or if a patron spends 7 hours in your store. If your biggest concern is not being able to find a table then you are worried about the wrong thing. Sure it is nice to have free access and as I mentioned before I would like to see starbucks offer something that would involve free access for purchases made in the store but the bottom line is that at the moment starbucks is concerned with Internet security and how can you blame a company for that!

[B]

johnmoore's got it right--with its prices of coffee alone, starbucks is catering to a more financially secure crowd, those who can afford to drop 20 bucks a week for lattes. you know how we all hate 13 year olds who order frappuccinos? they're not gonna PAY for wireless, and that's just what sbux wants

What if Starbucks decided to offerer "free" Internet on the condition that their prices would increase to pay for the service? How angry would you be then? Nothing in life is free. Because you are not directly having to front the cost for a service does not mean that someone else isn't having to pay.

[cornfrost]

Not to hijack the thread, but what Starbucks really needs to charge for is bathroom access. We routinely have a dozen or more people lined up at the bathroom for hours at a stretch. People trash the bathrooms in ways that defy natural law. We use endless rolls of toilet paper. Starbucks has become the de facto public bathroom provider for NYC, but we don't seem to be subsidized by tax dollars.

Back to the wireless issue: I imagine the real test is whether Starbucks is in fact losing lots of business to the indie coffee shops offering free wireless. I sure don't see it -- though we do seem to have more customers asking whether wireless is free.

[RR]

I love Starbucks coffee, but when I need to use my computer out and about, I go to a local independent coffee house where they have free wireless. The coffee's not as good, but it's less of a hassle.

[tallamericano]

I could see giving people a free hour of access with a purchase, but I agree that it is often tough enough as it is to get a table, and if people could get unlimited access it would be even more difficult. As a customer who does not bring a laptop with me and wants to sit down and enjoy my drink for about 20 minutes or so before moving on, I am happy with the policy as it is.

[Robert the Red]

Seems to me that this is one way that local, independent coffee shops can better compete with Starbucks!

[Free is bad for *$]

i've been to a few of these free internet indie coffee shops in DC.

CROWDED as hell. laptops + wires all over the place. every seat taken.

with free internet, you gain customers at first. but once people loiter for hrs, you lose customers because they'll find someplace better to get coffee.

*$ isnt desparate to gain more customers. and what kind of customers would *$ gain anyway w/free internet? those too cheap to pay for it.

how much $ would *$ make off these people vs those $5 latte people they lose because there's no place to sit. or those $5 latte people dont want to be around the 'free' loitering riff raff types. (aka snob appeal)

by charging for internet *$ keeps out their non-target customer, which are those that DO bat an eyelash to paying $5 for a cup of java.

[JW]

Does Starbucks get paid with it being a "T-Mobile" hotspot?

[sbuxgrrl]

Contrary to many of the above posts, Starbucks does NOT charge for internet access. T-Mobile charges for internet access. You don't pay Starbucks...you pay T-Mobile. Think about it...have you ever paid at a register at Starbucks to use the internet? NO. So maybe you should petition T-Mobile to provide free access. As long as you are bothering with that, why don't you ask them to throw in free cell phone service?

[Angie]

No, you don't pay starbucks. T-mobile does for the contract....duh.

[StL Shift]

SBUXGRRL is right - it's technically T-Mobile charging for WiFi. But don't think that Starbucks didn't make money from it. Who knows what type of haul Starbucks brought in by giving T-Mobile access to all of its stores and customers.

The security is important for those customers who want to work away from home. And, T-Mobile doesn't censor content as some free providers do. Also, if you register with T-Mobile, you can get a free 24-hour pass.

My boyfriend and I share an account and I love it. But I do think the cost is steep, even with our 50% discount. Then again, I have WiFi whenever I'm near a Starbucks, and it's only $15 a month. My home access is about $50 and its slower because my phone lines are old, which makes my DSL run like crap. Just like anything in life, there are trade-offs.

When we first got T-Mobile in the stores, I remember being told (or maybe reading in The Scoop) that the corporate agreement allowed Starbucks to continue providing healthcare for its part-time workers. At the time I was a PT worker, so I certainly wasn't unfond of the idea.

[Repthebay]

I work at a location about 100 yards from the public library, i tell them that in order to access the web at starbucks they have to have an account through t-mobile, otherwise i always point out the option of going to the library, always places to sit, you know its quiet, and free wireless internet.

