Starbucks reports a net loss of $6.7 million for the latest quarter, compared with a net profit of $158.3 million for the quarter a year ago. It was the cost of closing stores that resulted in a penny per share loss. The company earned 18 cents per share when the costs for restructuring and closing stores are excluded. (It earned 21 cents a share a year ago.) (Read the Associated Press story || Read the press release)
heads have already rolled (not really the right ones).
Posted by: grendelprime | July 30, 2008 at 03:22 PM
heads have already rolled (not really the right ones).
Posted by: grendelprime | July 30, 2008 at 03:24 PM
Shares up almost 7% after hours
Posted by: Observer | July 30, 2008 at 03:27 PM
Observer,
Of course they are! Wall Street is a difficult bedmate...never satisfied. Even now they think this is good but when the negative ramifications of the decisions begins to hit the bottom line, they are going to be asking for more.
Posted by: Cut Out The Heart | July 30, 2008 at 03:40 PM
"Rose! This Way!!! We have to stay on the ship as long as possible!"
"Jack.... this is where we first met!"
Posted by: Sheik | July 30, 2008 at 03:50 PM
One guy who recently told me that customer don't really know what they want (in regards to customers ordering 'bold' coffee) got the boot yesterday. Getting rid of people like that ought to be good for 2 pennies a share next quarter!
Posted by: Peace | July 30, 2008 at 04:06 PM
Currently listening to the conference call... man... have never heard Howard sounds so down and somber - sad might be a better way to put it - at least that's my sense.
I get the feeling he knows a lot of what has happened is directly do to his doing.
Posted by: Observer | July 30, 2008 at 05:03 PM
So with all these store closures and layoffs there will be a surplus of extra money...maybe we'll all actually get a raise that included the inflation of coast of living this year!!
Posted by: Coffee Soldier | July 30, 2008 at 05:07 PM
yes because a 6.7 million dollar loss = surplus profit
Posted by: buxy | July 30, 2008 at 05:17 PM
Well, 3 months to go until next quarter, and without any additional store closures, what will be the excuse for the next loss of profit? Vivanno is not sparking the sales that are desired, Oatmeal is on the way, Dunkin' Donuts is mocking SBUX by introducing "healthy items." CA is still slumping, and it is the bulk of the US revenue for SBUX.
On another note - A SBUX SSC "partner" found out they were laid off 3 days ahead of the announcement when they went to the Doctor and their benefits were already cancelled. When they called "partner services" they were told by the "partner rep" that they were terminated. 3 days later, they were told by their director. Howard if you are reading this, your support of "partners" is laughable!
Posted by: Jim C | July 30, 2008 at 06:50 PM
Jim C - that is horrible! Aren't we supposed to be able to pay to maintain our health benefit for a period if we lose benefits for any reason?
Posted by: sample cup | July 30, 2008 at 07:01 PM
that is very poor planning on that partner's manager's part. A partner action notice would have had to been submitted days prior to their conversation with their director ... within hours of the PAN being processed their status changes in our human resource database and from there everything gets disabled auto-magically
you can't fault howard because a director doesn't know how to lay people off properly ... they haven't had much practice with reducing our bloat just expanding it
Posted by: buxy | July 30, 2008 at 07:20 PM
jim c.
That is not only a lie but not possible due to continued coverage offer with Cobra. They would have received a certified letter in the mail about the opportunity to pay for coverage. How were they stll on the system to use e-mail? Or the VPN or VM? We have enough isuues without the drama stories!
Posted by: sick of the bs | July 30, 2008 at 07:30 PM
My DM was canned, without the highly touted 'dignity & respect' that the company CLAIMS to pride itself on. After 9+ years of loyal dedicated service. His health benefits will end tomorrow, for his whole family AND for an added bonus he wont get his EARNED vacation pay.... NICE.... thats DIGNITY AND RESPECT??
Sign me up!
Posted by: justapawninthegameofsbux | July 30, 2008 at 07:31 PM
Everybody needs to chill and quit jumping to incorrect conclusions> Hard time are ahead, but will correct if they can connect with consumers on the consumer-level.
Posted by: Dummy_brarista | July 30, 2008 at 07:54 PM
Well not to sure if I totally believe that. I know a manager that was let go had been with the company over 10 years had 5 weeks of vacation and they paid him for it.
Posted by: bayman | July 30, 2008 at 08:31 PM
Now is the time that we all have to make a choice about being on the bus or off. Changes will be made and it may get worse before it gets better but the partners are what make the company and we need to support each other in a way that will be uplifting and progressive.
Posted by: Zenster | July 30, 2008 at 08:53 PM
Where is PRIDE in all this? PRIDE????
