SERIOUSLY.....nuff said. I don't do Starbucks anyway.

But for those that do...why would you want to keep giving the guy money when he's trying to make a last ditch effort to keep his former team out of our city???

Go back to Starbucks after the Sonics are here for good and you see the players taking advantage of our city with their families and friends!

No way am I giving up my Caramel Macchiato!

done.

Since I don't like paying exorbitant prices for mediocre coffee, this would be the easiest boycott I've ever considered joining. ;)

I have no clue what you are talking about. What does Starbucks have to do with - I am assuming moving the Sonics here?

I have no clue what you are talking about. What does Starbucks have to do with - I am assuming moving the Sonics here?
Howard Schultz is the owner of Starbucks and the former owner of the Sonics. He filed in court to try to get the team back.

Have silly boycotts EVER worked for anything more than give a warm fuzzy to those doing the boycotting?

Have silly boycotts EVER worked for anything more than give a warm fuzzy to those doing the boycotting?
I wouldn't know, I never boycotted anything to my knowlege and I don't drink Starbucks anyway.

Soooooo.....I still don't understand what my morning cup of heavenly mocha lite latte has to do with anything.

Howard Schultz is the owner of Starbucks and the former owner of the Sonics. He filed in court to try to get the team back.

Howard Schultz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Schultz) is the chairman and CEO of Starbucks. There is no one owner of Starbucks. It is a publicly traded company. Schultz is an employee.

Not sure that Schultz's personal (completely separate) dealings with the Sonics should affect the company for which he works (Starbucks). Wouldn't you hate it if people began boycotting your employer for something that you did on your own time?

I'm sorry John, I saw you going into the Ford center the other day for a Star Trek convention. You know that just doesn't reflect well on us here at McDonalds and so we'll need to let you go. :)

Don't get me wrong, there are lots of other good reasons to boycott Starbucks (so I'm in!), just Shultz's behavior isn't necessarily one of them.

I see this as a catch 22, the people of Seattle have been boycotting him for months now, and it HAS affected his bottom line, their stock is down about 40% (now granted, this is not just because of Seattle, although they did create a respectable amount of profit loss). Earlier this week, when he announced he would file a lawsuit against Bennett in two weeks, they immediately flocked back to his stores.

So, with this in mind, they boycotted him, he saw this as a PR move to get back a few local customers and save face locally. The more business he lost, the more incentive and reason he has to file against Bennett.

If OKC boycotts Starbucks, it might be a small small blip to his losses, however, it might encourage him more to help keep the Sonics out of OKC. At the same time, on the "moral" ground, boycotting satisfies the conscious and as OGTS said, "creates the warm fuzzy feeling".

I don't think boycotting will solve anything in this case.

Have silly boycotts EVER worked for anything more than give a warm fuzzy to those doing the boycotting?

Umm. yes! see Montgomery Bus Boycott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Bus_Boycott)

Umm. yes! see Montgomery Bus Boycott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Bus_Boycott)

He said SILLY boycotts. That one makes sense. It had to do with the bus. They boycotted the bus. They won.

Boycotting a company because someone who is part of the board does something to piss you off....silly.

People piss me off on a daily basis. If I boycotted every place they worked I would probably starve to death and never leave the house.

why boycott starbucks? what howard schultz is doing has nothing to do with denying OKC, it's about business.

he sold the team with the agreement that clay bennett wouldn't try to move the team until he had made an effort to keep them in seattle until next year. well, in his e-mails, he talks about wanting to move them a lot sooner (as in april of '07, not october, as bennett had claimed). schultz, seemingly, was decieved. and if a judge agrees, the sonics will stay. if bennett is unwilling to pay for a lengthy legal battle with schultz (who's not exactly broke) and pay to get out of the key arena lease, he may say, 'to heck with this,' and sell anyway. this doesn't look good for OKC.

i hate this "we're getting your team, haha!" attitude. it's classless and unnecessary. this is a business matter, and not a good one at that. why are we giving a multi-million dollar league TAX INCENTIVES? they don't need them! my wife, who doesn't care about any of this, thinks we're starting to look desperate.

i know we want a team, but do we want a team brought here under shady business practices? what if it doesn't work out financially as well as bennett thinks it can? don't say it absolutely will, if it was a sure thing here, we'd already have a team. hosting a team for two seasons and having one of our own are worlds apart. moving this team, this quickly, to an untested market is a risk. and if it doesn't work out, what's to stop bennett from selling the team to someone from Kansas City, who will do to OKC what bennett is trying to do to seattle.