[chi-town's best/angriest barista]

cornfrost-
i totally agree, public restrooms will be the death of us. why oh why can we not say they are for customers only? or get an employee only bathroom in the back? then i wouldn't have to waste my whole ten minute break waiting to use it.

anyway, back to the real topic.
starbucks is not your office. please do not use it as such. i see no reason why starbucks should offer free wireless. please don't act like you are entitled to anything for free just because you want it "and bobby sue down the street has it." i want free college tuituion because some other people get scholarships, but does that mean i'm going to get it? no. same general principle applies here yes, it sucks to pay for it, but it sucks to have to deal with the cheap bastard paper-pushers who commandeer the entire front corner of the store for hours on end after splitting only a muffin and refilling their cups with milk from the condiment bar. stop that.

[Barista of the Millenium]

Jim,

Did you ever get my email about when I asked you this question months ago?

BARISTA OF THE MILLENIUM

[the Foodie]

"Some establishments may choose to provide free wireless access, but we believe the T-Mobile HotSpot service provides a much more rewarding experience by offering internet access in the comfort of Starbucks coffeehouses in far more locations."

That comment makes no sense whatsoever.

Bux needs to just pony up and provide free wireless. I suspect that they don't want to give up the kickbacks from T-mobile.

[BOSTON STARBUCKS REBEL]

Yes, I think we should charge for use of the bathroom or make sure customers buy at least something worth $4.
1) Customer comes in and buys something and give them the bathroom card.
2) They must swipe the bathroom card in order to access the restroom.
3) The bathroom light does not come on unless the door is shut once and then somebody swipes the card.
4) To ensure this policy the door also remains unlocked and there is a huge VACANT sign that lights up.
5) The register partner will recommend some promotional drink such as the dulce de leche latte so they can have access to the bathroom.
6) Your credit card can also be an alternate form of authenetication at the bathroom in order to indicate your purchased something.
7) Partners can free access to the bathroom, anytime, anywhere and they get to cut the line.

I buy the T-mobile monthly pass so I can use it wherever I go. It is very important for me to remain connected wherever I am.

BOSTON STARBUCKS REBEL
PRIMUS INTER PARES
STARBUCKS REBEL ALLIANCE
AIM SN: BOSTONSTARREBEL

[Tall Drip]

Look, I would say just offer it to a customer for a couple hours. Have a security key for the day that people can request for a 2-hour long pass, or what have you. That's more than enough time for me, and most other people, I'm sure. I don't really want to stare at a screen for too much longer than one hour, myself. I can't see sitting around to work for 7 hours...I don't need the Internet for work, I just need the Internet for screwing around. LOL let's be honest here. How many of us "work" on the Internet?

As for hanging around in the store, how is that any different than if I bring a big thick book and plop down in a chair for 3+ hours? I've been known to do that before.

SBUX can't possibly be making all that much money off this outmoded T-Mobile mid-1990s business model.

[ex-barista]

WAAAAAA!!!

I want stuff for free!

Other people get stuff for free!

I want free stuff too!

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

This is almost as bad as the person who wanted to know where all the free samples had gone...

NOTHING in life is free.

Just because other places offer free internet doesn't mean everyone will or should. Remember what your parents taught you when you were young? Life isn't fair? Yea.

Don't like it?
Don't buy it.

Sheesh.

[Speedmaster]

While I think that the company has every right to charge whatever it wants, and customers are free to go to competitors ...

The argument made by the company is both lame and nonsensical.

"Some establishments may choose to provide free wireless access, but we believe the T-Mobile HotSpot service provides a much more rewarding experience by offering internet access in the comfort of Starbucks coffeehouses in far more locations."

What?!?

Chris
http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/

[Plain Talk]

The spokeman's statement is what's called "STARBUCKIAN," which means it makes no sense at all.

[pepperminthotchocolategirl]

Ok in college we had Northern on Main, which was the college's coffee shop and it had Starbucks. Our internet there was free and wireless, and it was great because we could escape those darn noisy dorms, and do our homework and studies in there (the library sucked..it was like a prison, so no one went there..the warm and cuddly feeling there was dead, unlike the coffee shop) and so we could do our studies, get our hot chocolates, and chill out.

