Comments on: Starbucks “Instant” Coffee

By: MKonings

MKonings — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 05:43:22 +0000

I live in Seattle and first encountered Via about 6 months ago and I still haven’t figured out why I would buy this product. If I have access to hot water I also have access to electricity and would far rather grind some beans and make better cup of drip coffee in my one-cup Melitta filter in the same amount of time for one fourth the price. I went backpacking recently and even there I brought ground coffee and made a great cup of drip far superior to the thin “Via” instant in the same amount of time. It’s not 1980. I suppose some will opt for the convenience of just pouring it into hot water b/c they have no clue how easy it is to make better coffee for far less money in the same amount of time.

By: Barry Ritholtz

Barry Ritholtz — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 01:58:26 +0000

I love Viet Namese coffee, with condensed milk!

By: Kineslaw

Kineslaw — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:32:05 +0000

I suspect this product is intended more for the Asian market than for domestic consumption. I spent last summer in SE Asia and had more cups of instant coffee than I would care to recall. Very few places had the capacity to brew cups of coffee, with the exception of Vietnam.

I’d be interested to see how much of a marketing push they give this overseas.

By: Bokolis

Bokolis — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:08:23 +0000

I drink it b/c I’m addicted, not for the taste, so that makes be a poor example. But, it would seem instant coffee runs contrary to SBUX whole point of existence. It’s like the pigs walking on two legs.

Thanks for the link to the re-post; opened my eyes (n/p/i).

By: xnycpdx

xnycpdx — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:34:48 +0000

“non-Starbuck’s coffee can be earthshatteringly bad. It’s like Clint Eastwood pointing a gun in your face and asking you whether you feel lucky.”

and therein lies the problem with american consumers the last 30 years: comforting, consistent mediocrity over The Possibly Brilliant, Possibly Bad Unknown, every time. in coffee, in food, in music, in clothes, in politicians.

alexp, that also answers your question!

By: nsambol

nsambol — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:34:30 +0000

I tried Via two days ago at my local Starbucks in a free tasting. I was *very* pleasantly surprised. Barry, maybe you had the Columbian or maybe it was mad improperly – 1 packet to 8oz water. I really like the Italian. Its definitely better than Pike with a feeling on the tongue almost like a french press but not quite!

In fact, I’m drinking a cup right now (Italian and black) that I purchased yesterday.

I’ve been thinking about this:

- The price is no cheaper than purchasing a cup from your local store. This product is solely for convenience if you don’t have the time or inclination to hit your local Starbucks – like I don’t this morning.

- They exceeded my quality expectations for “instant.”

- This could be VERY damaging to them in the future. They charge $1.00 per pack / per small cup – with no chance to sell other merchandise since you are not in the store. Someone else will figure out how to do this and undercut them in price – not so difficult to do. Once that happens, they will be forced to lower prices and their margin is gone.

I think they really jumped the shark on this one. If the instant is not successful, they have lost some R&D dollars and maybe some customer good-will. However, if it is successful, it seriously undercuts their bread and butter store operations. I think this may be akin to Krispy Kreme selling in supermarkets, cannibalizing their retail operation.

By: Mark E Hoffer

Mark E Hoffer — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:52:59 +0000

does “Instant SBUX strike anyone else as oxymoronic?

n. pl. ox·y·mo·ra (-môr, -mr) or ox·y·mo·rons
A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

[Greek oxumron, from neuter of oxumros, pointedly foolish : oxus, sharp; see oxygen + mros, foolish, dull.]
oxy·mo·ronic (-m-rnk) adj.
oxy·mo·roni·cal·ly adv.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/oxymoron

By: alexp

alexp — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:55:51 +0000

I live in a town that has about a dozen locally owned coffee shops, and ALL make better cups than Starbucks (be it brewed or espresso-based). Dunkin-freakin-Donuts is better too. Starbucks coffee just blows; I have no idea how they’ll keep all these stores open going forward.

By: Shnaps

Shnaps — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:54:09 +0000

I’m real happy for you Starbucks, and Imm’a let you finish, but Barry just re-posted one of the best Big Picture blog posts of ALL TIME! Of ALL TIME!!

By: isldguy

isldguy — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:38:33 +0000

Instant is not really instant if you still need cream and sugar. That aside, I think it’s a great product. I’m visiting Portland and we’ve avoided Starbuck’s only because of the fantastic and minimalistic Stumptown downstairs of The Ace Hotel. As with everything Starbucks I foresee the success of their instant coffee product on the basis of marketing. If I had a choice it would be Stumptown every time, but I don’t usually have that luxury, and non-Starbuck’s coffee can be earthshatteringly bad. It’s like Clint Eastwood pointing a gun in your face and asking you whether you feel lucky.