The Power of Starbucks

[Rootbeer]

Originally Posted by AL7273

No mate, it is the combination of a highly addictive substance (caffeine) Plus the MSG = serious addiction.

Thanks for the reply. I think you might have misunderstood the author in your link. He is talking about the ingredients that give the pumpkin flavor in a pumpkin coffee drink that is available seasonally. He says there are unlisted ingredients and that he believes "typically" might include MSG, but he doesn't know. He is not saying that he believes MSG is included in any other Starbucks product.

[Jonathan007]

Originally Posted by AL7273

MSG.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monosodium_glutamate

I understand that Starbucks uses MSG in their coffee. Remember, these are not organic beans. They are mass produced.

I've heard MSG is basically salt on steroids?

[dba]

Originally Posted by AL7273

Remember, these are not organic beans. They are mass produced.

I might be simple but isn't almost everything grown in the ground organic? As far as fruits and veggies in this country are concerned, if there is no measureable pesticide residue on the plant 30 days from picking, it can be labeled as "Organic."

My nephew is a produce manager for a large California grocery store chain. He always tells me, "everything is sprayed"

[Ruud Van Driver]

I'm caffeine sensitive and couldn't drink coffee even if I wanted to. I suffer the most ghastly migraine with coffee so am actually repelled by Starbuck's (and Red Bull etc.).

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by dba

I might be simple but isn't almost everything grown in the ground organic? As far as fruits and veggies in this country are concerned, if there is no measureable pesticide residue on the plant 30 days from picking, it can be labeled as "Organic."

My nephew is a produce manager for a large California grocery store chain. He always tells me, "everything is sprayed"

Actually there is a legal enforceable standard set forth by the California Code of Organic Products Act of 2003 §110810 So when a grower in any state says "we are organic" or "we grow according to the CA Code" they actually have to prove it, and their status is investigated, inspected, tested and regulated. So all due respect to your nephew but he's wrong as far as this country and the term "organic"

As for other countries, from WIKI:

Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972.[3] The USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) definition as of April 1995 is:

“Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony."[4]

Organic farming is a form of agriculture that relies on techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, compost, and biological pest control. Depending on whose definition is used, organic farming uses fertilizers and pesticides (which include herbicides, insecticides and fungicides) if they are considered natural (such as bone meal from animals or pyrethrin from flowers), but it excludes or strictly limits the use of various methods (including synthetic petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides; plant growth regulators such as hormones; antibiotic use in livestock; genetically modified organisms;[1] human sewage sludge; and nanomaterials.[2]) for reasons including sustainability, openness, independence, health, and safety.

[ct.matt]

I don't get the obsession with Starbucks, their coffee taste bitter and burnt. I grab iced coffees every once in a while, mostly while we're driving as Starbucks are fairly ubiquitous. In DC, I go to local coffee shops that roast their own coffee and procure it from sustainable sources.. and are independently owned (Compass Coffee in the DC neighborhood of Shaw, e.g.). Starbucks coffee is still better than what most diners or restaurants pass off as coffee.. it's mostly just dirty water with little to no taste.
That line is absolutely ridiculous, though.

[Ferdelious]

I used to drink Starbucks but once I got a Nepresso machine I realized that there is better cheaper coffee out there IMO. Starbucks has done a masterful job of marketing and really doesn't have any competition when it comes to coffee shop chains. It would be like there being only one fast food burger joint. They have so many locations and are always conveniently located.

I stick to local coffee shops that actually try to make coffee an art form like high end cuisine.

[Rock]

One of the reasons Starbucks flopped in Australia is that there was already a very well established 'coffee culture' of quality Roasters supplying brown bean to Cafes that focused on coffee rather than food and were very fussy about the quality of their product.
I have never encountered a 'chain/franchise' that could compete quality-wise with passionate owner-operator Cafes. There are still a lot of crap outfits around who think they produce good coffee, but they don't stay in business long as the competition is fierce.

[Johnb1]

From Australia too (Melbourne), I love going to Starbucks when overseas for the free WiFi! Haha

Been to Starbucks a couple of times in Australia, usually get the green tea milkshake. Their coffees don't taste like coffee, did I mention free WiFi?

[Demosthene]

Originally Posted by Rock

One of the reasons Starbucks flopped in Australia is that there was already a very well established 'coffee culture' of quality Roasters supplying brown bean to Cafes that focused on coffee rather than food and were very fussy about the quality of their product.
I have never encountered a 'chain/franchise' that could compete quality-wise with passionate owner-operator Cafes. There are still a lot of crap outfits around who think they produce good coffee, but they don't stay in business long as the competition is fierce.