Now if you had to charge us for internet, we wouldn't be happy. The cost of going to school alone is freakin enough..we don't want to pay the T-Mobile thingy cause hellooooo..we already paid for the freakin campus access!!

As for going into town to the coffee shop there to do homework or reports, yeah it would be nice to not have to pay. I mean hell you already make me pay 4.00 for a drink..I think that shoudl cover the fee, and if I tip you (which I usually tip a dollar or two) I just gave you 6.00 for a drink that lasts me about 5 minutes!!! That's a dollar a minute people!!!! So yeah..I think the wireless should be free. If nothing else, you buy a drink, you get so many minutes, like an hour. That way, after the hour buh bye. No more time unless you buy another drink (here comes more obese Americans!)

But really, here, all the coffee houses have free wireless..why? We live in a wireless nation, communications are key to everything, if the cell will not provide we must have the laptop, and this is also a place where a lot of college kids are, so we need somewhere to go to do our homework in a quiet environment without someone pounding Guns N' Roses in our eyes as loud as they can. (nothing agains Guns..just when you are studying..you don't need Welcome to the Jungle blarring at you)

So if Starbucks wants to keep the college kids..give it to us for free. We're already broke enough as it is. And at the rate we pay for those drinks..we kinda deserve it cause I can go to Jumpin Juice N Java get the same drink cheaper (and they have more flavors, the York Peppermint Patty Frap is awesome!) and I get free Wireless!!! And a 10% student discount HAHAHAHA. See they're going to have to step up if they want to keep the crowd, cause we will go where we get the most for our money.

[Charles]

I can think of at least two reasons why Starbucks might charge for WiFi (even though I know there will be counter-examples).

First, consider the sheer number of Starbucks locations. To provide WiFi at each location, either there has to be one common carrier, or they negotiate on a site-by-site (or city-by-city) basis. T-Mobile probably reflects that common carrier. T-Mobile deals with the issues of getting connectivity to the stores and handles their own cost recovery; Starbucks can offer Internet to those who want it, while focusing on their core competency (coffee).

(Counter-Examples: Panera and Caribou Coffee. I think both lack the number of locations to hit the scale of Starbucks, as well as perhaps a different operating model.)

The other factor, I think is the inherent difference between a "neighborhood indie" who offers free WiFi and Starbucks. The Indies who do this are typically (in my experience) in residential neighborhoods or shopping areas, where they are trying to bring in business. Starbucks certainly plays in that space, but also in airports, downtowns, and major commercial areas, with a relatively captive audience. In these places, you are likely to have both lots of people who may camp, and folks who can put their T-Mobile bill on an expense account. This might be a similar comparison to hotels where folks "have" to stay (business travelers) versus where folks "choose" to stay (tourists). Slate has a good article on this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2135226/

I can easily imagine the headaches for a free WiFi provider at an airport or downtown business area that they might not want to deal with. On the other hand, an Indie may see it as a competitive edge (especially if they can more readily translate it into sales).

[Andrew]

T-mobile proides the WiFi for most airports I have been to. All the hotels that I have stayed at that made you pay for Wifi were partnered with T-mobile for Wifi. coincidence? i think not.

Example: I was at the airport on a layover and really needed to get online to check my email. I noticed that the Wifi I had to buy was the same as the one from Starbucks, so it made me have less buyers remorse to buy the Wifi. When I arrived in Vancouver and my hotel wanted to charge me for Wifi I just went to the local Starbucks.

I got back home to Seattle and was feeling like getting some work done but was unproductive at the office. I could have gone to the independant coffee shop with free Wifi, but "SINCE I WAS ALREADY PAYING" for Starbucks I just went to Starbucks instead.

So by Starbucks making me pay for T-mobile I escalate my commitment to Starbucks so I become a more dedicated customer and will not go to the other coffee shops even the free wifi ones because I am paying for Starbucks.

[BNBARISTA]

On more than one occasion, I've had customers who have been more than irritated that we don't have T-Mobile hotspot. (As a BN, we use AT&T wireless). They're usually regular Starbucks customers in town on vacation with no other way to check their email, and then I have to tell them that the internet they already paid for isn't available. The problem gets much worse in the summer because we're a big tourist area. While you can purchase a couple of hours for something like three dollars, most people feel that since they already paid for Starbucks it isn't worth it, and we lose those customers to the Seattle's Best cafe in the bookstore down the road. Starbucks knows what it's doing by charging for internet, even if it might not make most people happy.

