Starbucks decision on guns in stores

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hope they stick to their guns

about this. I am not sure they will, should the public outcry become loud enough.
 
some observations on this topic--

First: AFAIK, this is a bit of a first: an international business, almost ubiquitous in its presence, has told the antigun fearmongers and blackmailers to go pound sand.

Second: given the nature of the free-market and of a capitalistic business structure, wise business decisions always will maximize profit--at least in the long run. Clearly, that is what Starbucks did in its public statement.

ilikepancakes: I don't quite understand the critcisim of what you call the Starbucks "charity" campaign. Are you saying that 1/80 of the cost of that drink is not enough? Would it be better that they did not do such a campaign? (Personally, I think such donations are admirable, and I come from an area where the business community has long done this, on a bigger scale--for example, by what once was 'Dayton's' and has now morphed into Target.) Can you elaborate more on what is wrong with the Starbucks 'charity' promotion?

BMF500: Although the source--a San Francisco columnist--probably is dealing with cultural bias, it would not be surprising to know that it is legal to carry any unloaded firearm in a case / holster. More likely is that he simply cribbed this information from another source--like a bigger MSM article from AP.

Jim H.
 
Last edited:
ilikepancakes said:
Exactly. Same as that great "charity" campaign they do during the holidays, where they donate a laughable 5 cents per specialty coffee sold. Given a coffee like that costs between 4 and 5 bucks, they're donating at most 1/80th of the cost and giving YOU the generous contributor a hefty cup of sugar with a splash of coffee and a big ol' pat on the back! It's all just marketing.
Click to expand...

Starbucks is a for profit business. They have operating expenses that come out of the revenues from sales. In the 2009 annual report they mention a number of future concerns that may seriously impact the business. This is from their annual report: ( http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjczNTB8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1 )

• Adverse public or medical opinions about the health effects of consuming the Company’s products, as well as reports of incidents involving food-borne illnesses or food tampering, whether or not accurate, could harm its business.........
Click to expand...

No mention or concern about the OC or firearms.

Their net earning for 2009 were 4.0% of revenues - not making windfall profits. BTW, as I understand it, they were one of the first companies to grant stock options to their employees. (Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Starbucks in any way).
 
Can't afford thier coffees, but they are everywhere, even inside supermarkets here in AZ at least. I was asked to leave a few businesses when I open carried,(legally, loaded, none of this unloaded nonsense), before CCW became a law in AZ in '94. The odd part is that every business that told me to take my sidearm and get out has been out of business for years now. :) Happy co-incidence.
Way not to knuckle under to the Brady Bunch, Starbucks, keep on grindin'!
 
I think the antis felt that Starbuck's was one business that would surely cave to pressure easily and since they are such a well-known brand it would generate a lot of favorable press. Their strategy backfired.

As Jerry Reed once sang, "When you're hot, you're hot. And when you're not, you're not". It must suck being an anti right now. OK, moment of sympathy over...
 
man, when liberals can't even get support from coffee shops, you'd think they'd really have to start questioning their worldview
 
I've always enjoyed Starbucks, and am glad they aren't taking a stance against gun owners. But do note this from their press release:

As the public debate continues, we are asking all interested parties to refrain from putting Starbucks or our partners into the middle of this divisive issue.

Starbucks wishes to sell coffee - not become a political rally staging area. As they are respecting our freedoms, we should respect their wishes as well and NOT bring up gun control with every employee involved in making your beverage, or continue to make their business a center focus of 2A discussion. We've won this battle. Thank them, buy their products, and let's start moving onto another area of focus.

thorn
 
Starbucks= something that is over priced that I do not want... personal opinion here but anyone that will pay that much for a cup of coffee has too much money, buy your coffee at Mc's and spend the savings on ammo.....
 
+2 for thorn- (one for each of the last comments).

OC isn't a big deal here in little town AZ, nor is CCW since we are shall-issue, but what are our CA brethren going to do? Trash pickup in the national parks, I guess.
 
Sending Starbucks a Positive Email is Important

I'm not sure how else they calculate support for their stance... or how any of that works... but as stated in the media report, much of the major media attention is biased against RKBA... so I believe it's very important to send Starbuck's a thank you email. It's easy and can only do our cause good.

They replied to me with a standard "thank you for emailing us" so even though the response is non-personal, it's absolutely noticed within their system!

EMAIL AWAY!
 