OKC doesn't NEED a team, we want one, and it would be great. but is it worth the nation thinking we're willing to do anything to anyone to get what we want?
(go to ESPN.com and read some objective stories about this, bennett and his group are starting to look pretty shady. and why was mcclendon being fined $250,000 not reported very much? he ran his mouth, and is screwing himself and us over.)

He said SILLY boycotts. That one makes sense. It had to do with the bus. They boycotted the bus. They won.

One man's silly is another man's serious. You are using the success of the boycott to judge if it is silly or not. How do you judge a boycott serious before it occurs? Seems like OKCisOK4me is pretty serious given he started his post with the word "Seriously". Some people are really invested in getting the team to OKC and consider Shultz's lawsuit an obstacle to making that happen.

Never did use SB anyway. Like my coffee strong, hot, and black. 7-11 here I come.

If you are one that things something like that would do anything - take the time to try a local coffee company! If nothing else, at least you will be putting money into the pockets of Oklahoma business people.

One man's silly is another man's serious. You are using the success of the boycott to judge if it is silly or not. How do you judge a boycott serious before it occurs? Seems like OKCisOK4me is pretty serious given he started his post with the word "Seriously". Some people are really invested in getting the team to OKC and consider Shultz's lawsuit an obstacle to making that happen.

Nope. Wasn't talking about the success at all. I was judging the sillyness of the boycott based upon the relevance of the boycott. It makes sense to boycott the bus if the bus pisses you off.

Nope. Wasn't talking about the success at all. I was judging the sillyness of the boycott based upon the relevance of the boycott. It makes sense to boycott the bus if the bus pisses you off.

Then by your logic, it does make sense for OKCisOK4me to boycott Starbucks. The lawsuit Shultz is filing, as you put it, pissed him off. Shultz is the CEO of Starbucks. CEOs are the heart and sole of a publicly traded company. The company goes south, so does the CEO. Hit Starbucks, hit Shultz.

Then by your logic, it does make sense for OKCisOK4me to boycott Starbucks. The lawsuit Shultz is filing, as you put it, pissed him off. Shultz is the CEO of Starbucks. CEOs are the heart and sole of a publicly traded company. The company goes south, so does the CEO. Hit Starbucks, hit Shultz.

:doh:

nevermind.

If I had to keep up with the politics of every companies CEO and base my purchase therein, I would be so busy with research that I wouldn't have time to patronize the businesses my research has shown I don't want to patronize; meaning I would be boycotting everything because my research on who to boycott has taken up all my time to boycott!

SERIOUSLY.....nuff said. I don't do Starbucks anyway.

But for those that do...why would you want to keep giving the guy money when he's trying to make a last ditch effort to keep his former team out of our city???

Go back to Starbucks after the Sonics are here for good and you see the players taking advantage of our city with their families and friends!

I recently stumbled, quite by accident, on a secret that very few people seem to know. I learned that it is possible to make coffee yourself. . . . at home. Pretty good stuff too, and you can make it taste the way you prefer. I can't really boycott Starbucks since I have never been in one, but the whole boycott idea seems futile to me.

:sofa:

If you are one that things something like that would do anything - take the time to try a local coffee company! If nothing else, at least you will be putting money into the pockets of Oklahoma business people.

Who do you think works at these OKC Starbucks? They have families here in OKC to support......

Who do you think works at these OKC Starbucks? They have families here in OKC to support......

I think the point is that dollar for dollar, more money stays in Oklahoma if you buy your coffee at a locally owned coffee shop as opposed to buying your coffee at a national chain coffee shop. Clearly some of the money does stay in the state, but not all of it, as is the case for locally owned shops.

I think the point is that dollar for dollar, more money stays in Oklahoma if you buy your coffee at a locally owned coffee shop as opposed to buying your coffee at a national chain coffee shop. Clearly some of the money does stay in the state, but not all of it, as is the case for locally owned shops.

And I'm sure plenty of Oklahomans also own Starbucks stock.

By the way Metro, any boycott of Starbucks in Seattle hasn't registered so much as a blimp on their sales. The SBUX stock plunged due to a poor market for just about everyone and certain things going on within Starbucks. In fact, sales are up!

