8 ms·

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people mak

• Someone1234 11y ago
  I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.
  • pkaye 11y ago
    I'm not a coffee drinker but I guess people go there for the convenience and consistency.
  • navait 11y ago
    If you are really into coffee, mass produced is cool to hate on, and the best is what you make yourself. I enjoy the coffee, but it's not the best I ever had. Of course, in my area it's the only option over Dunkin Donuts or Mcdonalds, which I do not like.
    • stcredzero 11y ago
      Hacker Dojo used to have Dunkin Donuts coffee, along with a precise posted procedure for brewing it, which seemed to work quite well. ("How to brew coffee like a BOSS!") For me, for DIY: Aeropress and recently roasted beans. Grind yourself.
  • mattdotc 11y ago
    >If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I can't speak for every Starbucks customer out there, but I always assumed the reason is that it's a status symbol. To some degree, they want to be seen with the cup. They haven't tried the competitors, so they assume Starbucks must be very good to justify the price. If they really enjoyed coffee for coffee's sake, they'd probably be going to an independent shop for their drink. I think Starbucks' coffee isn't terrible, but I definitely prefer to brew it myself or spend the same amount at a smaller cafe, preferably if they roast their own beans.
    • seanmcdirmid 11y ago
      That doesn't really make sense, it's like saying people want to be seen eating Big Macs. Starbucks isn't really a status symbol in the states, it is simply a guilty pleasure/luxury/drug to those who are addicted. They don't go to indies simply because it is not convenient (sbux is everywhere) and they know what they are getting. Believe me, would love to try an indie, but in my neighborhood, the only alternative is Costa and Pacific Coffee, which are just as bad UK and HK brands.
      • talmand 11y ago
        It makes perfect sense, if being seen eating Big Macs were to become trendy then you would see more people eating Big Macs. It happens for all kinds of things in popular culture. Why do people buy the expensive famous name brand stuff when the no-name clothing would be just as good for their needs?
        • seanmcdirmid 11y ago
          You would be embarrassed if you were seen eating a Big Mac, the same is almost true with Starbucks. It is anti-status right now: better to be seen with a hipster indie coffee than the McDonalds-like Starbucks cup! People buy the expensive branded clothes because...they know what they are getting. No one really wants to walk around with a swoosh on their chest! Going for no-name clothing, there is no reputation to go by, how can you tell if that shirt is going to feel good or wear well? Muji does no-name well, you can trust their quality even if they don't put their name everywhere, but even that is a "brand."
        • rdancer 11y ago
          > if being seen eating Big Macs were to become trendy then you would see more people eating Big Macs I grew up in a poor country. One Christmas Season, I took a part-time job at a bank's back office. The full-time employees would go to the McD across the street from the office building, and get a take-away. The journey cut their 60-minute lunch break by half. I remarked how expensive it was, but my colleague told me: "Remember how much they're making, they can probably afford it!" :-)
  • fluxquanta 11y ago
    People don't pay $3 for plain Starbucks coffee. They pay $3 for the atmosphere of the shop and the availability of a halfway decent public bathroom.
    • csixty4 11y ago
      And reliable wifi.
  • rorykoehler 11y ago
    I drink a ton of coffee, rarely Starbucks or any other Corp coffee, and I think mcd coffee tastes miles better.
  • Kluny 11y ago
    I think the beans that they use are decent quality, but they seem to over-roast them, which leads to excessive bitterness, as well as killing some of the richer and more subtle flavors. Starbucks coffee does have MORE flavor than McDonalds/Tim Hortons/Dunkn' Donuts. Those other chains seem to just serve their coffee really weak. But the extra flavor you get from Starbucks is just a higher intensity of that burnt flavor. It makes you feel like you're getting a bigger caffeine hit (you're not), but it doesn't taste that great. My personal theory, anyway.
  • messick 11y ago
    At least in Los Angeles, the prices for a medium sized coffee at Starbucks vs. McDonalds is: $2.25 tax included vs $1.29 tax not included. So, the prices aren't as different as you think.
  • dragonwriter 11y ago
    > I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? Starbucks is widespread enough to count on and convenient almost wherever you are, and for many good enough and better than McDonald's, etc. Now, its been quite a while since I had a McDonald's coffee drinks, but when I have, its been bad, far worse than anything I've had a Starbucks. At the same time, there are plenty of independent coffee shops that have better coffee, and, if I am someplace where I know one, I prefer them. But Starbucks is good enough, and reliable and consistent enough when I am somewhere where I don't know what the good local independents are (and, when I am near my home, its a lot more convenient than the nearest preferable independent.)
    • sp332 11y ago
      McDonald's coffee improved drastically when they switched to Newman's Own.
