quote:

Originally posted by Tony Bad

I had also read a point/counter point discussion regarding the evil empire of starbucks. It pointed out that many of the "mom & pop" coffee places supposedly put out of business by starbucks only existed because of starbucks. Before starbucks brought the "coffee house" to places they didn’t exist, these mom & pop places didn’t exist. They came about because they saw a good idea, and closed up when the big pusher of that concept finally caught up with them. Not passing judgement on whether this is right or wrong…I just found it interesting.

Nationally, this may be true, but in my hometown, San Francisco, it absolutely isn’t. There have been "coffee shops" here since the first Italian immigrant stepped off the boat to look for gold. This book lists over a hundred independents:

And many of them still thrive, but Starbucks has made it tough for a few and I regret the loss of any. It’s true, the independents are mostly in residential neighborhoods where they function as auxilliary living rooms and study halls with warn furniture and a homey atmosphere whereas Starbucks has mostly established itself in the downtown business district where its "clean as a whistle" glitz makes the office commuters feel more at home. But in a few places they compete directly and I wish they’d pack up and go back to Seattle where that’s the case. Even downtown, I (and most people here) prefer the local chain, Peet’s.