No vaping allowed at Starbucks

[The Goo]

Ignorance? Yes. Rather than boycotting a company for their policies and being ignorant myself, I try to determine why would they ban vaping.

So why did Starbucks ban vaping as well? Maybe because it looks so much like cigarette smoke [to some] that it would cause people to think vapers were actually smoking and thus they start smoking themselves or people who smoke analogs may get jealous and say "Why the heck does he get to smoke his e-cig and I can't smoke my cigarette?" Or maybe people who don't even smoke and are not familiar with e-cigs in general would think it's a cigarette. Would an employee who saw "smoke" have to come outside to investigate every time to ensure it's only vapor?

They banned both to eliminate any confusing perceived by anyone. Yeah, it's annoying and doesn't make sense [to us]. We need to be proactive and provide them with INFORMATION. Not just telling them it's safe or not as bad or "screw you, I'm not buying your product anymore because I feel you're wrong".

Provide them with links to [study] sites, pamphlets and so on. INFO INFO INFO. We need to provide proof rather than just word of mouth.

@Buzzzlove - That's a great idea what you did. I think linking them to a research site as well would be helpful to them.

Anyways, we're part of a great community here and I'm glad to be part of it. We are all in this together and we shall stick together. Hopefully someday vaping will be excepted everywhere without question and that's the road we need to pave.

The Goo.

 

[SissySpike]

Right now I'm at Chuck e cheese, anyone dare me? Lol.

Sissy if you dont!

 

[SissySpike]

mouth.

@Buzzzlove - That's a great idea what you did. I think linking them to a research site as well would be helpful to them.

QUOTE]
Good Idea Ill email them that aslo

 

[vjc0628]

Well last I knew smoking was okay outside there, and indeed there were ashtrays on the tables outside, the last time I went there, which was some time ago. Now it would seem they have adopted a new policy, under pressure of the anti-smoking/anti-vaping nazis, and have banned both smoking and vaping on the premises.

I've always found such social control-freaks to be intensely distasteful to be around, and I've no respect for a business that allows them to dictate policy to them that affects other paying customers based on their own personal prejudices and ignorance, to say nothing of their lust to impose control on others.

I haven't been to Starbucks in a wile do to previous political stance whatever that's there choice
I have not been to a Starbucks that has had outside tables
If a company has a no smoking no vaping policy I can live with that
But if they have tables set up with ashtray's and don't allow vaping that is a whole dif subject

 

[spartanstew]

Ignorance? Yes. Rather than boycotting a company for their policies and being ignorant myself, I try to determine why would they ban vaping.

So why did Starbucks ban vaping as well? Maybe because it looks so much like cigarette smoke [to some] that it would cause people to think vapers were actually smoking and thus they start smoking themselves or people who smoke analogs may get jealous and say "Why the heck does he get to smoke his e-cig and I can't smoke my cigarette?" Or maybe people who don't even smoke and are not familiar with e-cigs in general would think it's a cigarette. Would an employee who saw "smoke" have to come outside to investigate every time to ensure it's only vapor?

They banned both to eliminate any confusing perceived by anyone.

Exactly.

Not to mention the perception by non-smokers. When a mother pulls up in her SUV with her kids and see's some people outside of starbucks "smoking", she's probably more apt to not go in. I was always surprised that Starbucks allowed smoking outside at all, for this very reason. In this regard, it makes business sense for them to ban vaping as well. It has nothing to do with the health risks, and everything to do with the possible perceptions. Non-smokers are going to see people outside of Starbucks blowing smoke and might not go there. The average patron can't be expected to go investigate and determine if it's a cigarette, vaping, or a joint (for that matter).

It just doesn't look good.

There may be thousands of vapors that will now boycott Starbucks, but I'm pretty confident there's more non-smokers that may visit more often now, and I'm sure Starbucks evaluated all of these scenarios.

 

[SissySpike]

Exactly.

Not to mention the perception by non-smokers. When a mother pulls up in her SUV with her kids and see's some people outside of starbucks "smoking", she's probably more apt to not go in. I was always surprised that Starbucks allowed smoking outside at all, for this very reason. In this regard, it makes business sense for them to ban vaping as well. It has nothing to do with the health risks, and everything to do with the possible perceptions. Non-smokers are going to see people outside of Starbucks blowing smoke and might not go there. The average patron can't be expected to go investigate and determine if it's a cigarette, vaping, or a joint (for that matter).

It just doesn't look good.

There may be thousands of vapors that will now boycott Starbucks, but I'm pretty confident there's more non-smokers that may visit more often now, and I'm sure Starbucks evaluated all of these scenarios.

I have to disagree we are on one side the extremest anti what ever is on the other, most could probably care less. If we make our voices herd they will pay attention.

Unless the policy was made buy a doogooder nanny person they made the policy because of money plane and simple. If they think they will lose enough customers they will change the policy. Having a internet article even a quick little news story Starbucks is vape friendly is just one more feather in our cap.

You are speaking threw years of conditioning it looks like you are vaping period! It doesn't look good or bad. Educating business is just one small step in the right direction for us.

 

[skyztheLynnit]

My wife said no lol.

Can't wait to get out of here!

You asked permission? !?

Do it and ask for forgiveness instead

 

[SissySpike]

You asked permission? !?

Do it and ask for forgiveness instead

Hes not fooling any one he knows hell get the special reward for enduring Chuck e Cheese Hes not going to mess that up!

 

[spartanstew]

I have to disagree we are on one side the extremest anti what ever is on the other, most could probably care less. If we make our voices herd they will pay attention.

You're assuming they are unaware of what vaping is.

they made the policy because of money plane and simple.

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

If they think they will lose enough customers they will change the policy.