Posted by: kidcapri | July 30, 2008 at 09:06 PM
This old Jackie Mason routine about Starbucks seems erlevant today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fGnIOZ1yY8
Posted by: Torontodude | July 30, 2008 at 09:13 PM
I'm here, I've just been reading posts lately and haven't had much to contribute that hasn't already been said. There are so many thoughtful posts on here, and then a few that are just not true, so be careful what you believe. Vacation time is paid out in all states that require vacation time to be paid out. If you are in a state that doesn't have that as part of their labor law, then you should probably take that up with your state legislature.
Darleen, I am sad to hear that you're moving on. I'm not surprised by much these days, I know that every partner needs to take their own unique situation into account. While I respect that you are not burning any bridges on your way out, I also seem to be reading between some lines and it seems like you've been identified here at SG? You probably wouldn't be able to respond and let us know if that was the case, but I really hope that you weren't let go simply because you post here. You are one of the most uplifting partners and I can't imagine you getting fired for supporting SB here on SG. Can you give us any more details about your departure, without getting yourself into any more trouble?
Posted by: P.R.I.D.E. | July 30, 2008 at 09:15 PM
Believe it, Bayman @ 6:31
He called corporate and they 'apologized' and said that he indeed would NOT receive it...
Posted by: justapawninthesbuxgame | July 30, 2008 at 09:29 PM
The comment about someone's benefits being ended doesn't sound right.
No one's benefits get "shut off" mid-month. A partner's benefits end at the end of the month in which they're separated (or fail an eligibility audit).
Posted by: anon | July 30, 2008 at 10:04 PM
This news has been coming for a while. Howie didn't sound too convincing today... the words were there but not the feeling.
Hey Howie... I know what you guys did buddy. The cat is out of the bag and soon will be public. I think I know why Hummell left now too...
Posted by: Pat Nerr | July 30, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Oh, for cryin' out loud Pat...!!!
Don't leave us hangin'!
SPILL!
Posted by: HolyCow | July 30, 2008 at 10:13 PM
You can't be fired for posting and reading this site. You can be fired though for WHAT you are posting though.
I don't think its possible for Darleen to be let go because of Starbucks Gossip because shes always posting uplifting things and isn't divulging anything confidential about the company. I even remember when Howard Schultz did an open forum in SF, he asked for a show of hands in the crowd of 800 how many people visit Starbucks Gossip. I was one of them, and it wasn;t like he came over to me and told me I was fired. He did said they that he wanted us to be careful about what we were posting (this was when BSR and Vicki Verona were famous for posting the promotional workbook info)
Posted by: Trent | July 30, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Salaried partners vacation is on a grant basis not an earned basis like hourly partners. I was told by the pcc that they will not pay out vacation for granted vacation time that wasn't used.
Posted by: XBaristaD | July 30, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Trent... there's been an effort made to find out who each of you are...
Posted by: Pat Nerr | July 30, 2008 at 10:29 PM
My friend did not get his unused vacation and he was fairly high in the organization. As for the benefits issue, I don't doubt there was a denial of benefits but I bet it was more of a communication error then anything else. Benefits run through the end of the month and then COBRA kicks in, if you elect to use it. We have had issues where the month had 31 days but the insurance provider only used 30 days.
Posted by: Cut Out The Heart | July 30, 2008 at 10:51 PM
I absolutely cannot believe Howard on the conference call reversing his stand on the breakfast sandwiches. He just confirmed in the Portfolio interview that they were gone, and now they're staying.
Also, my DM with a 2xxxxx partner number was let go. Really awesome lady who embodied the culture of Starbucks.
This might be remembered as the month in which partners lost the faith. It's hard to see how there's any coming back from that.
Posted by: BAYAREABUX | July 30, 2008 at 11:44 PM
HOWIE -- WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, FIRE INVENTOR OF "got a great idea" BOBBING FIGURE ON STARBUCKS.COM
What an annoying dashboard figure this is when you're trying to read Company's line. Not sure if genius resides in Marketing or IT -- either way, get rid of the fool.
Posted by: coffee please | July 30, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Pat Nerr, short of some sort of subpoena or deposition of webmaster-Jim, I have a hard time imagining that Starbucks could figure out who we are. ???
BAYAREABUX, on the conference call, Howard's explanation on the breakfast sandwiches (reversal) sounded like the most disingenuous part of the whole thing.
I didn't think Howard talked nearly as much as last conference call ... maybe that was just my imagination.
Posted by: Melody | July 30, 2008 at 11:56 PM
oh, and by the way, they still smell like s--t. One piece of cheese or two? Give me a break!!
Posted by: BAYAREABUX | July 31, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Melody... Think like an IT professional rather than a lawyer
Posted by: Pat Nerr | July 31, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Okay, so I'll bite and play PI here - Phil Hummel was Director, P&AP at Starbucks. So by the sound of Pat its something unethical that.. Howie did?
