Starbucks' formula has changed, let us count the (three) ways.
Paul Boutin writes,
I went to my local Starbucks and asked the barista to walk me through exactly what's different from yesterday in their drinks.Link to Paul's post at Valleywag. Photo of Starbusian signage by miskan.She showed me three changes: A richer mix on the espresso machine, smaller steamer pitchers, and shot glasses into which all espresso is now poured first, so they can check it before serving it into a cup.
(And I have to brag: I can't find anyone else who actually REPORTED the story and got all 3 changes.)
the latest
latest episodes
I'll happily be the first to note that my grande vanilla latte tasted better than it used to. Richer mix, indeed.
It was, to be honest, a surprise -- how many companies make a sweeping change like that to a brand all at once...and actually get it right the first time?
It's good to know thetre are still some industries that don't have to bother with endless beta testing.
They're using HUMAN BLOOD!
All this means to me is that the lines are only going to get longer as coffee preparation gets slower -- doing all the checking on each shot, dumping, careful foaming, etc. -- these things take extra time, and they're not probably going to install extra machines or cram extra people into those tiny spaces to make up for it.
Perhaps this will be the opening for Dunks' to return to the northwest.
I went to Starbucks today for the first time in 5 years (to burn off a giftcard). It was horrid--a bunch of hybrid hippies/yuppies conspicuously showing off their latest Apple purchases.
I hope to not go back for at least another five years.
BTW everything they sell is laughably overpriced.
It seems strange to me that Canadian Starbucks would have had different practices from US stores, but i don't think i have ever seen an espresso shot NOT made directly into a shot glass.
Canadian Starbucks have to compete with Tim Horton's. You've got to do your best when your competition sells liquid crack.
I just run some hot water from the kitchen tap into a mug with a half spoon full of Sanka Instant coffee crystals - tastes the same really
@Hyperkine: Not to play devil's advocate for Starbucks, but if you can find an indie coffeeshop with (a) high quality coffee at (b) prices significantly lower than S'bucks and (c) no Apples in use, I'll be amazed.
I prefer my local independent to Starbucks, but this will make those on-the-road stops at Starbucks much nicer.
#3 I can't believe anyone would think this would help Dunkin! They used to make a good cup of coffee about 35 years ago. No more. Now they can't even manage an edible doughnut. They taste like nothing natural is in the dough, not flour, not nothing that didn't come out of a test tube. Horrors.
The Chai syrup Tazo supplies to the Starbucks cafes is different from the Chai concentrate available in Barnes and Nobles Bookstore cafes, supermarkets and other fine outlets. The Starbucks Chai syrup comes in a white container, whereas the consumer Chai concentrate comes in a beige container.
When, oh when, will Tazo make the thicker, heavier, chai syrup available to the consumer, so that I may slurp up obscenely sweet chai all day long?
Peter J. Lupo Esq.
antiaging4geeks.com
Intéressant. I go in for barista training tomorrow. Wish me luck, random BB readers!
It never ceases to amaze me, the knee-jerk animosity towards anything Starbucks. It always ends up that the person simply has no basis for their accusation (most of the time it's the over-priced argument), and remain ignorant. A confirmation bias because hating Starbucks is the new black.
Yes, I work there. But I'm not a fanboy. They treat me well, I respect them, and therefore I enjoy enlightening people on their (usually amazing) practices.
Anyway I really came in here to point out that those are the three changes to the formula. The retraining was to ensure that EVERY Barista could properly steam milk (which is easier to ensure with smaller pitchers), calibrate the espresso machines to pour a proper shot (which is why it's require to pull double shots, and if the second isn't used, to inspect it in the shot glass and if possible taste it), and lastly but most importantly get the damned recipes right!
Howard Shultz became President once again a few months ago, and this was part of his effort to bring the company back up from the sorry state the previous dingbat put it in. He's also getting rid of those silly breakfast sandwiches- too fast-food.
I doubt anyone will read this, but I just wanted to put my 2 cents out there. I love my coffee, I love my job, and I love BoingBoing. It's rare that they all intersect.
They drive mom and pop coffee places out of business. Weyland-Yutani.
@12, pedmands:
when you say properly steaming milk, does that mean starbucks is going to try to cut in on latte art now?
jeeez, here come the screws for lock-down. Later
I have found exactly one place in my town that has coffee better than Starbucks, for less, without the apple fan-boys. It is right next to the most amazing over-priced organic sandwich shoppe, so my wallet is still significantly lighter after an outing. You do have to put up with trite aspiring art students, which is an equal trade off for the fan-boys.
Starbucks in nice, in that I know exactly what I'm getting (quality coffee products), and that I don't have to drive 10 miles to get it. I would hate them for being overpriced, but so were all the mom&pop joints they squeezed out of business.
