Starbucks' Self-Sabotage

Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, has banned outside smoking nationwide and in Canada, while telling his shareholders that he doesn't want their financial support if they are against gay marriage rights. Admirable, perhaps, but little or nothing to do with selling coffee and/or enjoying coffee's marriageable partner, cigarettes! The Starbucks corporate representative in Sarasota, Florida, however, at 2805 University Pkwy where I have been a loyal customer for years, gave me permission to organize a petition for an outdoor smoking area at this open-air Starbucks location and to get 500 signatures, which he would send to corporate.

Upon obtaining some 250 signatures in less than 24 hours, I was informed by the same corporate representative that I could no longer petition signatures at this location because it was not politically allowable. Of the 250 signatures I had solicited, close to one-third were from non-smokers. Granted, some folks chose not to sign at all, and some folks complained to the staff; but those who chose not to sign numbered all of 20, and only two of those actually complained.

Are you really that politically oriented, Howard? This mixed message which was given to Starbucks' loyal smoking customers while shareholders were told "We don't want your business" in relation to traditional and/or gay marriage seems far more removed than smoking and coffee to your share holders. Or is this the political trade-off pressed upon you by your shareholders as a strictly "politically correct" publicity move to garner positive press? All this while the unpublicized news of banning open-air smoking areas on June 7th, 2013 gets sneaked through so you'll get no negative press from what appears to be a 50% loss (at this location anyway) in business revenue? Something seems out-of-touch to be so political on gay and traditional marriage issues, which have little or nothing to do with enjoying a great cup of coffee, as does marriage with a cigarette.

Please share this message of segregation. The rule of law needs to apply equally across the board, or else these sorts of seemingly minor, unannounced, segregationist concepts will begin to appear in more relevant, behind-closed-doors agendas.