Here's a good analysis from CBS MarketWatch as to Starbucks stock problems. (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/starry-hopes-few-bucks-coffee/story.aspx?guid=%7BA1E71D3F%2D9ED1%2D46F0%2DA918%2 DF52C1FF7B7F8%7D&siteid=yhoof) And no, it has nothing to do - nothing - with boycotts.

And don't forget: Clay goes to Starbucks. Gotta be like Clay. Gotta do what Clay does.

Umm. yes! see Montgomery Bus Boycott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Bus_Boycott)

UmmmmOranges! We're talking apples.


The Montgomery case is something civil rights leaders took to the Supreme Court. Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott was about unconstitutional segregation, not semantics in an argument about a sports team. This is a boycott of a multi-national behemoth chain of coffee stores by people in a city with a scant handful of their stores here. They could probably close every store in this state and it wouldn't be more than a larger than average blip in their stock price. Not to mention that this "boycott" has nothing to do with people getting actually harmed or having their basic human rights violated, unlike in Montgomery.

People that don't have a direct interest in the situation (see: 90% of the population) won't give a crap, and will continue to buy their double venti on the way to work every morning and the baristas won't even notice a dip in sales.

The Southern Baptist Convention called for a boycott on Disney a few years back...How did that work out?

People have been trying to boycott Exxon for decades, yet they still make money in piles.

That's just how I see this. I'm not trying to denigrate anybody wanting to boycott them...More power to them. I just think that it's going to do about as much good as me ranting and trying to change their mind on an internet message board ;)

This is about as smart as boycotting buying gas for one day to show the oil companies we are tired of it...i mean, we can just go get gas the next day anyway so it doesn't interrupt our lives. :-P

well of course people in OKC work at starbucks, but they get paid weather i go or not.

The whole Clay Bennett/Aubrey McClendon thing stinks to me. You know they bought the team with full knowledge that they'd move it here, and their emails proved it. Anyone could see it coming.

The fact that our government is willing to give the farm to these millionaires in the form of all the tax breaks is supremely insulting to all the Oklahomans that work their butts off and have to pay full taxes. As the Joker said in Batman, "This town needs an enema." We need to start with Mick Cornett.

UmmmmOranges! We're talking apples. ...


To be fair, you asked


Have silly boycotts EVER worked for anything more than give a warm fuzzy to those doing the boycotting?


The Montgomery Bus Boycott was a successful boycott. Thus the answer to your question is yes.



That's just how I see this. I'm not trying to denigrate anybody wanting to boycott them...More power to them. I just think that it's going to do about as much good as me ranting and trying to change their mind on an internet message board ;)

You seem really to be making the point that consumer boycotts aren't effective. However, that isn't necessarily true. Combined boycotts, advertising and protests can be an effective way to produce change even at large public companies. For example:

From: Office Supply Superstore Staples Inc. Agrees to Historic Endangered Forest and Recycling Policy (http://www.nativeforest.org/press_room/release_11_14_02.htm)

"The Staples Campaign - which involved more than 600 demonstrations at Staples' stores nationwide and tens of thousands of letters and calls to the company's CEO - is over following the office-supply giant's announcement today that it will meet The Paper Campaign's goal of moving the company towards environmentally-preferable paper sales."

I'll say again, however, that proposing a boycott of Starbucks because of Shultz's personal behavior (i.e. the lawsuit) and not because of Starbuck company policy, isn't just.

W O W !

I think this is the first successful thread I've ever started. Let me clear some things up:

1) I don't do Starbucks because I do not drink anything coffee! (although I have had the refrigerated Frappachinno (I don't even know how to spell it) from 7-11 once or twice in my life).

2) This is not a 'HA we've got your former team now'. If you're pointing this out, then it leads me to believe that you 'war party' with the mongers up in Seattle so take your opinion to their threads as they will probably welcome you with arms wide open.

3) I said boycott Starbucks for as long as you can. Not forever. Forever works fine for me because I do not do coffee...but YOU can supplement your needs somewhere else until the time comes that you can't stand not drinking their prices anymore--cause I guess it's just that delicious! In that time you might find a place that has better coffee products & at a cheaper price. Granted, this new place probably won't have a drive thru window and you'll be condemned to getting out of your car...but are you really that lazy? No wonder our mayor has to challenge his city to lose 1 million pounds--save that for another subject.

