They can also fail at maximizing profits with an idea that was indistinguishable from empathy. Which therefore fits the term altruistic, whether they intended

They can also fail at maximizing profits with an idea that was indistinguishable from empathy. Which therefore fits the term altruistic, whether they intended for this or not, as other businesses have not replicated what Starbucks is doing. With all these possibilities, alongside a potentially contrived ideal of a founder to actually subsidize public bathrooms for all, doesn't that mean it is useless to debate and just accept the reality at face value of "they are providing a service and its nice"