Oyasuminasai.
Learn to make your own coffee, the way you like it.
Or else just hand over your glands/wallets. Some corporation will do it for you.
Why is BoingBoing giving free publicity to a multi-national? It was bad enough with the Nike ads.
There's a Starbucks in my office building. I occasionally go for a double shot in the afternoon, never loving the espresso flavor; too burned & smoky.
Well this afternoon I went downstairs & tried the new style. Definitely better. Less bitter. Finer crema too.
Does this mean they don't throw away a paper cup when making a shot for a personal mug? That would be genius.
At Starbucks, they learned how to press the button at a different angle to influence the espresso shot. Then they learned to scrutinize the automated shot to make sure every automated shot looks the same. If it doesn't, they put a call into corporate, and then continue making the shots, by pressing the button at the new and unique angle.
This is just so ridiculous, how much press this PR stunt has gotten. :(
Haha, The logo begs a goatse!
Wait, I don't think I've ever watched a Starbucks barista work, but are the changes and the discussion an indication that:
- Starbucks used to pour the espresso straight into a paper cup
- Starbucks used to make ONE shot at a time, slowing service down and fucking up the brewing process
- If Starbucks did make two shots at a time with one of those double-shot head-thingies (My barista training wasn't in English, OK? :P) and the second shot wasn't used, they didn't pour it the hell down the grate after a minute because it was, uhhh... older than a minute
- Starbucks is now encouraging its employees to TASTE the leftover shot rather than just pour it down the grate after it's been sitting there longer than a minute
I mean, the foam is obviously not top-notch, but if that's the way they treat their coffee... Holy crap, it's not rocket science, people!
Coffeegeek, thanks, you made me laugh!
Coincidentally (or maybe not, given the tenor of these changes), I was talking to the barista in a starfucks a couple of weeks ago, and they had just had some downtime to install new push-button machines that supposedly make better coffee than the old ones. So, even the robots get retraining! Incidentally, the baristas were in the midst of some serious post-install retuning of the machines, which they had just gone in and were pulling watery shots the color of iced tea -- so there's still a lot of skill/attention to quality required by the job.
In WDC where I used to live, there are a lot of terrible copycat independents and worse chains like Cosi, so I often sought out the consistency of the Starbucks push-button. Not to say there aren't great places for coffee in DC -- Murky (of course), Swing's, Sip of Seattle, Stacy's and Greenberry just to name a few in my former stalking grounds.
@Raisedbywolves, in fact SOP I think varies a lot depending on what equipment they're using and whether the baristas care. At least a few years ago when I last had a friend who worked there, they did have the double-shot head thingies (I don't know anyplace that doesn't), and always dumped the leftover shot if the order was a single or triple (policy was definitely to waste it and *not* let it sit around or get used in a drink). Actually, far from letting it sit, they usually didn't bother with a shot glass for the second shot and just let it go straight down the drain.
What do they mean by using a new "mix" in the espresso machine?
I thought the only thing required to make espresso was ground coffee and water? Are they cutting it with Soylent Green?
"At Starbucks, they learned how to press the button at a different angle to influence the espresso shot. Then they learned to scrutinize the automated shot to make sure every automated shot looks the same. If it doesn't, they put a call into corporate, and then continue making the shots, by pressing the button at the new and unique angle."
Actually the machines were re-calibrated and completely overhauled. All the timing systems were redone, and they installed a wide mesh screen filter instead of the fine mesh screen filter that used to be in the machines. Shots have a fuller body now, nicer crema on top. This is what is meant by "new mix."
Also, the Verismo machines we use don't pull single shots well. It has to do with the way the coffee grounds fill up the filter basket and it not providing enough pressure when only pulling singles. Starbucks has always used double shots for drinks that require two shots, but in efforts to save money (see: corportate board members who don't drink coffee) we've been using the single shots for drinks that only take one shot (shorts, talls) or when drinks require 3 shots. No longer. Everything is a double shot.
That being said, I'm still excited to jump ship to the local shop here if they decide to hire me. Starbucks is all right - they do a better job than almost all the shitty local places here.
I should note that several Starbucks here in Boston are testing the crazy $11,000-per-machine Clover coffeemaker. It makes individual cups of vacuum-extracted coffee, sort of an industrial Aeropress.
It's by far the best cup of coffee I've had at any coffeeshop.
@14 Isaac: Some of us have already moved on from hearts to hearts with squiggles through them! some of the neatest coffee art here.
Here are some of the other changes that they made.
::looks puzzled::
Tim Horton's and Dunkin' Donuts have better coffee than Starbucks ?! Come on now... Yeah, they're a big step up from watery, gas station swill, but Starbucks outdoes 'em (even if their roasts are often on the edge of burnt-tasting).
