Is Starbucks-for a buck good or not?

Phoebe
EAP 2 WW
Mr. Leverett
Argument essay
April 8, 08

Is Starbucks-for a buck good or not?

I drink Starbucks coffee almost every day; however, I heard some news that stated that Starbucks’ coffee is not good for our health. Therefore I was looking for some information about Starbucks’ quality problems on the Internet. Starbucks’ products issue is, “it has done little to keep genetically engineered ingredients out of its foods and beverages or to promote Fair Trade, shade-grown coffee” (Deen, 2002, para.4). “Coffee plants naturally grow in the shade, under the cover of a diverse biosphere. But unless your coffee says ‘shade grown’ on the bag, it was probably grown in a field for easier harvesting and greater profit margins” (Deen, 2002, para.5). Also, the milk has a problem; some scientist found the cows that Starbucks uses milk from which have been injected with rBGH. Then the milk contains bacteria, antibiotics and pus (Deen, 2002). In these few days, Starbucks wants to win back customers, so they are providing 8 oz. of coffee for a dollar. So some high class people discuss whether Starbucks’ quality problems are coming again.

In my paper, I want to write that because millions of people in the world drink Starbucks’ coffee, if Starbucks’ coffee quality cannot like up to a standard, people’s health will not be guaranteed. Starbucks must solve this problem. First, some related associations need to supervise the working process and the option of material. Second, government should build a new law in order to control the drinking products’ quality. For example, punishment and added tax is necessary. Finally, Starbucks should avoid the battle of business because it can influence the quality of products.

First, some related associations need to supervise the working process and the option of material. That would restrict the company so that they cannot choose the cheapest material which cannot guarantee the products’ quality. For example, if Starbucks selects the low-priced material the related association must interfere with the working process so that Starbucks cannot produce the low quality goods. Therefore, once the related organization influences Starbucks’ working process and the option of material, their coffee’s quality would be much better than before.

Second, the government should make a new law in order to control the drinking products’ quality. After that the government should sets up some pointed punishments that would limit the producer in order to improve the drinking products’ quality. For example, once the government built a new law which stated that if a company produces one product that whose quality cannot be guaranteed, they would be punished by the government and they would be more heavily taxed. Therefore, to punish Starbucks severely would be good for Starbucks’ credit and their customers’ health.

Finally, Starbucks should avoid the battle of business. The commercial battle can influence the quality of products. The reorganization of quality and taste is basically what they are supposed to do. For example, if Starbucks wants to be the winner of this battle, they probably would reduce the price. Sometimes low price leads to poor quality. So, some passive competition should be avoided.

Opponents of Starbucks say it is not really going green; that is because it has some problems of quality, so Starbucks has begun to compete with its competitors by providing the discount and free refills. However, this argument does not give a complete side of what Starbucks did. In fact, these benefits were well received by consumers and these methods should be provided to the customers in order to win the commercial competition. The truth is that the price reduction at Starbucks, even for one item, could make the customers happy and could be a positive activity. Jackie Gehlem, who said she visits Starbucks about twice a month, said, “It sounds good to me because I think Starbucks is too expensive” (Harris, 2008, para. 18). Furthermore, after Starbucks provides a low price, discount, and coupon, they can gain credit from customers. Credit is a necessary factor for a company; it can influence the image of a company so that Starbucks can win back their customers. After Starbucks brought Chairman Howard Schultz back, Starbucks shares jumped; this shows that the Chairman make a good decision for his company. To conclude, providing the $1 cup of coffee and free refills are beneficial for both the consumers and Starbucks’ company.

In conclusion, Starbucks must solve the quality problem in order to win back consumers. So, the Starbucks coffee’s working process and the option of material should be supervised by some related organization. Punishment should be given to the Starbucks by OCA or any interrelated organization. The reorganization of quality and taste is basically what they should do.

Reference
Deen, S. (2002, March 25). USA: Starbucks Beans Not So Green. Valley Advocate. Retrieved Mar. 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=2170&printsafe=1
Harris, C. (2008, Jan 24). Starbucks–for a buck. SEATTLEPI. Retrieved Mar 28, 2008, from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/348521_sbux24.html