Posted by seattlemike at 4/8/08 1:09 p.m.

Tastes just as bad as any other Starbucks I've had....

Posted by captainavenger at 4/8/08 1:21 p.m.

tastes like Dunkin' Donuts coffee to me!

With plenty of Splenda and half/half, any coffee no matter how bad can taste good.

Posted by cmsof1 at 4/8/08 1:35 p.m.

Starbucks sucks. I hope Schultzy burns.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 2:09 p.m.

To be honest, it is not very good. It is less bold than their other brews which I like, but its still not very smooth. Starbucks just isn't the place for great coffee anymore. It is consistently good, but not great which you can find in Seattle. Peet's still has the best coffee around here.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 3:44 p.m.

We tried it today in Bellingham, and were not impressed. We went home and made a better cup of coffee from a local roaster (Guadalupe's Day of the Dead). The coffee was, as another poster said, not smooth at all and definitely not bold. It tasted burnt.

So, called "Bucky's" to let them know - customer service gal was clearly not happy to hear this feedback. We were told that she would "record the comment," no interest in how she could make the Starbucks experience better. Thought that was interesting because every Starbucks now has a sign up that says that if your coffee isn't perfect, they'll remake it. Maybe they need to reroast Pike's Place blend - it really could be better.

If they're worried about Dunkin' and McDonalds nipping at their heels, this was not the blend to break out as their "everyday blend." You couldn't pay me to drink it today, certainly not everyday. Glad it was free.

Posted by dzzdg at 4/8/08 5:30 p.m.

I thought it was amazing. I usually drink my coffee with cream and two raw sugar. I tried it black on the urging of the barista. It was great and she just saved me an extra 90 cals by not using the cream and sugar. Well played starbucks!!!

Posted by wafflesnfalafel at 4/8/08 6:31 p.m.

Man, you guys are tough on Starbucks. I tried the new blend today and was actually impressed. I was worried they were going to go mild and weenie but they didn't - it was nice and rich, complex. No, Starbucks isn't a growth stock, or the local family owned joint, but I am amazed it can so consistently offer a better than average product. (That said, my very favorite coffee right now are the cappuccinos from Peet's in Fremont.)

Posted by fletc3her at 4/8/08 6:37 p.m.

I haven't had a chance to try it yet, but surely will.

Saying you can make better coffee at home should be a given. If you cannot then you should not be making coffee at home. It's like saying your homemade barbecued hamburgers are better than McDonalds. Umm, yeah, you bet they are!

Starbucks in my experience hasn't historically had a bean roasting problem, but a coffee brewing problem. It's why the Americano is so much better than the brewed coffee at their restaurants. However, if you take the Starbucks beans home you can make a nice cup of coffee and really experience the different origins. Still, as with everything about Starbucks, it is possible to get better quality for cheaper, especially in the greater Seattle area.

As for Peets. I don't see them being head and shoulders above Starbucks. They seem like a lateral move to me. Kind of like Tully's. I find their attitude a little annoying. Like, they used to sell Talls and Grandes, but at one point decided to sell 12 and 16 oz beverages and started complaining when customers order "grande" coffee. The reverse 'tude is no more enjoyable than being corrected at Starbucks when you order a "medium".

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 6:40 p.m.

I am a regular Starbucks guy. So I like starbucks coffee, black usually. But I am sorry to say, that the new Pikes Place tastes just like Mc Donalds! I know it hurts, but they are competing with Mc Donalds now, so maybe that is what it's suppose to taste like. Consumer reports says Mc D's taste better! Oh capitalism at it's finest, competing for number 1.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 6:48 p.m.

fletc3her - if you are advertising gourmet coffee and the "perfect" cup, then you should be able to produce something better than what someone should be able to make at home. Yes, I make better burgers than McDonald's. But then I spend more on the ingredients to make them at home than I would to get a McBurger. If I'm going to spend more money on coffee when I buy it in a shop, I expect to get a good cup!

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 6:48 p.m.

Tried it. It tasted like coffee. Pegasus is my favorite for a cup of drip downtown.

Posted by steve.body at 4/8/08 7:31 p.m.

