"Scooped On" Dating?!?!? Oh, wait -- of course -- it's Starbucks!

[zin1953]

One thing that being in the wine trade taught me for so long is that BIG does not automatically equate to BAD. (Likewise, small doesn't automatically mean great, but that's another discussion.)

So last week I ran out of coffee in my office, and the only thing nearby was 1) a supermarket with self-serve bins (you know -- put a bag under the spout, open and close it real fast before the bag overflows and someone is on the intercom saying, "Clean up on Aisle 4"); or 2) Starbucks. So I buy a half-pound of coffee, figure I'll thow away whatever is left when my shipment arrives later that day or next -- how bad can it be?

So I go into a local Starbucks and see their "Pike's Palce" roast, the brown mermaid, the old logo, a "real" bag (not Mylar) . . . the whole thing -- like I said, how bad can it be?

So, I plunk down my $5.45 and I see a strip of paper glued across the top. It reads "Freshly Scooped on:" and hand-written below that is "4/23/08" (and it was indeed the 23rd of April when I was buying this) -- next to that, it reads "Scooped By:" and then, "Kelley" . . .

You know it wasn't bad in my little office espresso machine!

So I blew through the 1/2 lb. and I thought this morning, as I'm almost out of coffee at the office, that I'll just keep my coffee at home and try this again . . .

Today the bag reads, "Freshly Scooped on:" and "4/29/08" -- and "Kelley" is still at it.

But what I didn't notice before is a sign on the wall,
"Try Our New Pike's Place Roast -- Freshly Roasted on April 8th at Carson Valley, Nevada."

Hey! But it's freshly scooped!!!

Cheers,
Jason

[roblumba]

Man that's some nasty trick on words! Freshly scooped, as if somehow it matters how fresh you scoop it. Oh, please just leave my coffee in a pile out in the sun, but heaven forbid that you scoop it any sooner than when I actually want it!

What an insult. And they try to give it a personal touch by telling the scooper's name. You now, Kelly is actually a trained scooper specialist. She's not no pooper scooper!

Uhh, I think I'm feeling sick now. Must have good espresso.

[VS_DoubleShot]

The scoop date placebo - I bet it makes a lot of people feel good to see that date...people who think they know coffee but don't really.

I walk past a magazine shop every day that has barrels of coffee beens in the window with clear lids that just sit on top. No one buys beans at this place so I can only imagine how old the beans are. They brew some and keep it on the counter in airpots. A coworker told me they have "good coffee". I just laughed.

Yikes.

[ppopp]

I'm guessing that 3 weeks old isn't actually that bad for *$, compared to most of the beans that they sell.

That don't make it right, though.

[gislipals]

at least they do disclose the roast date. I absolutely HATE when roasters, especially large scale ones, only print a pointless 'best before' date

[roblumba]

Yeah, they post the roast date to cover their ass legally. Most people read the bag and immediately go into date compare mode. "Oh, this one was scooped yesterday, I'll get this one over those others that were scooped the day before". When they look at the sign that says the actual roast date, they probably don't even make the connection and think that perhaps the sign is just wrong, or referring to the beans they are brewing. If the poster wasn't clever enough to notice this trick, even I might have been tricked into thinking I had picked up a bag that is fresher than the stuff that the store is using.

[DigMe]

Yeah, they post the roast date to cover their ass legally.

I really don't think it has anything to do with CYA. Do you REALLY think they're worried about lawsuits because there's not a roast date?? Seems like kind of a ridiculous ASSertion to me.

brad

[zin1953]

I really don't think it has anything to do with CYA

Agreed. Nothing legally forces them to disclose ANY sort of date vis-a-vis when the coffee was roasted. Otherwise, a majority of roasters in the US would be breaking the law.

[roblumba]

Legally as in they technically did the "right" thing. So if anyone complains they can technically say, hey, we put the roast date up there. Sure, no one will sue, and perhaps there's no foundation for it, but with all the law suits out there, I think everyone thinks legally like this these days. But in a larger context it's just a part of human nature to stretch the boundaries of what is right by using these "legally" or "technically" right ways of doing things although their intent is far from being right. They intend to make you think it's fresher than it actually is. Which is not good. But they legally, or technically have everything correct.

[zin1953]

Legally as in they technically did the "right" thing.

Since when does "legally" mean "do the right thing"?!?!?!

[roblumba]

Since when does "legally" mean "do the right thing"?!?!?!

Exactly. Hence the quotes around the word "right". One of the things that small coffee shops can't afford to do is mess with their customers like that. Especially the independent shops who's customers are a little more discerning. It's just not good for customer relations when you feel like their trying to use deceptive marketing tricks. I like good old fashioned hard truth. Tell it like it is. But of course, these guys are trying to cover up the truth instead of dealing with it. Small shops like Barefoot who roast on location are always going to have the upper hand on large operations that have to ship their coffee from distant locations. Especially with the price of gas on the rise, it will be more costly for them to try to maintain fresh beans and keep gas costs down.

