Starbucks move into instant coffee market

[shuurajou]

I'm no fan of Starbucks, but it's an interesting read: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009 ... ready-brew

Howard Schultz said that through a hi-tech process, Starbucks had "cracked the code" in retaining freshness and flavour in instant coffee, with taste tests showing Via to be indistinguishable from brewed coffee.

I know it's the trend to mock Starbucks, but if they can't get the coffee fresh to their stores, what hope do they have of making instant coffee taste fresh? Also, their existing 'tasters' have seemingly failed at preventing bad coffee to hit their stores to date, so what good are they for the instant? These are interesting statements for Starbucks to make.

[petikas]

I thought they couldn't sink any lower!

I was wrong.

[tav69]

My wife is a bit of an instant coffee drinker, so she may be interested in this. Saying that, she just drinks it to wake up. Makes me wonder why we have to buy Gold Blend??? Surely that industrial powder stuff would do, or a couple of pro-plus!

[espressomattic]

Really, no pont getting our undergarments in a kerfuddle. It's big business - this equals profit. In the present climate, I can't blame them for trying to find new ways to make a dollar. I would even give it a go - just to see...hmmm....maybe not thinking about it!

[ianboughton]

I always hesitate to mention my own magazine on a forum, but you can read about it here:
http://www.coffee-house.org.uk/

And yes, I've tried it. I had two packs delivered by Starbucks yesterday.

-IanB

[CakeBoy]

How was it Ian?

[Aadje]

That's the intersting part, how was it?

[bruceb]

He's not going to tell us.

I must say, when considering the enormous problems that *$s are having it doesn't surprise me that they are "convinced" that the coffee market is ‘ripe for disruption.’ The company itself is ripe for disruption and they need something badly.

Spray drying coffee is nothing new at all. It was being done 40 years ago. Adding finely ground powdered coffee is also not original. What's more, having the aim to make a product that tastes like *$s coffee is questionable at best, especially at those prices.

Edit: Just discovered this sentence in the Chicago Tribune: "Critics say the move smells of desperation as the chain closes locations in the U.S. and overseas and cuts up to nearly 1,700 jobs."

[CakeBoy]

Maybe people are finally tasting the quality difference, or perhaps the large buckets of milk froth with little coffee flavour are the issue. Whatever the reason, we live in interesting times.

[ianboughton]

Well, I said to Starbucks, and I hope tactfully, that you could taste a Starbucks roast in there. Make of that what you will, please.

Yes, adding finely ground coffee to an instant product is not new - General Foods did a 'granules and ground' in the early 80s, and Percol tell me they did the same ten years ago.

My favourite comment on all this is Peter Mandelson's outburst in the States yesterday, when he objected to Howard Schultz of Starbucks saying he was worried about the British economy. Mandelson replied, loudly and in public: 'who the F*** is he?'

Cheers
-Ian

[CakeBoy]

Well it seems as though they managed to reach their objective. With a 'distinctive' roast flavour like theirs it could be conceived as less difficult to achieve than with some other styles.

It is very nice of Mr Schultz to concern himself with our problems. Perhaps he attributes his own firm's tough times entirely to our economic situation. Maybe he should focus on the coffee eh?

[Aadje]

I can't agree more with you cakey on the previous statement. We do live in interesting times.

[ianboughton]

Dammit, this is the longest time I've spent on this forum for three years or more... I'm supposed to be packing magazines !!!

Anyway, it's funny you should say that, because Schultz did blame the UK for a lot of Starbucks problems. I can't find the reference now, but about a month ago he did single out the UK as a bad performer. Perhaps it will help to know that, according to the Seattle press, Howard himself is taking a pay cut - from $1.2 million last year to $10,000 this year.

With regard to the microground matter, I did wonder whether this was a similar practice to the (alleged) one of injecting a certain amount of coffee essence into a jar just before the final sealing, so that the customer opens a new pack of instant and gets that whiff of 'real' coffee.

-Ian

[bruceb]

As a business model Starbucks, like the automobile industry and many others, could only be successful as long as the bubble of imaginary prosperity was intact. As long as people believed that their credit card company and the banks were going to be footing the bills they had little thought about paying $$$ for a cup of coffee. Once some kind of reality catches up with them people realise that they could not afford Mr. Schultz's syrup fandangos and they make do with cheap instant or cheap prepackaged ground coffee again.

I am NOT talking about real coffee enthusiasts. They did not make Mr. Schultz, his burnt beans and his business a gold mine. Starbucks enjoyed a cult status among the uneducated coffee snobs and people who just plain like syrup fandangos. Real coffee enthusiasts will give up other things in order to get a good cup of coffee. Other people will give up expensive coffee before they will give up a lot of other things.

The Russian mathematician and philosopher P.D. Ouspensky said "Certain things can only be understood if you have a negative attitude towards them." It is unrealistic to try to relate a business model like Starbucks to high-quality coffee. Their business is not making good coffee, their business is making money.

[Aadje]

[...] their business is making money.

As any capitalist company, I would say.