Look, let's be honest here: we all give a rat's patootie about Starbucks because it's a Seattle company and we're homers. Nothing wrong with that. But it's been YEARS since Starbucks was anything like the cutting edge of coffee, either here or around the globe. They may be the cutting edge of coffee marketing but, as a beverage, their stuff wasn't ever that much to begin with and it's geting worse as the company concerns itself with expansion, new products, labor issues, and all the other effluvium that accrues to mega-corporations. It's too big and too otherwise occupied to concentrate on coffee. I sell wine for a living and, years ago, I got into a vicious argument with a local winery owner who shall remain nameless but whose brand was, even then, very successful. He asked what I was doing to sell his product and I said, "Nothing." He asked why and I said, "Because your wines are not very good." Then we were off to the races but the bottom line, as I told him, is that as your company grows and diversifies, adds new products, distributes more widely, your ability to focus on any one aspect of the business is compromised. That's the Starbucks story in a nutshell and it's NOTHING but marketing when they introduce a new flavor and give us all a taste. They'll do it frequently, just to keep the name out there, spawning headlines to counter the negative publicity they get for a host of reasons. This is Starbucks getting some non-controversial ink, nothing more. Their "new flavor" was practically poured into my mouth this morning by a pal who works there. I don't go there anymore because their boss sold out my basketball team and he doesn't deserve my money. But I tasted it. Same old, same old. Ho-hum. Get all worked up if you want but you're just buying into their marketing ploys, not getting cutting edge coffee.

Posted by Olav at 4/8/08 8:53 p.m.

The only Starbucks blend I can honestly tell the difference on is Christmas Blend (which I love). All of the others taste the same to me, and the new Pike Place stuff is no different.

Posted by Col. Panic at 4/8/08 9:57 p.m.

And after Starbucks, when you're ready for a wide selection of truly world-class brewed coffee, visit Zoka (Zoka/Clover), Trabant (49th Parallel/Clover), Seven (Seven/Melitta cone), Stickman (Borogove/Clover), Hotwire Shoreline (Borogove/press or urn), Caffe Vita, or another company that controls as much of the process as possible.

Most will let you pick a flavor profile, growing region, or roast for your individually brewed cup. Don't be afraid to ask for recommendations.

Zoka and Vita blog about what it takes to pull off such a feat: Caffe Vita blog, Zoka blog.

Posted by Scrivener at 4/9/08 3:01 a.m.

Steve, you appear to be a person who resents the success of others. As an Apple fan, I am used to hearing the same baseless claims made about it as you are making about Starbucks. That includes irrelevant attacks on the founder and CEO. Your skin is green, isn't it?

Panic, you are poorly informed. Starbucks owns the company that makes the Clover and will be bringing it to all of its stores. I would not be surprised to learn some of the places you recommend use Starbucks beans. Critics also trip themselves up by citing Seattle's Best or Coffee People as better, though Starbucks owns both.

As for the new brew, I think it falls between the deeper brews and the milder ones. Its middling nature may make it popular.

Posted by steve.body at 4/9/08 6:01 a.m.

scrivener,

See, there's the problem with attempting to pigeonhole people: I neither envy nor begrudge Starbucks their success nor am I a wild environmentalist - just to cover both bases of your oblique "skin is green" comment. I have never thought much of Starbucks as a coffee company, while appreciating their business acumen. And the business dynamic I stated - wild growth and diversification = decline of product quality - isn't excatly a state secret. Why do we all prefer small, independently-owned restaurants versus big chains? Ultimately, it's about what's in the cup and IMHO, Starbucks has always been nearly dead last in that department. Why is it so hard for you to simply read the observation as it was intended, with no interpretations? That's far more a comment on your agenda than mine.

And the "attack" on Sergeant Schultz is simply another observation: he did exactly what I said he did - sold the Seattle SuperSonics basketball team to an Oklahoma City partnership which is now swiping it from the city in which it was born. That was Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks and you better believe that comment is relevant. As a businessman myself, I expect and welcome the marketplace dynamic that says that I had better consider the impact my actions outside my business will have on my business. I am the face of my company and Howard is the face of his. When we all found out about Kathy Lee Gifford's sweatshops, it impacted her business. If we all found out tomorrow that Paul Allen is a card-carrying member of the Communist Party, that would impact his business. Citizenship counts. As it should. And Howard Schultz completely fumbled his stewardship of a valuable civic resource. Therefore, his company gets no more of my money.

I wosh all you fire-breathing Starbucks apologists would just unclench a little. You all act like cult members defending some tin-pot guru. Starbucks can be criticized without the earth tilting off its axis.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 1:18 p.m.

steve.body,

Well said.

scrivener, your points about the various coffee companies Starbucks has bought out ignores the fact that while being owned by Starbucks they don't use Starbucks coffee, Torrefazione still roasts and blends it's coffee as it did before it was purchased by Seattle's Best and then Starbucks. The point people are making about Clover is that you can visit a micro-roaster and through the Clover brewing process you can broaden your coffee experience but the Clover relies on you putting decent coffee into it.