Ive always wondered if opening an Australian style coffee shop in the US would make a killing.
I know there are a few in New York already and Australian friends who live there dont get coffee from anywhere besides Little Collins.
http://drinks.seriouseats.com/2013/1...-brooklyn.html

[mtrunner]

Originally Posted by Demosthene

Ive always wondered if opening an Australian style coffee shop in the US would make a killing.
I know there are a few in New York already and Australian friends who live there dont get coffee from anywhere besides Little Collins.
http://drinks.seriouseats.com/2013/1...-brooklyn.html

Little Collins has fabulous coffee. If I am in that area I always stop in for a cup.

[hsfrank]

First let me start off by saying that you either love Starbucks or hate Starbucks. This is the opinion of most of the people who talk about Starbucks as a controversy oh product. The 0P Originally question why people lined up to buy Starbucks. Besides the obvious already posted brand loyalty or ha originally question why people lined up to buy Starbucks. Besides the obvious already posted brand loyalty or habit. I can suggest something else. Starbucks marketing produces brand loyalty through its gold card program. A disclosure here. I have been a gold card member since 2007 its inception. With the gold card you get a variety of promotions, free drinks, free refills. All of this reduce the price of your coffee substantially below any of its competitors. Further Starbucks acts ethically in its procurement of coffee by dealing in fair trade coffee. It promotes interest by being active in community projects such as cleanups and charity . Their employees are provided benefits including health care for part-time workers as well as college educational benefits along with discounts and of course free bags coffee once a week. I think none of these would be of interest if you actually did not like the coffee. As for the MSG to quote Scrooge bah humbug .

[Lorinzo]

I am a big fan of SBUX coffee. I also like their iced teas.

[SMD]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

The thing that surprised me about their popularity is that their pastries are in my mind mediocre at best.

It amazes me that they think they improved them when they changed providers a couple of years ago. Pastries are awful now.

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

Glad I don't do coffee!

x2....

[mtrunner]

Originally Posted by SMD

It amazes me that they think they improved them when they changed providers a couple of years ago. Pastries are awful now.

Agreed. I don't mind Starbucks coffee but all of the food offered at Starbucks looks awful and so processed.

[SMD]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

Actually there is a legal enforceable standard set forth by the California Code of Organic Products Act of 2003 §110810 So when a grower in any state says "we are organic" or "we grow according to the CA Code" they actually have to prove it, and their status is investigated, inspected, tested and regulated. So all due respect to your nephew but he's wrong as far as this country and the term "organic"

As for other countries, from WIKI:

Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972.[3] The USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) definition as of April 1995 is:

“Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony."[4]

Organic farming is a form of agriculture that relies on techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, compost, and biological pest control. Depending on whose definition is used, organic farming uses fertilizers and pesticides (which include herbicides, insecticides and fungicides) if they are considered natural (such as bone meal from animals or pyrethrin from flowers), but it excludes or strictly limits the use of various methods (including synthetic petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides; plant growth regulators such as hormones; antibiotic use in livestock; genetically modified organisms;[1] human sewage sludge; and nanomaterials.[2]) for reasons including sustainability, openness, independence, health, and safety.

There are many agencies and bodies that govern the "organic" label at the state and federal level. None mean they are healthier, and a recent Stanford study concluded just that. The key distinction to be organic is that you cannot use a synthetic pesticide, but you can still use pesticides, just not synthetic ones. Off topic, but there are some really big misunderstandings as what organic really means, and it can quickly devolve into a political discussion, which I want to avoid at all costs.

[tfduff723]

The Starbucks by me will also pressure test and regulate your Rolex for free while they make your java. Might explain the lines.

Very convenient for a WIS' on the go.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by SMD

There are many agencies and bodies that govern the "organic" label at the state and federal level. None mean they are healthier, and a recent Stanford study concluded just that. The key distinction to be organic is that you cannot use a synthetic pesticide, but you can still use pesticides, just not synthetic ones. Off topic, but there are some really big misunderstandings as what organic really means, and it can quickly devolve into a political discussion, which I want to avoid at all costs.

what agencies? what bodies? Just pick your state for example, tell us who governs the term "organic".

Are you suggesting there is a lack of empirical evidence? Kind of an obvious point, there is no evidence on either side as you well know. If you vote with your taste buds however, then there is no contest IMHO. Why do you think every restaurant worth their salt is clamoring to align itself with eco-friendly bio-diverse farmers? It's not because of the PR I assure you, It's night and day they way the food tastes.

