shadowfax wrote:This is what's catching me. Nothing I've ever seen or read of Starbucks has ever struck me like Counter Culture, Intelligentsia, Cuvée, and others do. They were never committed to the principles that drive those companies. They never lost their principles because what they've done as a company isn't against their principles. For the third wave to become Starbucks (i.e. sacrifice freshness and quality for profit and mass scale) would be in essence for them to turn their backs on their core values, like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde thing. Maybe this is all my confusion, but that's the understanding of the Green Witch from which my comments come.
I would personally disagree with this. The original owners of Starbucks seem to both know what good coffee is and have a commitment to it. I don't think they agree with the path their former head of marketing took when he bought the company. I suspect that even Mr. Schultz knows what good coffee is, based on the little cafe he had started before returning to run Starbucks; however investor pressures for a publicly traded company compelled him to go in the direction that he has.
That said, I do enjoy the espresso at the "Third Wave" cafes, but I find your optimistic views charmingly naive. They have the luxury of newer fancier espresso equipment and the refined knowledge of espresso that has become rather ubiquitous with the advent of the Internet. Nevertheless, the fundamental business model has remained extant; neither have the socioeconomic pressures that shape business changed. That is the concern I expressed. It is almost as if the small espresso cafe must constantly struggle against its own success, constantly remaining idealistic to an almost iconoclastic degree to preserve those very things for which they are extolled by us.
Unfortunately, I have seen no indication of this occurring, rather the opposite, the slippery slide, the insidious creep. Put another way: for the Third Wave cafes, gain is loss; failure is success.