Starbucks (and Sameness)

Re:Starbucks (and Sameness) by Flankk on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:52AM (#969423)

I find it interesting that Starbucks would want to throw away their branding and open up coffee shops under a generic name.

That said, this is a negative and contentless rant. Blue jeans are very practical in all seasons. It's not fair to compare a fashion trend to a franchise rebranding.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starbucks (and Sameness) by hassy on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @08:11AM (#969654)

> Blue jeans are very practical in all seasons.

Not when it rains. (Think Northern Englang/Scotland, or maybe Seattle.) :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starbucks (and Sameness) by teej on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @03:13AM (#969441)

I didn't see anything that said they were operating under a different name - only the interior decor was different and they abstained from putting the logo outside.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starbucks (and Sameness) by scott_s on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @11:04AM (#969954)

From the Reuters article:

Apparently the experiment isn’t working. A former Starbucks insider said that Seattle’s 15th Ave. Coffee and Tea – the first of the new not Starbucks stores (its website, by the way, is called www.streetlevelcoffee.com) – is doing only a third of the business of the regular green-logoed Starbucks store that used be at that site.

[ Parent | on HN ]