[SMD]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

what agencies? what bodies? Just pick your state for example, tell us who governs the term "organic".

Are you suggesting there is a lack of empirical evidence? Kind of an obvious point, there is no evidence on either side as you well know. If you vote with your taste buds however, then there is no contest IMHO. Why do you think every restaurant worth their salt is clamoring to align itself with eco-friendly bio-diverse farmers? It's not because of the PR I assure you, It's night and day they way the food tastes.

OMRI, USDA to name two as it pertains to organic certification and labeling. Again, firmly held beliefs and I have no interest in having the debate.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by SMD

OMRI, USDA to name two as it pertains to organic certification and labeling. Again, firmly held beliefs and I have no interest in having the debate.

Then don't start one if you're not willing to finish it, it's inherently dishonest. just keep it above a finger pointing level.

the FDA regulates the term "organic" wich trickles down to the USDA that overseas NOP.

OMRI for upstate NY?

[SMD]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

Then don't start one if you're not willing to finish it, it's inherently dishonest. just keep it above a finger pointing level.

the FDA regulates the term "organic" wich trickles down to he USDA that overseas NOP.

OMRI are you in Canada?

Did not realize I was starting a debate. OMRI is not Canadian.

New York State also governs what you must do to call yourself organic. Have nice day.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by SMD

Did not realize I was starting a debate. OMRI is not Canadian.

New York State also governs what you must do to call yourself organic. Have nice day.

Come on, "have a nice day"?

You made claims that people don't understand what organic is, what it means and that you couldn't say anymore without getting political??????

Since there is a misunderstanding, I agree BTW, about what organic is lets get it all out there and discuss it. If you have an opinion we should discuss it not hide from it, what's your fear? Don't get it, not even a little.

[SMD]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

Come on, "have a nice day"?

You made claims that people don't understand what organic is, what it means and that you couldn't say anymore without getting political??????

Since there is a misunderstanding, I agree BTW, about what organic is lets get it all out there and discuss it. If you have an opinion we should discuss it not hide from it, what's your fear? Don't get it, not even a little.

I gave an example in the original post -- organic does not mean pesticide free. If you want to have this discussion, perhaps a thread dedicated to it. Don't think this is the place for it. Thread hijack over.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by SMD

I gave an example in the original post -- organic does not mean pesticide free. If you want to have this discussion, perhaps a thread dedicated to it. Don't this is the place for it. Thread hijack over.

I'll apologize to the OP later, the natural line of questions and answers led to this discussion "organically". Is your point that spraying tomatoes with Capsaicin extract or Eucalyptus oil invalidates their organic status?

[SMD]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

I'll apologize to the OP later, the natural line of questions and answers led to this discussion "organically". Is your point that spraying tomatoes with Capsaicin extract or Eucalyptus oil invalidates their organic status?

Not at all. What I am saying is you can use pesticides and still be considered organic, but the pesticides have to be naturally occurring and not synthetic. So Rotenone and pyrethrin, known carcinogens, can be used in organic farming because they are natural pesticides. The only point was organic does not mean pesticide free, and organic pesticides aren't necessarily safe simply because they are naturally occurring. Organic is far from black and white.

[J!m]

Just in case this war was cooling off- there is very little on this planet that is not organic in my opinion. The couple hundred pounds of moon rocks we dragged back and the few tons of meteorite that has hit the earth over the eons are also "non-organic": however everything else from this planet is organic.

The Iranians use organic uranium. It's all good. If the "non-organic" food doesn't kill you, something else will. It used to be second-hand smoke but now it's illigal to smoke so we needed something else to bitch about.

Whatever.

[MattSoCal]

Originally Posted by SMD

Not at all. What I am saying is you can use pesticides and still be considered organic, but the pesticides have to be naturally occurring and not synthetic. So Rotenone and pyrethrin, known carcinogens, can be used in organic farming because they are natural pesticides. The only point was organic does not mean pesticide free, and organic pesticides aren't necessarily safe simply because they are naturally occurring. Organic is far from black and white.

Over the last few posts, I'm feeling awkward - like seeing an argument between a couple in public. I think the post thread has veered way off course here.

[SMD]

Originally Posted by MattSoCal

Over the last few posts, I'm feeling awkward - like seeing an argument between a couple in public. I think the post thread has veered way off course here.

I agree. I'm out.

[mtrunner]

TRF has had a weird vibe lately. A lot of pot stirring going on in several threads.