[HopkinsBella]

...."98% of indie coffeehouses have it" free....

And the "free" also applies to my home (my job requires I have fast access on a reliable network, so they foot the bill for my home wireless), my job, when I travel....I don't have to pay for it. So no, Starbucks does not win this argument in my book, either.

Thusly the only "work" I do at Starbucks is when I meet a client or coworker for an informal business meeting.

And for the record, I do not see many people utilizing the online services at Starbucks when I go in--whether it is on a weekday at my nearest work location, in the evenings, or on weekends. So I really do not get how Starbucks is making any money off of this, other than through the contract they currently have with T-Mobile.

[djchuang]

I have been a T-Mobile wifi subscriber for over 2 years now, and 98% of the time, it has proven to be reliable and faster than the free Wifi I have used at other coffee shops. I travel maybe once or twice a month, and like the predictability of being able find a Starbucks and know I can get online via a Wifi connection with my grande soy latte. But, now I've recently gotten a mobile broadband card too, so finding wireless internet is no longer the greatest road warrior / web worker challenge. It is trying to find a power outlet! Now those are much harder to find!!

[Rob]

The comments above keep yammering over and over how Starbucks' T-Mobile WiFi can't possibly compete with other coffee shops' free services. Okay, try finding one of these "free WiFi" coffee shops in Fresno, CA. Or Bakersfield or Madera or Modesto...

There are MANY cities in the U.S., especially in the more rural areas, where Starbucks is the ONLY coffee shop in town, other than little hole-in-the-wall cafes that don't even have a place to sit, let alone WiFi access. So it's T-Mobile nor nothing.

[Joel]

Finally some people are getting it. T-mobile hot spots are not exclusive to starbucks. They are in many Airports, hotels, and other locations. That is what is being said in the quote by starbucks... comfort of starbucks locations plus OTHER PLACES! They do not have free wi-fi so that College students can use it. All colleges offer Internet to you as a student and just because you dont want to study on campus is not starbucks problem. Starbucks isnt around to provide college students free wi-fi... and I AM A COLLEGE STUDENT. A post earlier mentioned that not only is the t-mobile access secure it is also faster than most local/free wi-fi. The free wi-fi spots around me are all unreliable and slow. When I had t-mobile access I never had to worry about any of that.

Just because every other coffee shop is doing it does not make sense... financially it doesn't work for how big starbucks is. The Important thing to remember is that T-mobile offers secure, safe, reliable, fast Internet access. I do believe starbucks should work on a deal to provide limited access for purchases made in store but to offer just free wi-fi doesn't work.

This is NOT about crowded stores, finding a table, people sitting in starbucks for hours, college students, or any of that stuff. It is about providing reliable, safe Internet.

[pepperminthotchocolategirl]

Well there is a lot more people out there besides T-Mobile. You sound like a sales person for them Joel.

Instead of having T-Mobile, why not support the local guys? Here we have several companies that offer wireless LOCALLY! And they are not "big names" and they are far more reliable compared to T-Mobile and all those other places. Like my wireless, the guy sends out emails when he is going to update the system and for how long an outage might be. Which is great. I won't get any surprises!

And I will not pay for wireless at some store. I don't care where it's at. I won't. Why should I pay YOU for something I'm only going to use for perhaps 10-30 minutes to check email and a few other things. I'm not going to. I'll find someone that offers it free or find some place with a signal and get in that way. But I'm not going to "subscribe" to some other dang internet when I've already got my own at home that I pay 50.00 a month for. I don't need another bill just so I can go to Starbucks and enjoy peace and quiet while sipping on my latte and reading my emails.

As for reliable, I have never had a problem with anyone's wireless being slow etc. Places around here know how to cater. If we complain it's slow, they know we'll go somewhere else. So everyone has everything beyond up to par. Rather nice really. So no, Starbucks doesn't hold a candle to the competition. And here where I currently live there is two coffee houses, Maggies, and Starbucks. Maggies has free wireless..guess what..So does Starbucks. Why? Cause T-Mobile doesn't exist here. Plus they know we'll all go to Maggies. Her coffee is the same quality but cheaper, and you can order meals there as well.

