GeoffPDX wrote:After watching that marketing video, I have to post these videos from Starbucks' coffee master; I'm sure you'll all get a giggle: http://youtu.be/GlL1z_76TNo?t=45s
http://youtu.be/2kphfWRQyy0?t=43s

I was about to post something along the lines of "hey guys, I know Starbucks bashing is fun, but give it a rest, you are not Starbucks target market, yada yada ..."

Then I saw that vid of a Starbucks "Coffee Master" talking about brewing with steam pressure and commenting how that dishwater extraction and nasty looking gray latte looked "lovely" and thought "nope, y'all are right, let the bashing continue..."

Anvan wrote:Looks like more chains are getting into the act. Here's a Wall Street Journal from this morning, February 1.

I find this very cheering. Seems all us 3rd wave cafes, consumers and hobbyists have some influence over the larger market after all.

Perhaps it's the classic two stage effect; i.e. market to the mavens, let the mavens market to everyone else: "People I know who are really into coffee say dark roasts ruin the taste;' so how can you (Peets, Starbucks etc,) say they are better?"

another_jim wrote:we are mainly talking about the number they are doing on roast terminology

Jim, I'm not singling you out, but I immediately thought of this topic when reading this piece
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 67980.html <--
And especially this quote

Starbucks chose the term "blonde" because "light" can "infer that something has been removed" or might confuse consumers who think of light coffee as having milk added, a spokeswoman says.

Which raises a valid point. Sure, everyone with even a passing knowledge of coffee roasting hates this, but I think this makes sense. Nowadays, if something is 'light', it's better for you than the non-light alternative*, but inferior tasting when compared to the real stuff.


*Or at least, that's what marketing would like you to believe, but I think this isn't the place to discuss that

I'll have my coffee medium rare, please.

Bluecold wrote:Nowadays, if something is 'light', it's better for you than the non-light alternative*, but inferior tasting when compared to the real stuff.

That's a good point; but before futzing around with the names; they may try to clue in their marketing execs:

Starbuck's Flak wrote:Mr. Russell reckons his mother is Starbucks's target customer for Blonde Roast.
"I'm planning to give her a bag soon," Mr. Russell says.

Dropped by the Starbucks at the resort where I work, I like to go by some mornings to talk to the manager, and grab a cup of drip, as this is the closest thing I have to a coffee community here around where I work. All the staff loves coffee and are really nice (there is little interest in coffee locally, for now, so it is cool to chat about coffee with the some of the local kids).

What did I find has finally made it's way to Macau? Blonde roast! It even looks more weird once you see the phrase on big wall size posters, I just keep thinking of beans roasted to 165 degrees, with a nice blonde color . I had a cup while in there talking, it is really strange to drink a cup of Starbucks without that tinge of charcoal. My favorite poster has a hand holding the tryer out of the roaster with some FC+ beans in it, yeah, nice and....blonde? Imagine the confusion for the staff who learn to call a full city roast "blonde", they learn all they know about beans and roasting from the corporate training materiel they get at the shop.

One interesting thing about the Starbucks affect on Macau is that it really did bring better coffee to me here. Two ex-staff from the first shop they opened here in 2004 have left and opened their own independent shops. One has a 1KG Cafemino roaster, and has gone to many SCAE training courses to become a certified trainer. He also teaches "home brewing" coffee classes on the weekends, and the classes are very popular. I even saw one of the young girls that works nearby my office at her desk yesterday hand grinding fresh roasted coffee beans in a hario grinder and making a pour over at her desk! I was shocked, she told me she had just taken the coffee training class, and only drank coffee from fresh roasted coffee beans now. I wanted to give her a hug! I will be bringing her some of my home roast now for sure.

I just wanted to comment that I tried Willow, one of the Blonde roast blends. Unfortunately it was 2 months since it hit the cooling tray, but this is pretty fresh for Starbucks. Willow is a blend of Central American and East African coffees. I tried it as a pour over and espresso. Surprisingly it pulled nicely and did not taste too stale, but it lacked that big and nuanced flavor kick we expect from fresh espresso. It was however drinkable. Extremely drinkable if I were to compare it to any other Starbucks coffee pulled. As a pour over, it was quite nice and I could easily see myself enjoying this cup of drip not much less than fresh, quality beans. Sweeter and less carbony than the usual Starbucks but still lacking complexity. Maybe if it was a month or so fresher, it would have jumped up to "pretty good," but for now, I'll just call it better than anything else at Starbucks and I wouldn't dislike it if I had to drink it.

Faint Praise

I was in the Charlotte airport today and wanted a caffeine fix, and there was Starbucks selling their Blonde Roast Veranda blend. For the sake of research, I ordered the smallest cup they'd sell me. It was indeed not an over-roasted coffee that needed a Tums chaser. It was mild, actually lighter roasted, and completely devoid of interesting flavor notes. They advertise it as mellow. It was that. I got a little caffeinated and it didn't ruin my digestion.

Yes, good way to describe what I tasted, devoid of interesting flavor notes, as mine cooled it was just watery and sweet.

I never found out if it got sweet. I added sugar to give it some taste. I'm guessing it was stale too, but I wonder what they were trying to accomplish with that blend to start with?