It's not our fault...

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 07:54:08 -0700, Tom Sixkiller wrote:

Starbucks has become the Wal-Mart of coffee shops, to be despised and
avoided at all costs.

They've been one to avoid since their fiasco in NYC during the 9/11
disaster.

what have they done then?

#m
--
harsh regulations in North Korea (read below link after reading the story):
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/04/open-mikulan.php
oooops ... sorry ... it happened in the USA, ya know: the land of the free.

wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 09:53:40 -0600, "Dan Luke"
| wrote:
|
| You'll note that the first word of the newsgroup's charter is
| 'information.' If an article fails to provide INFORMATION that falls
| within the newsgroup's guidelines, it isn't appropriate, IMO.

This from an idiot who constantly posts his political opinions.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:PagIb.690743$HS4.4891134@attbi_s01...
Lo and behold, Starbucks heard about it and threatened a lawsuit!

That's sad.

Starbucks has become the Wal-Mart of coffee shops, to be despised and
avoided at all costs.

They've been one to avoid since their fiasco in NYC during the 9/11
disaster.

Pardon the failing memory of his non-coffe drinker. What did the NYC
Starbucks do that caused the fiasco?

VideoGuy

"Video Guy" gkasten at brick dot net wrote in message ...
Pardon the failing memory of his non-coffe drinker. What did the NYC
Starbucks do that caused the fiasco?

I believe some Starbucks near the WTC refused to give out water for free. I'd hardly
claim this to be a corporate wide defect. The local Starbucks here, equally without
corporate input, supported various efforts like the Northern Virginia blood banks
(people forget that Virginia was also attacked) with free coffee and other stuff during
the emergency.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

"Video Guy" gkasten at brick dot net wrote in message
...
Pardon the failing memory of his non-coffe drinker. What did the NYC
Starbucks do that caused the fiasco?

I believe some Starbucks near the WTC refused to give out water for free.
I'd hardly
claim this to be a corporate wide defect. The local Starbucks here,
equally without
corporate input, supported various efforts like the Northern Virginia
blood banks
(people forget that Virginia was also attacked) with free coffee and other
stuff during
the emergency.

I'm sure individual Starbucks may be very helpful. The problem was the
corporate HQ response. It took a media blitz to get them to even answer the
phone, and even then their response was LAME!

It took a pointblank "slap in the face" to the Starbucks CEO to get him off
his arrogant/contemptuous ass.

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
In article , Ron
Natalie wrote:

"Video Guy" gkasten at brick dot net wrote in message
...
Pardon the failing memory of his non-coffe drinker. What did the NYC
Starbucks do that caused the fiasco?

I believe some Starbucks near the WTC refused to give out water for
free.
I'd hardly
claim this to be a corporate wide defect. The local Starbucks here,
equally
without
corporate input, supported various efforts like the Northern Virginia
blood
banks
(people forget that Virginia was also attacked) with free coffee and
other
stuff during
the emergency.


IIRC Starbucks put out some kind of window dressing advertisment in
some of their shops in NY shortly after 9/11 that which depicted towers
of coffee crumbling. It was very distasteful and they were forced to
withdraw them within a day or two.

Not even close! http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cool.htm

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
In article , Tom Sixkiller
wrote:



IIRC Starbucks put out some kind of window dressing advertisment in
some of their shops in NY shortly after 9/11 that which depicted
towers
of coffee crumbling. It was very distasteful and they were forced to
withdraw them within a day or two.

Not even close! http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cool.htm


Yes, that's the one. Starbucks got a load of **** for those ads here in
the NY area when they appeared.

How you qualified them as "distasteful" is really a curiosity (or did you
mean to say some mental midgets found them "distasteful"?).

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
In article , Tom Sixkiller
wrote:
IIRC Starbucks put out some kind of window dressing advertisment in
some of their shops in NY shortly after 9/11 that which depicted
towers
of coffee crumbling. It was very distasteful and they were forced to
withdraw them within a day or two.

Not even close! http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cool.htm

Yes, that's the one. Starbucks got a load of **** for those ads here in
the NY area when they appeared.

What do you mean, "yes, that's the one"? You described a depiction of
"towers of coffee crumbling". The actual ad merely showed two cups of
coffee sitting placidly in a field of grass! (And the ads were displayed
for a month or two, not "a day or two".)

Tom Fleischman wrote:

[snip]
As you point out, the ad itself was fairly innocuous.
I think the word "collapse" was not well chosen,

So should the word "collapse" be unusable in advertising from now on because it
describes what happened to the WTC? Should we pull any and all ads using the
words "airplane", "fly", "tower", "twin" too? regardless of how much of a
stretch it is to suggest they were intentionally chosen? How many pest control
service ads use words that *could be* associated with horrible events of the
past century? I don't think anyone lacks compassion for victims and their
families, but if you're going to get that "sensitive," just about anything
could be linked in one way or another. Where do you draw the line?

but looking at it now I think it was a bit of a
stretch to connect it to the WTC.

Ya think?

We've had good luck with our local Starbucks, they generously donated
four huge carafes of coffee for our Challenge Air event at FDK last
October. They even supplied all the cups, cream etc.

www.challengeair.com

Rich
(my real email )


"Ron Natalie" wrote in message om...
"Video Guy" gkasten at brick dot net wrote in message ...
Pardon the failing memory of his non-coffe drinker. What did the NYC
Starbucks do that caused the fiasco?

I believe some Starbucks near the WTC refused to give out water for free. I'd hardly
claim this to be a corporate wide defect. The local Starbucks here, equally without
corporate input, supported various efforts like the Northern Virginia blood banks
(people forget that Virginia was also attacked) with free coffee and other stuff during
the emergency.