Gouezeri wrote:I'm on the fence with beanie on this one. We don't actually know what *$ are going to do with it. Yes, I'm concerned, but I don't think we really have grounds to criticise yet.?
He agrees with me?!!!? Run for cover, the sky is falling! The sky is falling
This thread is kinda making me think of Starbies as the Microsoft of coffee
Anyway, just the volume (how many shops worldwide now?) of the green giant will make production of the Clover 'cheaper'... even if it's just realeased to its own shops. Maybe they'll do both, an in-shop and home version. Seriously, don't most companies buy other companies, not just for the product(s) but for the IP? And if so, don't they want the IP, not just to halt distribution, but also to develop that IP? It is an 'investment' after all.
There are references made to *$ shops not being able to afford the Clover in certain areas... well, that was the case before even *$. Also, I thought *$ is not your typical franchise (as in no franchise owners) but jv & licensing agreements. As more than half the outlets are company-owned, can't they place the Clover wherever, if they choose?
I think I'm changing my mind... whatever Starbucks decides to do with it, this move has generated more exposure about that elusive cup of 'quality' coffee. As said numerous times before as well, this also might incite further innovation from non-Starbies