I've got to go to work!

and you'll be condemned to getting out of your car...but are you really that lazy? No wonder our mayor has to challenge his city to lose 1 million pounds--save that for another subject.

haha. YES! I am that lazy. I have a work out time, and it's not walking from my car to places I'm ordering a drink. And I weigh about a buck o five when wet, so I really don't think I need to worry about it.

BUT - I would be more willing to support local coffee shops if they were available to me without going out of my way to find one. I don't drink Starbucks on a daily basis, I get free coffee at work and at my house. Well, I bought it from the Nazi store that put the mom and pop grocer out of business..but let's put that aside.

I get coffee driving from point A to point B. There aren't any local coffee shops between the two. With the hours I work - I need my coffee! And I want it strong.
I just believe in picking my battles, this one is yours to have...I have my boycott in place against walmart and dillards to uphold. It won't do anything to hurt their business, but I feel better about not contributing to either.

To be fair, you asked


The Montgomery Bus Boycott was a successful boycott. Thus the answer to your question is yes.



You seem really to be making the point that consumer boycotts aren't effective. However, that isn't necessarily true. Combined boycotts, advertising and protests can be an effective way to produce change even at large public companies. For example:

From: Office Supply Superstore Staples Inc. Agrees to Historic Endangered Forest and Recycling Policy (http://www.nativeforest.org/press_room/release_11_14_02.htm)

"The Staples Campaign - which involved more than 600 demonstrations at Staples' stores nationwide and tens of thousands of letters and calls to the company's CEO - is over following the office-supply giant's announcement today that it will meet The Paper Campaign's goal of moving the company towards environmentally-preferable paper sales."

I'll say again, however, that proposing a boycott of Starbucks because of Shultz's personal behavior (i.e. the lawsuit) and not because of Starbuck company policy, isn't just.

Points taken :tiphat: ...But I still think this one is going to be about as effective as a fart in the wind. Just a little noise and nobody is going to smell it.

I am so glad you are back Oh GAWD! I'm a complete Oh GAWD e-groupie, I missed your posts!

You just like my fart jokes. :D

I love all your jokes. I love you like a fat kid loves cake.

haha. YES! I am that lazy. I have a work out time, and it's not walking from my car to places I'm ordering a drink. And I weigh about a buck o five when wet, so I really don't think I need to worry about it.

Glad to hear. I'm also glad to hear that I'm not the only one with boycott issues. I know we won't make a dent in the earnings but it feels good to be against something so greedy.

I hate Starbucks. Why? Because I never know what to order. The first time I went I had no idea what the difference between a latte and a frappachino was and apparently if you ask, the fifty impatient people behind you who are waiting for their caffienated crack fix get pissy and then even if you order a simple cup of coffee the order taker will snarl and give a look at you like "what is that?"

So I asked a friend that frequents the place and he told me what all the different things they have are so I thought I would give it another try. This time I walk up to the counter (wary of the crackheads behind me) and order a "large carmel macheeto with an extra shot" of which the order taker then proceeds to snarl at me (while the fifty crackheads behind me all collectively snicker) and says "you mean double grande caramel machiato" with a tone of annoyance.

I went twice more and it doesn't matter, whatever I order the counter staff always corrects me, the people in line have zero patience, and the double mocha latte grande frappachio machiato isn't all the great anyways, plus the fact that I can buy two gallons of gas for the same amount as 20 ounces of liquid means I'll just find my plain cup of coffee elsewhere.

[B]"I am a man possessed, the boycott is on... " The fight has just begun![B]

that I can buy two gallons of gas for the same amount as 20 ounces of liquid means I'll just find my plain cup of coffee elsewhere.

lol, I feel the same way.. I have no patience for coffee snobs who think because they know the proper way to order a cup of coffee that it elevates their social status.

Here's a hint, save the $5 - $10 bucks per day on your java, invest that same amount religiously and really become what you are pretending to be. http://www.okctalk.com/images/vbe2blue/misc/progress.gif

try the new coffee at mcdonald's, it's awesome, and the large is only $2.99. and it's way bigger than the starbucks large, whatever it's called there...

wait, i meant $1.99. not that i'm schilling for mcdonald's, but it's cheaper and just as good.