Another shop on the blocks
The venerable Tea Spot has a sign up on the cash register announcing their demise. Sad. The location is a bit awkward. You’d think the ice rink plaza would get more foot traffic but it’s just enough out of the way to be relatively unvisited. The Tea Spot sign says that the owners are doing well in their wholesaling business so that’s where they’ll focus their efforts from here forward, the end of the lease being a good time for them to pull away from the retail shop. New owners could jump in on favorable lease terms (seems like business leases are going ridiculously cheap in Boulder right now) and an already-completed buildout.
So where does that leave the Boulder coffee shop scene?
- Amante for sale
- Playgrounds for sale (and closed until somebody buys it)
- Organica folded about 6-9 months ago
- Sidney’s just sold
- Tea Spot closing
Who is doing well? The obvious ones (meaning they’re always full):
- Amante NoBo
- Folsom St. Coffee
- Laughing Goat
- Logan’s (full all day though?)
- The Cup
- Saxy’s (but see recent post decrying the “success“)
- Starbucks (hahaha) … actually, only the Hill location seems to be consistently busy
- Vic’s (Ideal)
clueless. totally clueless.
If you can get by the moneywall, there’s a little gem of an article in the March 1st Economist. Somebody else in these fine spaces (yes, there are multiple ppl with logins to post to this blog) wrote a couple days ago about Starbucks, musing about their internal wifi conversations. The Economist article backs it up.
The Economist’s point is that Pepsi and Starbucks are both worried about their branding — Pepsi because they realize that dark sugar water is just a commodity and there’s no logical reason people drink their fizzy bullshit. Starbucks because they finally realize that their maniacal push to hyperexpand (1000 stores to 13,000 stores in ten years) has made them a sterilized coffee factory, not unlike McDonalds for red meat. As the article points out:
But during its expansion Starbucks installed automatic espresso machines, rather than hand-pulled ones, added drive-through windows for motorists and started to sell hot food, mugs and even CDs. As McDonald’s, Dunkin’ Donuts and other fast-food chains moved upmarket, Starbucks looked less distinctive. Consumer Reports, an American magazine that publishes reviews of consumer products, recently rated McDonald’s coffee more highly than that sold at Starbucks.
So what is Starbuck’s doing about it? Sounds like their CEO is hitting the panic button, and hard:
Thoughts on A Patron’s Bill of Rights, Article A (Free Wi-Fi)
The no-longer-Gray Lady and undisputed matriarch of journalism and c-shop staple, The New York Times this Sunday morning dared to broach the subject of free wi-fi and it’s notable absence from every Starbuck’s on the face of the Earth.
The article (see it here) draws a parallel to movie theaters of the 1920s boosting summertime attendance by installing costly and (for the time) high-tech air conditioning systems. The brim-full theater attendence created by rare oases of air conditioned space open to the public created such a boon to business that owners scrambled to upgrade and earn a quick payback. In the process they created one of the first and finest examples of technology transfer to the massess, not unlike the internet cafe’s springing up througout the developing world.
The writer (Randall Stross) argues that free wi-fi is the spiritual successor to an old-time theater’s air conditioning and lavish lobbies. In my opinion, Starbucks’ embracing of this spirit is unlikely and unwelcome.