I'm not sure you even read what I posted. It's not a matter of losing customers that are vapers. It's a matter of losing customers that aren't.

You are speaking threw years of conditioning it looks like you are vaping period! It doesn't look good or bad. Educating business is just one small step in the right direction for us.

Again, you assume they aren't already educated. You shouldn't assume things like that. And no, I'm not speaking via years of conditioning, I'm speaking via 30 years as a business consultant. There's many factors that go into decisions like this. You have decided to look at it myopically and solely from the view of someone that vapes, assuming they must be unaware of the non-health risks.

A business like Starbucks must make decisions that reflect in their bottom line. They have determined that having people in front of their stores blowing smoke is detrimental to their business. Is that the right decision? I don't know, and you don't know. But I doubt it has anything to do with the health risks, it has to do with customer perceptions.

 

[SissySpike]

They assume they will lose less money buy banning vaping. Its up to us to show them that is a bad decision. You are assuming Im assuming they are not making a educated calculation. ;-)

If we go with the flow and let others decide our fate fore sure vaping will be demonized just like smoking if we work at showing the public its not harmful to them when we sit out side and have a cup of coffee and vape everyone wins

They made a policy biased on money they can unmake a policy biased on money.

So yes as someone who vapes I have a vested interest to do everything I can to change public opinion so a business consultant will advise a influential chain such as starbucks its better to let the vapers have the outside tables.

 

[relax1972]

I have noticed that some people are interested in knowing more about vapeing, but others just look at you and are offended even when they notice that it electronic, they don't see the difference and they don't want to know the difference because in their minds it is already smoke not vapor, therefore you are evil and out to do people around you and yourself harm.
I do not agree with Starbucks for implementing this policy of theirs but I understand that to them it was easier just to ban it then to explain to people what vapeing is, and that its non harmful to people around it.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that big corporations are lazy. Lol

 

[spartanstew]

Do what you must buzz, but while I don't have the data, I think it's probably the right decision for a company like Starbucks.

I noticed in your other thread you stated "I think most will agree Vaping in their store is not an issue". Why? What's the difference? If it's solely about the health issues and the effects of vaping second hand, why not fight for the right to vape inside the stores as well? Because it's not strictly about that.

I'm on the board of our local Little League and we have a strict no smoking policy at the park. We also don't allow vaping. It has nothing to do with the fact that vaping isn't as hazardous as smoking. 1. We don't want to have to go find out if someone is smoking or vaping everytime we see a plume of smoke (which is also probably another reason Starbucks is doing it), and 2. It doesn't give the right perception. People in the bleachers see smoke. They don't know what it's from either, and there's no reason they should have to worry about it.

As someone who vapes, I also have a vested interest in educating people and changing public opinion, but I'm also logical enough to realize that not every decision made by businesses and organizations is a personal affront to me.

 

[SissySpike]

Well then you are part of the problem I am fighting against. If your really going to make a argument about outside verses inside there is no point discussing anything with you.

The perception is there because the people making the rules lump us in with smokers.

I dont see any logic in not taking it personal as it affects me personally. I take it very personal along with all of the other liberty's I keep loosing at a very alarming rate.

Some of your arguments are the same as the FDAs and ANTZ. Its to bad this is the popular public opinion these days but it explanes why we get alot of the decisions we do with regulations and such.

 

[WarHawk-AVG]

Great now it looks like I have to carry TWO cards around with me!

Now do you see the similarities of the "e-cig" and "firearm" communities and the IGNORANCE and irrational "fear" of our hobbies?

 

[SissySpike]

Great now it looks like I have to carry TWO cards around with me!

Now do you see the similarities of the "e-cig" and "firearm" communities and the IGNORANCE and irrational "fear" of our hobbies?

I see the link with this and all of the libertys and rights the Nannyism is bringing on us!

 

[spartanstew]

Well then you are part of the problem I am fighting against. If your really going to make a argument about outside verses inside there is no point discussing anything with you.

Didn't make an argument, I asked the question. Why are you not fighting Starbucks to vape INSIDE? Vaping is harmless second hand, right? So, why stop at outside their establishments? Why not demand to do it inside? Isn't that also a liberty you've lost?



PS. IF the exterior of a Starbucks is their property they can do what they wish. You never had any liberties on private property, so you haven't lost anything. You never had the liberty to go grocery shopping in bare feet either. Or any one of a number of other policies on private property that are there for one reason or another.

You seem confused about what liberties actually are. The government taking away your rights to do something is having liberties taken away. Private property rules are not. It's damaging to the vape cause when you confuse those issues.

 

[jcco]

I suppose it's up to them to make their own policies. Although not consistent as my local store has signs up that say no smoking within
25 ft of entry. So is it 15 or 25.
They are taking the easy way out because I doubt there was many complaints about it.
All you can do is write them to tell them how you feel. Ignorance is no excuse for bad policy.

 

[rogergendron1]

If there is no water vapor allowed to store and how the hell did they brew the coffee????????????? Or boil water ...

On the other hand. 3. Starbucks in the area of Massachusetts that I live In they could care less if you vapevor not they dont even hastle smokers on thevoutside deck

 

[Glen Snyder]

Great now it looks like I have to carry TWO cards around with me!

Now do you see the similarities of the "e-cig" and "firearm" communities and the IGNORANCE and irrational "fear" of our hobbies?

Time to build a 9mm Hybrid mod?

 

[WarHawk-AVG]

Time to build a 9mm Hybrid mod?

Hah...could you imagine the looks you would get putting a pistol up to your mouth and having smoke come out of it!!!

bad enough already hahahaha

instead of just nannyism geeking out about it, people would actually have conniption fits!