Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

about.starbucks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 117 posts

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#21

Post by esseph »

betaby wrote: post #16
jsbisviewtiful wrote: post #12

Feel bad for those employees. In the last 10 years I've gotten Starbucks maybe twice, both times because we were on the road and needed coffee... and it was the only option. A true fall from grace; The drinks are either sugar bombs or taste burnt and corp loves union busting.

> taste burnt It was the case since forever ( ~15 years+ ). Starbucks is not a speciality coffee shop. There is nothing wrong with that. One has to acknowledge that high volume coffee shops have to rely on basically burned beans in order to be consistent with the taste.

This

Over roasted coffee averages the flavor across large harvests and sources, and they expect to dump a bunch of sugar in there anyway.

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#22

Post by ausbah »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #19

I never understood Starbucks. I live in Europe, we have good coffee places everywhere. They are cheaper and serve significantly better coffee. I can't think of anything I ordered from Starbucks that didn't taste artificial.

i think it’s mostly for american tourists

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#23

Post by shawn_w »

YC873498723 wrote: post #17
strongpigeon wrote: post #8

Really surprised about the closing of Starbucks Reserve in Seattle. That place was always bursting at the seams and must have had a major halo effect for the brand. It's hard not to associate the closure with its recent unionization.

No way! I've been there and had the best tasting coffee and pizza of my life. Surprisingly good combo. And it was right next to the old Living Computer Museum. It was for sure the highlight of my trips to Seattle. :(

The museum is also gone for good. Thank Paul Allen's estate for not wanting to keep it going or find an organization to take it over.

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#24

Post by mothballed »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #19

I never understood Starbucks. I live in Europe, we have good coffee places everywhere. They are cheaper and serve significantly better coffee. I can't think of anything I ordered from Starbucks that didn't taste artificial.

The ones in Seattle were solid. Not sure why, but I could never order a coffee from any of the other ones again after that, it seemed like the rest were fake ripoffs.

I think they basically developed a quality brand then just gutted the quality everywhere else to expand and it worked.

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#25

Post by Poomba »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #19

I never understood Starbucks. I live in Europe, we have good coffee places everywhere. They are cheaper and serve significantly better coffee. I can't think of anything I ordered from Starbucks that didn't taste artificial.

For me, I just order a drink when my wife stops by one to order one. I hardly go out of my way to order it myself. Everything from the drinks to the pastries are mediocre

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#27

Post by deadbabe »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #19

I never understood Starbucks. I live in Europe, we have good coffee places everywhere. They are cheaper and serve significantly better coffee. I can't think of anything I ordered from Starbucks that didn't taste artificial.

I go to Starbucks for the co-working vibes, not the coffee.

When are small coffee shops going to understand, if you have a 1 hour limit on how long I can sit there on my laptop (if you even allow laptops), I’m not going to go to your shop. Coffee doesn’t matter, it’s all the same shit.

Starbucks has never cared if I buy one coffee and then sit there all day.

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#29

Post by morkalork »

ausbah wrote: post #22
DarkNova6 wrote: post #19

I never understood Starbucks. I live in Europe, we have good coffee places everywhere. They are cheaper and serve significantly better coffee. I can't think of anything I ordered from Starbucks that didn't taste artificial.

i think it’s mostly for american tourists

Which is really sad, when I go to Europe I love trying all the different types of pastries you can get at the coffee shops there. A strudel with an intensely sour filling is not something you will find in North America for example.

Re: Starbucks: Location closures and elimination of roles

#30

Post by YawningAngel »

betaby wrote: post #16
jsbisviewtiful wrote: post #12

Feel bad for those employees. In the last 10 years I've gotten Starbucks maybe twice, both times because we were on the road and needed coffee... and it was the only option. A true fall from grace; The drinks are either sugar bombs or taste burnt and corp loves union busting.

> taste burnt It was the case since forever ( ~15 years+ ). Starbucks is not a speciality coffee shop. There is nothing wrong with that. One has to acknowledge that high volume coffee shops have to rely on basically burned beans in order to be consistent with the taste.

Coffee is inherently not a consistent drink. The only brewing methods that don't vary significantly with brewer skill and chance are immersion brews, which aren't broadly used in modern coffee shops. It's surely better to not burn the beans to ash and accept some inconsistency than ruin the drink every time
Post reply on HN