[zin1953]

Not trying to nit-pick -- and this is certainly no defense of *$ -- but . . .

One of the things that small coffee shops can't afford to do is mess with their customers like that. Especially the independent shops who's customers are a little more discerning. It's just not good for customer relations when you feel like their trying to use deceptive marketing tricks. I like good old fashioned hard truth. Tell it like it is. But of course, these guys are trying to cover up the truth instead of dealing with it. Small shops like Barefoot who roast on location are always going to have the upper hand on large operations that have to ship their coffee from distant locations. Especially with the price of gas on the rise, it will be more costly for them to try to maintain fresh beans and keep gas costs down.

In many instances, it's only because they didn't think of it -- or something similar.

Not EVERY shop is a Barefoot, and let's be honest: lots of small coffee houses/cafés do not roast their own, and buy their coffee from large roasters like Peerless, or even places like Mr. Espresso (as a part of their contract).

But let's not get carried away. If *$ was REALLY trying to "cover up the truth," as you put it, the real roast date wouldn't be written in florescent chalk on the same sign with their other "coffees of the day." I'm not saying "Scooped On . . ." dating is meaningful -- you'll remember that I started this thread, after all -- but I view it marketing (and a joke!) rather than any sort of willful attempt to deceive. (Were it that, as I say, the roast date wouldn't be readily visible on the wall!)

Keep in mind that the participants on this board (and similar ones) represent a tiny fraction of one percent of the coffee drinkers in the US (and in the world at large). The vast majority of people think Starbucks is wonderful stuff and clearly people like Barefoot, Ritual, Bluebottle, Intelligentsia, Vivace, and the other truly wonderful roasters out there have a lot of work to do.

The state of coffee in America reminds me of the state of wine in the mid-1970s/1980s. There's good stuff out there, but there's also an awful lot of $#!+ out there as well. Some is exactly what it purports to be (think Yuban, Maxwell House, etc.) and some has -- well, let's just say they have "illusions of grandeur," and leave it at that.

[roblumba]

It's marketing all right, but what is the message they are trying to convey with the marketing. They are trying to convey that it's somehow fresher than the actual roast date. This is deceptive because they should know that scooping has little to do with it's freshness, but the actual roast date is better. It would be better if it was scooped on the same day it was roasted and sealed in a bag, rather than allowed to sit for a time and then scooped into another bag and allowed to be exposed to air again, but long after it has degassed, so there's no hope for it to push out the oxygen it's been exposed to.

My conclusion is that they are using deceptive marketing practices. At first, it seemed like a funny joke, but the longer I look at it, the more plain it just looks bad.

[zin1953]

How do you know it wasn't sealed in, say, a 10 pound Mylar bag with a one-way gas valve and gets shipped to the store until "scooping"? I have no idea what *$ -- that's "*€" within the EU -- does, but (e.g.) Peet's does it.

Clearly the powers that be, that is to say Howard, know that the roast date is important, and that "scooped on" isn't. But I don't see any greater Evil here that exists with most other marketing campaigns: it's not illegal; it's factually accurate; and it's just so much "spin"-- like having the smallest size of laundry detergent in the store marked "Giant Size". It's like every political ad on TV. If you know something about the subject, the spin is a joke; if not, you get suckered into believing it . . .

Like most consumerism in America, it's "let the buyer beware."

[roblumba]

How do you know it wasn't sealed in, say, a 10 pound Mylar bag with a one-way gas valve and gets shipped to the store until "scooping"? I have no idea what *$ -- that's "*€" within the EU -- does, but (e.g.) Peet's does it.

Clearly the powers that be, that is to say Howard, know that the roast date is important, and that "scooped on" isn't. But I don't see any greater Evil here that exists with most other marketing campaigns: it's not illegal; it's factually accurate; and it's just so much "spin"-- like having the smallest size of laundry detergent in the store marked "Giant Size". It's like every political ad on TV. If you know something about the subject, the spin is a joke; if not, you get suckered into believing it . . .

Like most consumerism in America, it's "let the buyer beware."

Why is that I feel like you are trying to defend there practices? Everyone who shops for groceries knows that when you see those dates on the product you get the one with the most recent date because it's supposed to be an indication of freshness. But this scooped on date is just a deception to the consumer. It's simply deceptive marketing practice. I really don't see why you are trying defend this, but for some reason you feel very strongly that they should be given more of a haha very funny response rather than a more serious response from the coffee community. In one sense, this is not a very serious matter unless you consider that people might think that they can go there for fresh coffee rather than the local roaster. Who knows how many people are duped into thinking that Starbucks is just as fresh or fresher than the local independent roaster. In a competitive market where the small shop across the street is trying to compete with Starbucks, this type of deceptive marketing is unfair and should be frowned upon. With coffee, of course, it's not a health issue because it's not going to cause you to get sick, but if it was done with some other food items that spoil, this type of marketing can become illegal. That's why there are labeling standards these days, because deceptive labeling like this is not good for the consumer and consumers often do need to be protected from cooperations who are greedy for consumer dollars. Are there labeling standards for coffee? Perhaps there needs to be.

