HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Guns, Starbucks, and &quo...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:59 AM

Guns, Starbucks, and "repeating the same action and expecting different results".

First, there was the Brady Campaign boycott because Starbucks basically ignored them
and refused to flatly ban open-carry of guns in their stores where otherwise legal:

http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/press/view/1219/

Brady Campaign Urges Starbucks To Prohibit Guns In Its Retail Outlets

Feb 5, 2010

Washington, DC – Radical gun enthusiasts have begun parading into California restaurants and coffeehouses in recent weeks brazenly displaying handguns. The gun activists have frightened customers, alarmed police and caused at least two restaurant chains to establish firm policies prohibiting firearms in their retail locations.

Ten days ago, gun violence opponents in California started urging a third chain, Starbucks, to similarly prohibit the "open carry" of firearms in its retail establishments, but Starbucks has rebuffed their requests. Today, the national Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence joins with its chapter leaders in California and across the nation in urging the Starbucks Coffee Company to bar the carrying of firearms in its shops.

Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign, today sent a letter to Howard Schultz, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Starbucks Coffee Company, asking him to change their policy. "I am writing to urge you to reverse Starbucks’ current policy allowing persons to carry guns, both openly and concealed, into your stores," Helmke wrote. "On behalf of the Brady Campaign and its chapters across the country, I ask you to consider the rights of the vast majority of your customers to bring their families, including their children, into your stores without being confronted with the threatening presence of open-displayed guns."...


That didn't work out so well for the Bradys, as see:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x312487

http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=163516

Starbucks posts significant increases in earnings and sales in second quarter
by Austin Lewis
April 22, 2010

Coffee retailer Starbucks Corp., based in Seattle, Wash., reported significantly higher earnings based on improved domestic and international sales. Starbucks surpassed Wall Street’s estimates by four cents. The stock rose slightly Wednesday.

Starbucks earned $217.3 million, or 28 cents earnings per diluted share, in the second quarter ended March 28, up nearly eightfold from $25 million, or 3 cents per diluted share, in the same period last year. Earnings reflected a $5.8 million charge related to restructuring....


Now, remember those numbers. Cut to one year ago- some bright spark declares that HE will succeed where
the Brady Campaign failed (emphasis added):

http://gunvictimsaction.org/blog/2012/01/press-release-starbucks-boycott/

Press Release About Starbucks Boycott
Posted Jan 30 2012 by ngac with 0 Comments
Starbucks’ “Pro-Gun” Policy Prompts Gun Victims’ Advocate Group to Launch Nationwide Boycott on Valentine’s Day 2012

CHICAGO, Jan. 23, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – A nationwide boycott of Starbucks stores and its products will be launched on Valentine’s Day 2012. Its goal is to eliminate the risk of guns in public places and ultimately to bring sane gun laws to the U.S.

This boycott is being called by the National Gun Victim’s Action Council (NGAC), a network of 14 million gun victims, the faith community including the: Episcopal Peace Fellowship, United Church of Christ, Fellowship of Reconciliation (46 peace fellowships and 43 affiliate fellowships), secular groups working to reduce gun violence and many of the organizations that support passing sane gun laws...

...Starbucks has the legal right to ban guns but despite having been petitioned by thousands, asked at a shareholder meeting, and a direct appeal made to their Board, Starbucks clings to this policy that puts millions of Americans at risk every day and encourages the spread of guns being carried in public.

IMPACT OF STARBUCKS BOYCOTT: Fineman says, “Starbucks steadfast support of the NRA’s lethal pro-gun agenda damages its ‘socially conscious company’ brand. Further,” adds Fineman, “Monte Carlo Simulation risk analysis indicates that 90% of the time, our boycott will reduce Starbucks stock price by an amount no rational company would allow.”...


Result:

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2013-01-24/industries/36522385_1_starbucks-posts-starbucks-shares-higher-profit

Starbucks posts 13% higher profit
Market Pulse
January 24, 2013|Jim Jelter

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Starbucks Corp. (US:sbux) reported late Thursday its fiscal first-quarter profit rose to $432 million, or 57 cents a share, from $382 million, or 50 cents a share, a year ago. Revenue for the quarter ended Dec. 30 rose 11% to $3.8 billion from $3.44 billion. Analysts surveyed by FactSet had expected the Seattle-based coffee giant to earn 57 cents a share on $3.85 billion in revenue. Starbucks stood by its fiscal 2013 revenue growth target of 10% to 13%. Starbucks shares fell 1.1% to $54.00 in after-hours trade.


Protip: Don't let Eliot Fineman give you financial advice- or believe gun control advocates who tell you
how 'popular' their views are...