Of course the best everyday coffee is what I make at home with fresh ground beans that were roasted in-house at my local Whole Foods ;)
I suggest that everyone who wastes their money in these expensive coffee-pusheries, just stop. Make it at home and save 90%. Remember way back, when coffee wasn't SO expensive and self-important? How green is it that millions and millions of paper cups get used everyday because people need their coffee on the go? Take a few minutes and drink it out of a cup, like a civilized society might.
PLEASE tell me this shot glass they are talking about is a paper cup that will get tossed after the coffee monkey TASTES the drink? Or are they just making it easier for them to spit in our drinks now?
How can people afford to spend so much on coffee? I make a pot and fill my thermos before work. Probably costs me $0.50 for 8 cups. Or I could go to starbucks and pay $3+ for a coffee.
@Jeff- For brewed coffee, sure. But not everyone can afford an espresso machine with a steamwand at home. Starbuck's offers ceramic mugs at every location, but you usually have to ask (oh no!)
@Legotech- don't be purposely dense. No one would drink directly out of the shot glass. Pour it in another cup.
@Rugerredhawk- There is no drip coffee at any Starbuck's that's over $3, or even close. Plus if you'd bring in your own thermos, you get a discount.
@Rugerredhawk: that's exactly why Starbucks is investing in improving their espresso and drip coffee. You can't get a decent espresso at home without a $300+ machine and a lot of hassle, and the Clover machines give you a $2 cup of "drip" that's miles better than anything your Mr Coffee can do at home (or even a French press).
Now, how people can afford to go in twice a day and get their venti caramel lattes, I have no idea.
@pedmands - righteous. i managed a borders cafe where there wasn't even a thought of automated espresso machines and every drink was ground, tamped, and pulled by a barista. a work of art. sounds like starbucks is trying to get BACK to that and that rules.
and it's not overpriced at all... milk costs a ton these days! people are dumb. they equate starbucks to fast food, and the truth is, is espresso drinks are made with all real ingredients (except that sugar-free crap). real stuff costs more. it's not a chicken patty.
whatever. it's sad that this is "an improvement" when this is how it should've been done all along.
All I can say to this whole story and thread is:
"That and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee."
I'm a Barista at Starbucks, and we did have training on how we need to always pull two shots, steam our milk better, and calibrate the machines, but that was only a small portion of the meeting on Tuesday night.
THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE will be in our customer service. If your drink tastes funky, or you notice your Barista doin' something crappy, like serving you a dead shot then tell them. You'll get your drink remade, and maybe even a recovery coupon for a free drink the next time around.
Our training session basically told us that Starbucks doesn't want to be seen as 'another fast food place'. I swear, you won't get any better service at Dunkin' Donuts, because if their coffee is gross, the more they'll do is give you another cup of gross coffee. At Starbucks we actually want to give you something that tastes great, because, yes, we realize our drinks are expensive. But when our customers are coming to Starbucks, they're not just paying for our coffee. I'd like to see someone conduct a serious business meeting, or have a great date at a creepy donut shop or Arby's where the floors are greasy, and the employees could care less if their napkin dispenser is empty.
The goal of our training was for us to realize, that it may take a little bit longer for us to get the drinks out, but every drink we actually put out, will be a drink we're proud of making and to give you.
Here's a parody logo for the brand.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060426232308/www.cbldf.org/graphics/logos/dwyerlogo.gif
You coffee nerds and your coffee lingo... crema, "pulling singles", etc. Listening to my girlfriend order her coffee at Starbucks makes me feel a level of shame one might feel when my friends and I talk loudly at a bar about WoW, WH40k, Star Trek or other such hideously geeky obsessions.
I’m not sure where Starbucks fits into a directory of wonderful things.
If this isn’t about a giant piece of corporate art being rolled through the window of a Starbucks, or some other such tail of inspiration I don’t see it as a boingboing kind of thing.
The Starbucks experience never worked for me and I really don’t understand how so many people drink this koolaid.
I talk loudly at a bar about WoW, WH40k, Star Trek or other such hideously geeky obsessions.
At least you're in a bar. Coffee versus martinis and a discussion of Wesley Crusher's sweater? Easy choice.
Hating on Starbuck's is the new black, doncha-know?
If I want a cup of coffee or espresso I visit Starbucks. If I'm looking for bad service or poorly trained baristas I'll go to the 'mom and pop' place across the street. I honestly gave them a try, for about a month I kept visiting the indy coffee shop across the street, the prices where the same and the drinks rarely as good. On one trip the counter person turned around to ask another worker how to make a cappuccino. "it's like a latte." they said and proceeded to let the newbie figure out my drink. Sorry folks, I'll take my business to Starbucks next time. My drinks rarely cost more than $2.