[HB]

Are there labeling standards for coffee? Perhaps there needs to be.

You're right, coffee isn't treated as a perishable food. Boutique grocery stores in our area mark "best by" dates of 60 days for Counter Culture's products. While not ideal, I think that's a reasonable compromise between roaster and grocery store (especially given the larger stores turn over product quickly). On the other hand, the Starbucks "scooped on" date and the name of the employee are a lame attempt to convey the idea of personal service and fresher product. Ironically neither is true; the consumer would be better off with a package sealed at the roaster than repackaged at the point of sale.

[zin1953]

Why is that I feel like you are trying to defend there practices?

Because -- not necessarily for the first time -- you seem to be reading what you want to read, and not what I'm saying.

Robert, I work -- now -- in the legal field, but for many years, I was a magazine editor and writer. I take things perhaps a bit too literally.

. . . this scooped on date is just a deception to the consumer. It's simply deceptive marketing practice. I really don't see why you are trying defend this, but for some reason you feel very strongly that they should be given more of a haha very funny response rather than a more serious response from the coffee community.

de·cep·tive adj., causing one to believe what is not true or fail to believe what is true.

I'm not sure it's deceptive, Robert. Clearly it's not illegal to place a "Scooped On" date on your package, any more than it is a "Best By" date, a "Roasted On" date, or no date whatsoever. Starbuck's "Scooped On" date IS factually accurate. It's not their "fault," so to speak, if consumers misread the information.

On the other hand . . . you (and Dan) are, IMHO, absolutely correct: coffee labeling standards are virtually non-existent, and should be tightened up! Roasted coffee beans -- whether whole bean or ground -- are perishable and should be treated as such.

Should there be a "more serious response from the coffee community"? Abso-f***ing-lutely! That's the whole reason I brought this to your attention and posted this. It IS laughable. It IS ridiculous. It is also perfectly legal . . . unless things change. So, Robert, let me ask you a question: have you sent an email or letter to Starbucks about how silly this is? Are you outraged only on Home-Barista, or doesn't this really matter to you, since you aren't their customer . . .

What motivation does Starbucks have to change? Why did they close their stores for 3 hours to train their "baristas" (and I use that term loosely) how to steam milk? Why did Starbucks start this stupid, silly-a$$ "Scooped On" dating? Why did Starbucks invest in new machines -- yet stick with super-autos ?

Could it be that -- even though they are the McDonald's of espresso -- they're feeling the heat, not only from the Peet's, Tully's, Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf's, and Dunkin' Donuts of the world, but also from the Vivace's, the Barefoot's, Ritual's, and Intelligentsia's of the world . . . . (OK, the U.S.)

Starbucks does deserve credit -- not for the "Scooped On" bs, but for actually putting the real roasting date on the blackboard behind the counter! But -- yeah! -- it should be on the bag!

[roblumba]

de·cep·tive adj., causing one to believe what is not true or fail to believe what is true.

I think we all agree that most people would be caused to believe that the bag is fresher because of this scooped on date. And that is of course, is not true. That's why it's deceptive. The scooped on date doesn't contribute to freshness, but in all likelihood actually subtracts from it since this means that that is actually the date that they introduced more air to already roasted beans. It would make more sense to look for a scooped date that was perhaps on the same day of the roast date or the day after. The beans would still be degassing at this point and it's more likely that the beans can push out the newly introduced oxygen. Especially if they scoop into one way valved bags. Anyhow, I still think it's clearly deceptive because they are aiming for the customer to believe it's fresher because of the scooped date, when clearly, it's more likely having the opposite effect.

I haven't wrote any letters to Starbucks. I'm just a concerned consumer who cares about fairness to the local roasters and the smaller guys who are trying to have a successfully business in a world were corporations often push their weight around and don't play nice on the playground. From a consumer point of view, we want the best produce to make it to the shelves and people who make good products should be rewarded with the consumers' dollars. Anyhow, technically, your probably right, that they didn't break the letter of the law while they did break the spirit of the law. This is exactly why labelling standards are created. Organics has been fighting for labeling standards and it not only helps improve the product, but helps improve consumer confidence. But of course, you probably need hundreds of thousand of dollars to fight these battles. So I'll leave it up to the businesses within the coffee community to determine if it's a battle that needs to be fought. I really am not in a position to determine it's severity and importance.

[zin1953]

Ahhhh, see? But if you don't write a letter, Robert, who will?

I sent off an email, but what good does ONE email do? Now if we ALL sent Howard emails . . . .

[roblumba]

Ahhhh, see? But if you don't write a letter, Robert, who will?

Like I said, those who know better than I, have more at stake, are more organized and have the expertise should know if it's a battle to fight and have the resources and expertise to fight these battles. I know in the political world there are organizations of every kinds lobbying for the consumer in a multitude of areas. Isn't there one for coffee? Doesn't SCAA do that sort of thing? Anyone else? They would probably be the best place to start because they are organized and purposed to identify, create strategies, and fight such battles.