How About A Boycott From Buying At Starbucks?

[zoiDman]

...

And I would bet someone (some ONE!) $100 that it was NOT customer complaints about vaping that engendered this policy, but a combination of customer complaints about SMOKING on the patios combined with some ANTZ lobbying.

...

I think that "ANTZ" receive Too Much Credit whenever a policy is Enacted that is Not Vaper Friendly.

I know that they are Easy to Demonize. But I don't see an ANTZ setting in on Every Board Meeting or Policy Steering Committee.

Not say'n that they don't have a Presence. They Do. I just don't see them as the Driving Force in Every Situations. I think Starsucks policy is Based on the All Mighty Dollar. That and Majorities.

More people Cough up Federal Reserve Notes at Starsucks who are Non-Smokers. So if you are going to make a Policy that is going to Offend a portion of your Clientele, I don't see Starsucks doing anything that Offends Non-Smokers.

 

[Uncle Willie]

I think that "ANTZ" receive Too Much Credit whenever a policy is Enacted that is Not Vaper Friendly.

I know that they are Easy to Demonize. But I don't see an ANTZ setting in on Every Board Meeting or Policy Steering Committee.

Not say'n that they don't have a Presence. They Do. I just don't see them as the Driving Force in Every Situations. I think Starsucks policy is Based on the All Mighty Dollar. That and Majorities.

More people Cough up Federal Reserve Notes at Starsucks who are Non-Smokers. So if you are going to make a Policy that is going to Offend a portion of your Clientele, I don't see Starsucks doing anything that Offends Non-Smokers.

Spot on .. as a business owner myself, it's imperative that the majority of customers feel comfortable .. although I don't think there would be any hinderance to Starbucks designating an area outside as a "PV Zone" with a clearly printed sign explaining the area .. however, what we hate to admit is the blurred line in perception .. and perception is reality ..

 

[zoiDman]

Spot on .. as a business owner myself, it's imperative that the majority of customers feel comfortable .. although I don't think there would be any hinderance to Starbucks designating an area outside as a "PV Zone" with a clearly printed sign explaining the area .. however, what we hate to admit is the blurred line in perception .. and perception is reality ..

At one point in my Working Career, I ran a CNC Department for a Manufacturing Company. And at that time, the Economy was Booming. Hence we had more work than we could get out in any given Month.

Every week I would go into Production Meetings with the other Department heads and the VP and we would Prioritize what we would work on for the coming week.

Since there was more work than could be done in 80 or 90 hours of a week, some jobs were going to be Late.

The meeting Always started the Same Way. What jobs are from Boeing? They have the Highest Priority.

If we lost some Little Customer because their work went late, so be it. But we weren't going to Lose Boeing. Even if it ment ONLY doing Boeings work 100% of the Time.

I see a similar Analogy to e-Cigarette usage.

Believe it or Not, many Companies are Sympathetic to e-Cigarette use. And some View them as a Viable Harm Reduction Pathway. But if they allow e-Cigarette in their Operations or Facilities that they run the Risk of Alienating their Core Customers. Or Employees.


I view Non-Smokes as Boeing to many Companies who depend on Retail Customers for their Revenue.

It isn't sometimes about Right or Wrong. Good vs. Bad. Or Healthy and Non-Healthy. It's more about Satisfying the Largest Segment of your Customers who Belly up to the Counter and Plunk Down all those Beautiful Green Pieces of Paper with the Pictures of Long Dead Presidents on them.

 

[Petrodus]

It isn't sometimes about Right or Wrong. Good vs. Bad. Or Healthy and Non-Healthy. It's more about Satisfying the Largest Segment of your Customers who Belly up to the Counter and Plunk Down all those Beautiful Green Pieces of Paper with the Pictures of Long Dead Presidents on them.

 

[zoiDman]

Thanks Petrodus

I get Lucky once and Awhile.

The problem is you have to Wade thru 11,059 Posts to Find it.

 

[ubergeek922]

Just wondering how many vapers boycott grocery stores the UFCW has issues with them, or boycott McDonald's since their employees want better pay and benefits, or electronics manufacturers for conflict minerals? Or is Starbucks now an evil corporation because this is a policy which now affects you personally? Call it what it is, selfish. If everyone avoided every place someone had an issue with, we would go nowhere and do nothing. But because now that it hits home, they must be stopped?

 

[Berylanna]

Just wondering how many vapers boycott grocery stores the UFCW has issues with them, or boycott McDonald's since their employees want better pay and benefits, or electronics manufacturers for conflict minerals? Or is Starbucks now an evil corporation because this is a policy which now affects you personally? Call it what it is, selfish. If everyone avoided every place someone had an issue with, we would go nowhere and do nothing. But because now that it hits home, they must be stopped?

I have boycotted other places for other reasons. But my own priority is when I go for coffee is me. Why shouldn't it be? Am I my #1 priority in EVERYTHING? No. But I'm not last either. I'm not demanding others boycott Starbucks on the grounds that this is more-important than all other world issues. I'm encouraging vapers to put some money into the pockets of vaper-friendly local businesses.

So, you disagree, fine, don't do it. But I'm going to let people know that some of us are doing it.

 

[Orb Skewer]

A personal boycott is still a boycott-well put Berylanna

 

[zoiDman]

Just wondering how many vapers boycott grocery stores the UFCW has issues with them, or boycott McDonald's since their employees want better pay and benefits, or electronics manufacturers for conflict minerals? Or is Starbucks now an evil corporation because this is a policy which now affects you personally? Call it what it is, selfish. If everyone avoided every place someone had an issue with, we would go nowhere and do nothing. But because now that it hits home, they must be stopped?

