> taste burnt

It was the case since forever ( ~15 years+ ). Starbucks is not a speciality coffee shop. There is nothing wrong with that. One has to acknowledge that high volume coffee shops have to rely on basically burned beans in order to be consistent with the taste.

Coffee is inherently not a consistent drink. The only brewing methods that don't vary significantly with brewer skill and chance are immersion brews, which aren't broadly used in modern coffee shops. It's surely better to not burn the beans to ash and accept some inconsistency than ruin the drink every time

Not at all - consistency is what they sell. It's like going to Japan from the US and eating McDonalds. Or eating McDonalds in Mexico. Same food, more or less.

This

Over roasted coffee averages the flavor across large harvests and sources, and they expect to dump a bunch of sugar in there anyway.

I once saw a publication by a coffee expert (sorry, don't have the link) who said the way to go with Starbucks is to order the lightest roast as it's always the closest to a proper, less-burnt coffee.

I've taken that approach and think it's sound advice.

They blow it more than half the time when it comes to regular drip coffee.

I still remember my first starbucks visit as a 13 y.o. Sitting down, having a coffee, not knowing what caffeine was, and having the best conversation of my life.

Sometimes I think Starbucks is more properly classified as a milkshake joint.

The calories!

Yeah, every generation seems to reinvent the malt shop in America.

The next iteration might be whoever builds the Starbucks of boba tea.

Gong Cha? Chatime? Here in Canada both of those seem to be expanding rapidly.

> The drinks are either sugar bombs or taste burnt

You can order exactly as much sugar as you want for their drinks. If you order a Cappuccino with milk or a coffee or Americano, there isn't any sugar in any of the drinks.

Try the blonde roast espresso. It doesn't have that over-roasted taste.