Maybe another hint? This could be a fun little game!
Posted by: a | July 31, 2008 at 01:19 AM
The UK has just announced that it will be giving free refills to anyone that buys a hot beverage. The UK Starbucks website doesn't give any details. Are there any UK staff here that can clarify the deal?
Posted by: Odge | July 31, 2008 at 02:05 AM
The only person in management that I know of in the Bay Area with a 2xxxxx partner number is Nicole. Better known as Cole. But she runs Starbucks at South Shore, and isn't a DM. What DM are you referring to Bay Area Bux? You sure you didn't mean SM?
Posted by: BayAreaBux has me All Confused | July 31, 2008 at 02:25 AM
East Bay DM, with the company since '91, I think. Must have been making too much money b/c I don't think she did anything to deserve it.
Posted by: BAYAREABUX | July 31, 2008 at 03:23 AM
bayareabux...
michelle s?
nope, she has been around since late 90's?
come on ... tell!
Posted by: dmanagerla(former) | July 31, 2008 at 04:10 AM
Guys, believe PatNerr. That's all I'm going to say on this. Believe what he is telling you!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Darleen | July 31, 2008 at 06:06 AM
Pat Nerr,
Here's my take on Howie.
The things he's said and behaves on the conference calls, interviews, and the like are all entirely theatrics for melodramatic purposes. Not only is he a CEO but he's also trained to put up a show.
Remember the conference for the stockholders at the stadium some time ago when he showed off that Maestrena and discussing Starbucks plans?
All entirely theatrics. All choreographed BS.
Who can you trust the word of? A CEO or the POTUS?
Oh, and Howard Schultz, if you're reading this:
You're still a schlock and a fool. I remember hearing about how your father's light on the candle went out and how you never wanted it to go out.
Well, YOUR light just went out.
Posted by: Anonymous Old School | July 31, 2008 at 07:59 AM
...
Pat and Darleen - you're making me nervous...
If you guys can't say what, can you say when?
And...
on a scale of 1 - 10... how bad?
Posted by: overworkedandunderpaid | July 31, 2008 at 08:06 AM
For those of us outside of Sbux - could someone please clarify what P&AP and POTUS are? Thanx.
Posted by: reality check | July 31, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Partner and Asset Protection; President of the United states
Posted by: Hmmm | July 31, 2008 at 10:12 AM
I also seem to be reading between some lines and it seems like you've been identified here at SG? You probably wouldn't be able to respond and let us know if that was the case, but I really hope that you weren't let go simply because you post here.
I'm sorry, I did not see this post. Yes, I was recognized by my posts on this site. However I was not terminated because of it.
Posted by: Darleen | July 31, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Go Peets!
Posted by: EFriedrich | July 31, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Its a shame that so many DMs have been laid off. I just found out the first one we've had since 2005 who isn't a phony was let go. It's time to move on.
Posted by: BluePhoenix | July 31, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Seriously still interested in this Howard business, Pat.. Can you give us any more information? I mean, the only two people here who have said anything are Darleen and yourself, and neither of you work for Starbucks anymore...
Posted by: a | July 31, 2008 at 11:06 AM
a-
I have said nothing about any Howard business. Please, do not put words in to my mouth.
Posted by: Darleen | July 31, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Webmaster Jim -
Under the new layout, it seems like I'm seeing a few email addresses but not the majority. Are we all anonymous? Or how do you post without an email address because your system won't seem to let me.
Melody
Posted by: Melody | July 31, 2008 at 11:48 AM
"... there's been an effort made to find out who each of you are..."
Oh, you got to be kidding me?!?!
First of all, I would never be so stupid to post anything about my employer from my work computer. And second, for those that have, you had this coming.
For those of us who post on this site from places outside of Starbucks (home, *other* workplaces, etc.) the risk of the IT sleuths coming after you is slim to none. Still, since I'm only working at Sbux for the discount and freebies, I could care less what IT does. Furthermore, I've spent hours hanging out with friends in my own store on breaks, after work, or during free time, vocally critiquing various company policies and business practices, even with store management around. Never once have I been remotely close to being reprimanded for that. Why? Because management darn well knows they'd rather have a sharp-witted, quick-thinking person with a brain on their head than some blond hair, blue eyed space cadet that doesn't know the basic difference between Sumatra and Pike Place blend.
Instead of sending the IT guys on a witch-hunt against us so-called rabble rousers, the talking heads on top should put out the welcome mat for us that actually care enough to attempt to help shape the course of the company, albeit from the sidelines.
Posted by: Westcoast Barista | July 31, 2008 at 11:52 AM