  • ferrisford 11y ago
    You're paying for the brand and for consistency. People love Starbucks because they know what there getting, you can order a Starbucks drink in Colorado and have it taste the same as if you ordered it in Tokyo or Prague etc. (so I've heard) You can also end up with something that's pretty much a milkshake with caffeine but instead of walking around looking like a fatty with your DQ blizzard cup you can be cute and trendy with your Starbucks cup.
    • kuschku 11y ago
      Funnily, ALDI/Trader Joes also roasts and sells coffee (they are only testing selling of freshly brewed coffee in some locations). They’re everywhere, and their quality is actually very high. It will be interesting to see how Starbucks is going to react when a big player like ALDI is going to take their territory.
  • fsociety 11y ago
    If you take a shot of espresso from Starbucks and compare it to a shot of espresso from a cafe which roasts their own beans, you'll taste the difference quite immediately. Starbucks beans are over-roasted by a large margin. Their coffee has the same story. Grinding Starbuck beans results in what looks like ashes from a campfire, and doesn't release those wonderful smells from the oil. Just smell the difference when you grind a higher quality bean, never mind how much more appetizing the texture looks. My understanding, from working in the industry for a short time, is that Starbucks roasts the largest quantity of beans in the world and that is why their coffee is so burnt. It's impossible to control the temperatures when they roast these large quantity of beans with much precision, so they compensate by over-roasting them. That said, coffee snobbery isn't a good thing, and their drinks aren't that bad when you put in tons of sugar or milk. But without the dressings, it's pretty terrible quality.
    • jsprogrammer 11y ago
      Surely Starbucks can afford an engineer to design and manufacture a roaster that can properly handle their volume?
    • alaskamiller 11y ago
      Most people can't taste the difference between the two, that's the difference. Third wave independent coffee shops harp on the idea it takes months of palette training for their baristas to calibrate tasting minute differences and somehow every other person comes in here to opine about how burnt or nasty tasting their cup of bean juice is. Starbucks optimizes for different things than other shops. They over roast as a signature, to create bolder flavor. Over the past decade they have great control over their supply chain and beans yet they still over roast beyond the flavor signature because when most of their products are milk-based drinks the extra flavor of the espresso comes through. It's meant to be that way, not because of some conspiracy to deliver mediocrity, but because it's their culture. And ignorance paired with pretentiousness in coffee culture is on whole other level cargo cult-iness. Besides, when one really wants to talk about bad coffee and they're not mentioning Philz then they have no clue.
    • ceejayoz 11y ago
  • alistairSH 11y ago
    Personally, I drink Starbucks once in a blue moon as a treat - not for superior coffee flavor, but because I want a giant, sugary dessert beverage. At one time I drank a large cup/week, but then I came to my senses. My normal morning coffee is brewed at home using fresh, but mass-produced beans (usually one of Trader Joe's varieties).
    • randycupertino 11y ago
      > At one time I drank a large cup/week, but then I came to my senses. I'm going through this right now with trying to wean myself off a bubble tea habit. There are just so many amazing options near my office and I have at least one giant one per week. The struggle is real. How did you successfully cut down?
      • alistairSH 11y ago
        I cheated... Last year, I was diagnosed with celiac disease, so I could no longer eat Starbucks food. I often grabbed my large coffee along with a pastry or sandwich. Will power not required. Sorry I can't be of any help.
  • jonesb6 11y ago
    Anecdotally Starbucks is the only coffee I enjoy taking black, other blends I'll usually add milk or half and half.
  • mikeash 11y ago
    I'm not sure many people actually order just "coffee" at Starbucks. When I've been in one, virtually every order is some weird-ass fancy drink, to the point where I feel a little out of place just ordering a coffee.
  • gyardley 11y ago
    It's better than all the available alternatives in about 99% of America by area. There's no shame in going to a Starbucks in the suburbs, or when traveling in another country without a good coffee culture. The people who are snotty about it (including me) are generally located in the few enclaves, like Portland, where there's genuinely better alternatives. Going to Starbucks in Portland is like eating at the Olive Garden in Times Square.
  • artimaeis 11y ago
    No one is spending $3 on a cup of regular brewed coffee at Starbucks to my knowledge. Maybe there's a strong regional difference? I can't find anything online to support that, though. McDonalds:{12oz:"$1.00" 16oz:"$1.50" 20oz:"$1.80"} Starbucks:{12oz="$1.75" 16oz:"$1.95" 20oz:"$2.25"} If I want to enjoy the drink on-location I'll pick Starbucks every time. The ambiance is generally pretty okay. If I just need a quick brew and can grab it in a drive-thru then McDonalds will do just fine.