I don’t like Starbucks. Anyone that knows me will tell you. I think it’s a pretentious brand, incredibly unbalanced quality to price ratio and asides from that one chai latte in 2008, any occasion that has forced me to consume a beverage from the Seattle based giant has ended in blood, tears and a lawsuit. Ok, not a lawsuit (or blood) but you get the gist. How do I feel about the new Starbucks logo? I hate it.
Basically, what the coffee house has done is eliminate the white text circling the Starbucks siren, enlarged their very own femme fatale and voila! A cleaner, smoother almost art deco-esque revised image, right?
Chief executive Howard Shultz has put little fits of outraged clients (really, you’re outraged?) to rest, explaining the move as more fitting to the Starbucks long- term vision. Said vision sees the money sucking brewers expand further into the groceries business; hardly going to sell a bar of chocolate with the words ‘Starbucks Coffee’ emblazoned on the wrapper, are they?
Wait… why the hell not? As a consumer, I feel like Starbucks is trying to be something they’re not. It is to my greatest horror that I must now endure business meetings over not only mediocre tasting and incredibly pricey coffees, but will also eventually be faced with an array of what I can only imagine will prove to be a smorgasbord of equally mediocre products, also at stupidly expensive price tags.
I know Starbucks has enjoyed unrivalled success in their industry and I know many of you will disagree with me, but in my humble opinion, why change something that works for your brand and has done for almost a decade now? Some might argue that Starbucks has reached that point of market saturation where it can quite easily rid itself of extra brand luggage. I choose to disagree. Starbucks is not McDonalds, it is not Nike and it most definitely is not the artist formerly known as Prince.
Steady on coffee criminals.