I suspect this is not as big a deal elsewhere as it is in CA and WA--but, mind you, I do not routinely open carry. It is legal to do so in MN, when the carry-er is permitted.

So, today I ran errands. I started with going to a local Starbucks, in a town about ten miles east of me. I selected two lbs of espresso beans (I make my own espresso, at home) and waited in line. I smiled at the mother with two young children in front of me, and at the forty-something UMC matron behind me. When I got to the counter, the cashier said:

"Are you Mr. Hanson? You used to be my substitute teacher!"

So, we exchanged pleasantries. As she rang up the purchase, I inquired,

"Do you know about the Starbucks 'open carry' controversy?"

She frowned slightly and said: "No. What's that?"

To which I said, "It's too long to go into, but I am a proponent of Open Carry, although I don't do so. And you just sold me two lbs. of coffee because of your company's position on this matter."

And as I turned to leave, that matron behind me smiled, gently--and I really wished she had winked.

Jim H.
 
The issue made Fox News tonite. Time will tell if Starbucks will weather the storm or find the publicity too damning.
 
Today's Wall Street Journal had a picture of a guy open carrying in Starbucks as the main photo on the front cover with a pretty lengthy story inside.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704541304575099433593489048.html

There's also a poll in the link, currently 70% in favor of the existing policy. Not too bad an article, but there is a typical silly anti quote near the end:
"I think the policy shows complete disregard for the safety and sentiments of their workers. The only thing worse than a yuppie upset with how their frappuccino turned out is a yuppie with a gun who's unhappy with how their frappuccino turned out," says Erik Forman, a Starbucks barista and union member in Minneapolis.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
Quote:
"I don't quite understand the critcisim of what you call the Starbucks "charity" campaign. Are you saying that 1/80 of the cost of that drink is not enough? Would it be better that they did not do such a campaign? (Personally, I think such donations are admirable, and I come from an area where the business community has long done this, on a bigger scale--for example, by what once was 'Dayton's' and has now morphed into Target.) Can you elaborate more on what is wrong with the Starbucks 'charity' promotion?"

These corporations and their charity campaigns are just another way for them to recieve another dollar that you think that you are giving to a struggling family. its a wolf in sheep's clothing. every one of those 5 cents that they do donate they turn around and take a nice tax break with. their is nothing wrong with donating, just disguising yourself as a struggling family for individualistic profit. gotta love capitalism, i guess. they don't belive in what they are doing. they do it because we care not because they do.
 
"These corporations and their charity campaigns are just another way for them to recieve another dollar that you think that you are giving to a struggling family. its a wolf in sheep's clothing. every one of those 5 cents that they do donate they turn around and take a nice tax break with. their is nothing wrong with donating, just disguising yourself as a struggling family for individualistic profit. gotta love capitalism, i guess. they don't belive in what they are doing. they do it because we care not because they do."
​

Maybe it is. But, AFAIK, the donations they say they will make are spelled out pretty precisely--they have to, it's the law. If they put out a counter display for a specific charity, the money collected there has to go into the charity, period. That's different from a corporate policy on donating some portion of income to charity. Sure they get a tax break for the corporate donations--but only insofar as the donation is written off as a deductible expense.

OTOH, I don't see how you or I can know anything about their motivations--i.e., whether or not it's a personal value of these corporations. What about the various operations of such businesses as Brownell's, or Midway? They (and many other firearms businesses) have long both done "round-up' campaigns to donate to the NRA, as well as their own contributions (which may not be tax-deductible either, depending on which NRA operation the funds go to.)

Personally, I do my donations directly, and do not usually contribute to such (for example) Christmas campaigns--save for the Salvation Army; their mechanism provides the biggest direct benefit / least expense, IIRC. But, I really don't see any reason to think poorly of the businesses, big or otherwise, that do promote charity giving at Christmas.

And now, back to the subject at hand....

Jim H.
 
I thought we were talking about Starbucks' tolerance of OC, not the direction of or the motives behind thier charitable contributions?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Support starbucks!
Replies
2
Views
432
Sam1911
S
H
  • Locked
Neutral/Positive RKBA article in Tucson Daily Star
Replies
0
Views
389
History Prof
H
B
  • Locked
Big Box or local gun store?
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
The Lone Haranguer
T
S
  • Locked
Wal-Mart Stops Gun Sales in California Stores
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Pendragon
P
O
  • Locked
Wal-Mart toughens gun policies
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
akodo
A
Back
Top