I am so happy to be living in Europe, where every cup of coffee tastes different in our vast variety of small, independent, original italian cafés. Each café may be a new discovery!
I really loathe standardized coffee from a big multinational chain by the gallon (!) in paper cups (!) to go (!) instead of thick-walled *real* espresso cups. And don't get me talking about those fantasy recipes with sprinkles and stuff!
The point about coffee is, and that has not yet been understood by Starbucks, the social event in the café and not the drink itself. "to go" should never even be an option. The whole point about coffee is to sit down and relax for a few minutes. La Dolce Vita!
But I admit that even I walk into Starbucks from time to time to drink a (always too big) portion of some hideously pronounced (they have to use the english product names over here, which sounds utterly ridiculous) fantasy creation based on some "secret" "special" coffee recipe. The only reason I go is to be found in the comfy sofas. But I definitely prefer small, independent cafés, where you can still be surprised - or disappointed. Also, why pay € 3,40 for a small self-service Cappuccino when a *real* Cappuccino (with balls) at the next italian café comes at about € 2,30, service included?
There are a LOT of coffee places in my town, and two are worse than Starbucks. So that leaves at least 20 I've tried that are better than Starbucks. Gloria Jeans is about the same as Starbucks, but less embarrassing to go to. Everywhere is cheaper than starbucks, except Gloria Jeans which is about the same. Surprisingly, the McCafe at McDonalds has really good coffee, hot drinks and iced drinks, and they are cheap too. There's so many places to get coffee here that there's no need for chains like this.
Giggle-inducing video of Improv Everywhere prank with three individuals lugging huge desktop computers and monitors into Starbucks and setting up shop:
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/starbucks-employees-may-need-training-but-the-pranksters-are-just-fine/
well I'm boycotting starbucks alltogether anyway, so this doesn't make a difference for me..except for what #13 ANTINOUS and many others said before me...
I can be silent for no longer. I used to work at Starbucks back in the day and pulling the occasional good shot of espresso was one of the only perks of the job. I'm not sure if I quit when they introduced the Verrisimo machines or if they fired my ass for being difficult, but I and all of my fellow employees were aware of the difference that the new automated machines would make in our working lives.
The thing is: it used to be possible to get a really good shot of espresso at Starbucks. Unlikely, but possible. With the introduction of the Verrisimo machines (early 2000's here in Portland) it became impossible to get a good shot or a bad shot, only a mediocre shot.
No amount of retraining with those machines will ever result in Starbucks employees being able to pull a really superlative shot of espresso. And that is what has moved them as a company from the realm of coffeeshop/restaurant into the realm of fast-food-place/convenience outlet.
@39 Not so long ago, if a customers drink didn't taste right, they would tell the barrista and not only would they get a fresh new(and well crafted, even if the first wasn't) drink, but unless they were an absolutely horrid person, they would also be showered with free drink coupons. The problem is not fixable, the problem is implicit in the corporate structure; the problem is implicit in the very fact that there is a corporate structure and that structure is designed to maximize shareholder value and neither customer nor employee satisfaction are taken into adequate account.
@49 klaradox: Except that what Antinous wrote in #13 (that Starbucks drives the independent shops out of business) isn't true. In fact, often times when Starbucks opens a new place near a mom and pop coffeehouse, business at the independent increases. Slate ran an interesting article on this phenomenon.
the problem is implicit in the corporate structure
I got dragged into a Starbucks once (he was hot, but still not worth it.) I ordered an iced tea. I was told that I could not have lemon because the suits had decided that the smell of lemons in the store would disturb the coffee smell. Game over.
Gosh. I love the comingled smell of coffee and lemon (zest). Hasn't any starbucks exec had an espresso with the lemon rind on the side, you know, at a restaurant?
Hey, that espresso with Lemon zest already has been in Beverly Hills Cop! I never had it, though.
Mom and Pop's get driven out of business...by what? Low prices? Awesome coffee? People who'd rather go to Starbucks?
I hate to say it but it's OK with me - if Mom and Pop make a shit cup of coffee then I'll cross the street and buy someone else's - if it is in my opinion a bit less shit. For the money that is.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Here's a company that's taking an honest look at their product and service, and trying to improve both, fully acknowledging that both have slipped in recent times. How many other companies are willing to do this?
Schultz's hands are somewhat tied, as he's stuck with the new automatic Verismo machines. It was as if we had a standard transmission car, and someone thought it would be better to have an automatic, which is fine. Now, we're being told to drive the automatic as if it were a stick.
I agree there's a significant PR spin to this whole effort, however you can't knock Schultz for trying to make the best of the situation. I also think we haven't seen the last of what he has up his sleeve.