But when I went to college we had five coffee houses, so yeah Starbucks had to compete to get our business. We had Tim Hourton's, Jumpin Juice N Java, The Fifth House, Starbucks, and some other place none of us really went to.

So there you have it. You want to compete, give it to us for free. I don't want to pay any extra compared to what Starbucks already freakin charges me. Cause I've actually stopped going to Starbucks like I used to. It used to be every week. Now..maybe once a month. After finding out what all goes in the drink..ewwwwwwwwwww. I'm not paying 4.00 for that!!

[Darleen]

So there you have it. You want to compete, give it to us for free. I don't want to pay any extra compared to what Starbucks already freakin charges me.

Thats just it, they really don't have to compete. To each their own, you don't want to pay for wireless, don't. You can read your emails at home. Plus from the sound of your post you seem to not like starbucks anyway, so why not go to an indie place and read your emails all day long if thats what you want.BTW, Nothing bad goes in the drinks at Starbucks, unless you are talking about how fattening some drinks are, but no one is forcing you to drink that breve hot chocolate, or that extra whip extra caramel frappuccino. Like I said, its all about choices.

And I will not pay for wireless at some store. I don't care where it's at. I won't. Why should I pay YOU for something I'm only going to use for perhaps 10-30 minutes to check email and a few other things. I'm not going to.

You can read your email at home, can't you? No one is holding a gun to your head saying you HAVE to buy t-mobile, get a grip, you don't want it, don't buy it! It's that SIMPLE!!!!!

[Josh]

If you don't like the policy at Starbucks, then don't go there. If you have another option, the don't give Starbucks your money.

If you don't have a better option, then pay them for the services you need. That's what capitalism IS. Free WiFi is not a natural human right.

[Anonymous]

The spokesperson is full of $hit and knows it. Ever hear of "wagging the dog"? That's what he's doing.

How is paying for wi-fi in a Starbucks rewarding? It's NOT. It's the charging of the prices that drives customers away creating less of a 3rd Place feel.

And I'll say it one more time. Starbucks is run by boneheads.

Now ask yourselves, if there was a national security situation or a FEMA incident in the area and one Starbucks is there. Do you THINK charging will reflect well on those government folks who have to use their ruggedized laptops (walkie talkies are'nt the ONLY tech they use..trust me)? What about professional journalists on the go?

...And I'll say it one more time. Starbucks is run by boneheads...

Thats why they are always on the forbes top 100, right? PLEASE...

...Now ask yourselves, if there was a national security situation or a FEMA incident in the area and one Starbucks is there. Do you THINK charging will reflect well on those government folks who have to use their ruggedized laptops (walkie talkies are'nt the ONLY tech they use..trust me)? What about professional journalists on the go? ...

They should have those tools already supplied to them, I would assume journalists don't have to rely on our t-mobile. Seems to me you just have a dislike for starbucks....

[JT]

In response to pepperminthotchocolategirl :

Why would Starbucks partner with local wireless companies? They would involve probably thousands of partnerships to run their internet instead of the one partnership they have now. That just doesn't make sense, the company is way too big to be dealing with that.

If all you're going to do is use t he internet for 30 minutes a week to check e-mail, Starbucks wasn't aiming at you in the first place when they introduced T-Mobile in the stores. Just like many people have said you're exactly the kind of person Starbucks is hoping to avoid.

Yes, a free wireless spot that's camped by people all day long is going to be more reliable than a secure wireless T1 connection, where you are most likely the only person, or 1 of 2 or 3 using the connection. /end sarcasm

I doubt that your local store has internet but no Hotspot. Starbucks is in a CONTRACT with T-Mobile meaning they have to use T-Mobile Hotspot's in their stores. People seem to forget that on this site. Every few months this same wireless issue comes up and every time I post trying to explain that Starbucks doesn't have a choice. Until T-Mobile gets their money back from the costs they incurred, Starbucks will be charging for wireless.

I'm sure Starbucks is so scared of your 4 local coffee houses when they have 13,000 locations worldwide and have went into areas with much tougher competition and still succeeded.

What it really comes down to is you are the type of customer that we'd probably rather NOT have in the store. You sound pretty cheap, and it also seems like you don't come in enough to warrant an opinion on the issue.