41 replies, 2840 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply Guns, Starbucks, and "repeating the same action and expecting different results". (Original post)
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 OP
another_liberal Jan 2013 #1
Clames Jan 2013 #2
Pholus Jan 2013 #3
another_liberal Jan 2013 #8
Clames Jan 2013 #15
Pholus Jan 2013 #18
Clames Jan 2013 #28
Pholus Jan 2013 #30
Clames Jan 2013 #31
Pholus Jan 2013 #36
Clames Jan 2013 #38
Pholus Jan 2013 #39
Clames Jan 2013 #40
Pholus Jan 2013 #41
holdencaufield Jan 2013 #5
another_liberal Jan 2013 #7
holdencaufield Jan 2013 #10
another_liberal Jan 2013 #21
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #26
holdencaufield Jan 2013 #29
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #34
ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #14
another_liberal Jan 2013 #20
gejohnston Jan 2013 #22
another_liberal Jan 2013 #23
gejohnston Jan 2013 #24
another_liberal Jan 2013 #25
ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #27
another_liberal Jan 2013 #32
ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #33
another_liberal Jan 2013 #35
Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #4
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #6
Phillip McCleod Jan 2013 #19
iiibbb Jan 2013 #9
Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #11
jimmy the one Jan 2013 #12
iiibbb Jan 2013 #13
Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #17
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #37
Clames Jan 2013 #16

Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:33 AM

1. I wonder how much . . .

I wonder how much more profit they might have made if gun-packers had been turned away? Seeing some caffeine-crazed clown with a .45 or a Glock openly displayed on his hip would make me find the nearest door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:51 AM

2. Less profit.

 

Those who supported Starbuck's decision to follow local laws spend well. They also tip well too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 04:44 AM

3. Citation please.

I would love to see this study. Unless, of course, it is completely made up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:37 AM

8. Good point . . .

Good point indeed. Thanks for mentioning it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 12:21 PM

15. You mean like the study that supports the post I...

 

...wad replying to? What an obvious and poorly considered question. Not made up but is based upon personally witnessed events which is a hell of a lot more than what you have...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 12:52 PM

18. Grammar FAIL.

Learn the difference between a question ("I wonder...") and a declaration of universal "fact" ("They also tip well too.") .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 03:08 PM

28. I know the difference.

 

Learn to frame you questions in such a way that it doesn't make you look like a complete newbie to this topic. Fear not, you have years to catch up if you apply yourself.


And yes, during those events it was common to tip with $2 bills. Easily Googled information if you are so inclined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #28)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 06:57 PM

30. Oh wise gunner, I stand in awe of you.

Not. The worst coworker I ever had to put up with, that gun waving bastard, was also the guy who usually tried to skin out on the check or failing that he would conveniently forget the tax/tip. The kind of guy whose going away party was celebrated the day AFTER he left.

So, please stop trying to portray your generosity as a group. It is, well, cow excrement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:30 PM

31. Bullshit.

 

That's all that little story is . As a group we are very generous, we actually put our money where our mouths are as opposed to those like you who do their capital expending attempting to be witty on message boards. Oh anti-gunner, have you sent one penny to the VPC or Brady Campaign this year? Ever? Don't worry, vast majority haven't either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 01:29 AM

36. Bwahahahaha.


You're having to guess at what I did or didn't do? You lose!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #36)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 02:13 AM

38. Don't have to guess.

 

As obvious and simple as they get these days...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #38)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 08:29 AM

39. Wow, thanks for admitting you maintain your own "facts."


You do not deal in evidence, you simply "know" your reality and conveniently it fits your preconceived notions.

Conclusion? That probably applies to everything you say. Not that this was any big surprise, frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #39)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 11:55 AM

40. Easy when you actually research a topic rather than regurgitating....

 

...whatever pops up from the usual anti-gun nonsense. You put forth nothing original so why waste the effort on you? Facts and citations aren't going to change your mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #40)


Response to another_liberal (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 05:08 AM

5. I don't think anyone should leave Starbucks ...

 

... just because they see a firearm.

Unless ... they're in the queue ahead of me ... in that case, Buh-bye!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:34 AM

7. If strangers with guns . . .

If non law enforcement type strangers with guns in a public places don't bother you, then they don't bother you.