Starbucks doesn't have great coffee anymore they have ok coffee so while they now own Clover and may deploy them to all of their stores it will only go so far in making their coffee better, frankly the Clover may highlight the faults in their coffees as well. So anyway go to a small roaster that buys exceptional coffee and have a cup from a Clover and use that experience to help inform your judgments.

Starbucks certainly is better than Dunkin Donuts or McD's please guys that crap is disgusting what's the point of even drinking coffee if you're going to put that in your mouth?

Posted by Scrivener at 4/10/08 12:59 a.m.

Steve, I meant green with envy. And, you certainly are. You have confirmed that by comparing yourself to Schultz, one of the great American success stories of our times. Compared to Starbucks, whatever you have done is piddling.

Again, the Sonics and Starbucks are separate companies. It makes no sense to try to link them. Your Babbitry is revealing. Apparently, you do not know the difference between bromides and real business, which is always about the Benjamins.

Unregistered, I seriously doubt that Starbucks allows any of its units to buy beans from some other supplier or prepare coffee under some other system. You seem to be talking loud and saying nothing.

Posted by ldrider51 at 4/10/08 10:23 a.m.

I tried it. It was good but not particularly memorable. Tasted less over roasted than the typical Charbucks brew.

They could do themselves a big favor by simply backing down on their roasting to let more flavor of the bean come through instead of over powering the beans' flavor with that of the roast.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

LD

Posted by steve.body at 4/10/08 1:19 p.m.

Scrivener,

It's the height of presumption to think you know anything at all about someone you've encountered twice on a newspaper internet forum, don't you think? I envy Howard Schultz about like I envy Clayton Bennett: in my futile quest to be the world's biggest horse's rump, they both have me beat by a country mile. As to what "good" we have all done, we'll let posterity decide that. And the truly revealing comment is this whole one-sided little turf war you're waging is that it's "always about the Benjamins". Thanks God all of us don't subscribe to that trash. Under your definition, whatever you do to rake in mounds and mounds of cash justifies itself, no matter how cold-blooded, ungrateful, self-serving and ultimately harmful to those around you it might be. And I made a proper comparison between Howdy Doody and myself; the only one, in fact, that I'd ever be comfortable with making: he's the face of his business in exactly the same way I am of mine. You seem to have a real inability or unwillingness to take anything said in response to you at face value. Why is that? In service of an agenda, are we? Well, I suspect that your attempt to excuse and deify this towering bozo for his success in pursuit of his bank account without factoring in what he did to trash a Seattle institution is going to be a very rough agenda to service, my friend. See, there are quite a few of us around this part of the country who do not worship at the altar of the Almighty Dollar; who see it in its proper place in our lives: a thing which in itself is neither good nor bad but can be either depending on what we do to get it and what we do with it after we do. You can lay hickeys all over Howie's fanny all you like and say that what he did to the Sonics doesn't count but he's still lost a TON of business around here and there are an awful lot of people who work daily at seeing to it that he loses more. You haven't swayed any of us with your sanctimonious pronouncements and you never will.

You make the one mistake in response to the critics on this forum that people like you always seem to make: you think your withering scorn actually means something. As to my Babbitry, God Help Me that I should ever be anything but that uncultured square if being so makes me anything like the unprincipled, reckless jerk we've come to see in Howard Schultz...or the pedantic, judgemental hauteur we get from you.

This my last exchange with you. I never mind trading jabs with someone who deals with what I write but I have no patience with people who interpret everything they read to suit their own ends. That's intellectual laziness and I have no time for it.

I wish to God all you wild-eyed Starbucks apologists would just Get A Grip. You all come off like those little glassy-eyed trolls who used to stomp around asking everybody if they know the Reverend Sun Myung Moon: brainwashed and immovable. Starbucks isn't immune to criticism. In some areas, they positively invite it and all you little Dutch boys really come off as pathetic in your blind attempts to stick your fingers in their leaky corporate dike. The earth won't shift off its axis if somebody criticizes Starbucks. Sheesh...

Posted by cafeend at 4/20/08 3:27 p.m.

I LOVE THE PIKE PLACE ROAST. Not only is it a fabulously smooth and full bodied coffee but it comes from a company that cares. Starbucks cares about the farmers, their employees and the neighboring communities. I find it interesting that you never hear about all the ways the company walks their talk. Quite refreshing, just like a great cup of Pike Place Roast.