I think Not Giving a Profit Oriented Business Money is the Best Way of Shaping their Policies and or Products.

You can Write all the Letters you Want. Or Slam them 17 Ways to Sunday on some Internet Forum. But until they see a Change to their Profit and Lose Statements, they could give a Rat's .... about Anything.

Declining Profits is what Makes ANY Company stand up a Take Notice.

 

[Berylanna]

I think Not Giving a Profit Oriented Business Money is the Best Way of Shaping their Policies and or Products.

You can Write all the Letters you Want. Or Slam them 17 Ways to Sunday on some Internet Forum. But until they see a Change to their Profit and Lose Statements, they could give a Rat's .... about Anything.

Declining Profits is what Makes ANY Company stand up a Take Notice.

I felt a letter was needed to explain my portion of the declining profits. I spend about $35/week. I don't want them to think it is because in their other policies (like open carry) they obey the law rather than creating their own laws.

 

[zoiDman]

I felt a letter was needed to explain my portion of the declining profits. I spend about $35/week. I don't want them to think it is because in their other policies (like open carry) they obey the law rather than creating their own laws.

Absolutely Nothing Wrong with a Letter. As long as they Understand that you are No Longer going to Patronize their Locations, ie: Reduce Their Profits.

And it sounds like you have made that Clear to them.

 

[Berylanna]

Absolutely Nothing Wrong with a Letter. As long as they Understand that you are No Longer going to Patronize their Locations, ie: Reduce Their Profits.

And it sounds like you have made that Clear to them.

I ALSO made it clear I was not going to patronize their products through other vendors: no more Starbucks coffee from the grocery shelves. I forgot to say, but I think it is implied, no more bottled frapps from gas stations. A lot of the money they get from many of us is not on-location. This is a hardship for me: I'm having to learn to make Frapps, learn where I can buy the roasts I like (light and medium: hard to come by at Pete's) etc.

I'm still sad the lady who roasted and sold a blend designed for me and named after me got hit by a family hardship and quit the business.

 

[LibertariaNate]

... rather than creating their own laws.

I realize this doesn't apply to most locales, but in Utah they are following the law. The Utah Indoor Clean Air Act now includes e-cigs which means no vaping in any publicly accessible buildings. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between. The new law went into effect on June 1, 2013 and I believe that's the same day Starbucks' own ban also took effect. Coincidence? Maybe, but it isn't uncommon for corporations to write policy for the lowest common denominator so to speak.

 

[Berylanna]

I realize this doesn't apply to most locales, but in Utah they are following the law. The Utah Indoor Clean Air Act now includes e-cigs which means no vaping in any publicly accessible buildings. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between. The new law went into effect on June 1, 2013 and I believe that's the same day Starbucks' own ban also took effect. Coincidence? Maybe, but it isn't uncommon for corporations to write policy for the lowest common denominator so to speak.

Well, what about the Utah Outdoor Clean Air Act? Does it apply to patios?

Should all Starbucks forbid open carry in all states because some states forbid it? They are being pressured to do so, and are resisting the pressure. Their policy is (and, for smoking, used to be) follow the local laws.

 

[DC2]

Some people appear to be willing to accept what is.
Some people appear to be willing to accept what is inevitable.

Some people appear to disagree on what really is inevitable.

Some people appear to want to shape the future.
And many people appear to disagree on the right way to go about that.

I side with those that do not accept anything that is full of crap.
And I side with those that want to educate instead of hide.

And I submit that only those willing to make an effort to shape the future will be able to do so.
The rest are just sheep.

That is all.

 

[DC2]

Just wondering how many vapers boycott grocery stores the UFCW has issues with them, or boycott McDonald's since their employees want better pay and benefits, or electronics manufacturers for conflict minerals? Or is Starbucks now an evil corporation because this is a policy which now affects you personally? Call it what it is, selfish. If everyone avoided every place someone had an issue with, we would go nowhere and do nothing. But because now that it hits home, they must be stopped?

This, of course, assumes that a person would agree with what unions are trying to do.
It isn't always that simple.

 

[LibertariaNate]

Well, what about the Utah Outdoor Clean Air Act? Does it apply to patios?

Should all Starbucks forbid open carry in all states because some states forbid it? They are being pressured to do so, and are resisting the pressure. Their policy is (and, for smoking, used to be) follow the local laws.

Just the usual "No smoking within X Feet" of a building...

I was just giving another possible reason why Starbucks might ban vaping at all locations.

I may not agree with it, but it's the company's decision to make. It's each person's decision whether or not to continue to do business them.

 

[Orb Skewer]

Starbucks tax avoidance
type that into your browser

 

[retired1]

Big whup. I get pretty tired of the so called indignant crying over something that's legal for a company to do. Don't like the way taxes are assessed? Petition your legislative body to change the laws. But this so called "tax evasion cry" is getting pretty old considering it's the governments that created the laws and rules that the companies are using.

 

[zoiDman]

Big whup. I get pretty tired of the so called indignant crying over something that's legal for a company to do. Don't like the way taxes are assessed? Petition your legislative body to change the laws. But this so called "tax evasion cry" is getting pretty old considering it's the governments that created the laws and rules that the companies are using.

You bet me to it.

Yeah... I don't get to Bent when a Company does something like this. If the Government lets them, then the Government should be Blamed.

Just like I Didn't Like BT putting all the Chemicals into Analogs. But the FDA allows them to. So who is Really to Blame?