As to the lines at Starbucks: True that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:58 AM

10. If I thought I would get my Venti any more quickly ...

 

... I would come in carrying an M249 and wearing a necklace of human ears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:39 PM

21. That sounds . . .

That sounds about right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:30 PM

26. A friend of...

...Daniel and/or Aurelio I assume?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #26)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 06:52 PM

29. Nah ...

 

... just hate queuing and I'm a big Colonel Kurtz fan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #29)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:43 PM

34. ;)

"... you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 10:06 AM

14. And you can tell plainclothes LEOs from civilians?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #14)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:36 PM

20. Do they carry . . .

Do they carry their weapons on their hips while on plain clothes duty? Seems like that would defeat the purpose of being in plain clothes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:52 PM

22. they do in Florida

detectives/investigators do, not to be confused with under cover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:54 PM

23. I hope they enjoy . . .

I hope they enjoy their coffee. Starbucks will, however, have to do without my business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #23)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:01 PM

24. They wear their badges on their belt

in my county they sometimes have a polo shirt that says "CCSD". It is obvious who they are. After being in real coffee shops in Japan in the 1980s, Starbucks doesn't do it for me. At best it is hipster/beatnick chic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:05 PM

25. Good point.

They have pretty good coffee, but not equal to the prices they charge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:42 PM

27. Everyday and even off duty

Location and holster type varies. I am old school and prefer a shoulder holster when carrying concealed. Hardest to see, but it can be "read" by someone who knows what to look for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:34 PM

32. I once had to carry . . .

I once had to carry a loaded weapon for self protection, did so for over a year. I did not like it much at all.

You guys can have all of my remaining share of that shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #32)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:40 PM

33. Today I carry because of where I live and that I ride a motorcycle.

Its a practical matter not political.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #33)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:43 PM

35. I hear you . . .

I hear you, brother. It was entirely practical in my case as well, but I hated to think what might happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 05:04 AM

4. correlation is not causation.

 

show some connection between the boycotts and the profit increases. until then this is bobbing upside down in the tank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phillip McCleod (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 06:03 AM

6. It does show that the boycott was ineffective. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 01:27 PM

19. as they usually are.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:38 AM

9. I enjoy a good fail as much as the next guy, but

 

They could have surpassed Wall Street estimates by double, or their profits boosted by 20%.

That being said, this is why concealed carry is preferred in spite of those who say people who conceal carry are cowards... conceal carry is polite and shows deference to those around you.

Gun Control always complains though... concealed carry is for cowards, they should open carry and be a "man"..... becomes open carry is menacing.

For me, a gun should be properly holstered, and the posseser polite and calm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 08:19 AM

11. remind me again - what of, is that the definition ?

lol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 08:56 AM

12. GUNNUTS EAGER TO SPEND $5 FOR CUP OF COFFEE

Clames Those who supported Starbuck's decision to follow local laws spend well. They also tip well too.

Dunno what's so smart about spending 3 or 4 dollars for a cup of coffee. I spend that much for a 13 ounce can of maxwell's house which lasts a couple weeks. My cost for 2 weeks coffee $3, gunnuts $56, what a dummy I've been to boycott starbucks (as well as every other coffee shop the past 25 years).
And then gunnuts add a tip to that? cheesess...

Then, could be 'other' reasons for a profit rise, that I guess people who would spend $4 for a cup of coffee, could not put together on their own...

Mar 8, 2012, Starbucks raises prices on a premium brew .. A “short” cup of Clover-brewed Sumatra went from $1.75 to $2.15, a nearly 23 percent hike. A “grande” French Roast will set you back $2.65, up from $2.25. The latest price increase follows a 10-cent Starbucks price increase in January for a “tall” brewed coffee in Boston and a handful of other cities and regions throughout the U.S.
The rise in prices comes even as expectations of a bumper coffee crop in Brazil put downward pressure on coffee prices, as the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2012/03/08/starbucks-ups-clover-coffee-price.html?page=all

nov 2012: But while coffee companies, cafes, and corner delis often raise prices, they rarely cut them. Earlier this year, Starbucks (US:SBUX) increased the prices of many drinks by around 1% in much of the Northeast and Sunbelt, including in New York, Boston, Atlanta and Dallas. That followed a 17% hike on Starbucks packaged coffee in 2011. The company hasn’t cut prices this year, despite the fall in wholesale prices.
http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-11-08/finance/34981340_1_coffee-prices-ground-coffee-coffee-companies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 09:25 AM

13. Jimmy's right

 

The opinions of anyone willing to spend money on Starbucks coffee is immediately suspect... gun controllers and gun nuts alike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iiibbb (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 12:50 PM

17. Yeah, I went to Starbuck's only to protest the Brady's protest. Not impressed...

I prefer the 3 independent coffee houses on S. First here in Austin. Much better coffee (I rarely drink it), and very good teas (I do drink that). But if Brady's outfit were to pull their stunt again, I guess I'll have to slog back over to that chain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iiibbb (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 01:56 AM

37. I only buy from them when there are no other coffee joints available...

...or the alternative is truly dire, like a conference I was at once where the hotel coffee was swill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 12:24 PM

16. I don't see what is so smart about drinking coffee period.

 

I don't even waste the little money you are spending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread