Holly Fretwell wants you in a car, kids

The Wall Street Journal's article Inconvenient Youths is a great read because it shows how kids can become obsessed with something other than toys, tv shows and beating up little gay kids. (I was the one getting beat up and teased, but that's another topic for another post) Anyways, one line in the article got me so angry I had to stop reading, put down the paper (yes, the paper, not the laptop. I am staying at a Mariott where the Wall Street Journal is free.) and share this quote with you from a book by Holly Fretwell:

“While riding a bike saves energy and is great exercise, it gives you less time to do other things, like sports or homework... We drive our car because it gets us to work and play faster.”

Why not add, "...it also gives you less time to hug your Mother, feed a kitten and see Mickey Mouse"?

I personally feel biking is one of THE best things we can do and is the ultimate example of multi-tasking: you exercise, you get from point A to point B, and you do not affect the environment. This argument that cars give us more time to do other things sounds like it came from 1954. "The car will make your life better, freeing you up to do wonderful things like spend time with your family, have a bar b q, or relax by the tv." It also sounds like propaganda.

The Wall Street Journal's article does point a light to what messages are getting to children in school from these sources of environmental information. I think what's missing from the equation is that environmentalism is not only about the environment, but about politics and business.

I think giving them the message, then letting them know who gave them the message and what that group or person benefits by giving them the message would allow kids to receive the full picture. I also think global warming should be taken out of the discussion. It's about the environment. It's about recycling. It's about not using plastic bags. It's not about Al Gore and pro-car-ism.

If you want to interview Holly Fretwell, contact Maria Sliwa, M. Sliwa Public Relations, 973-272-2861 / 212-202-4453, or msliwa@msliwa.com. (Source)

Open Letter from Starbucks to Starbucks

Starbucks Gossip Blog published a very interesting Starbucks internal email talking about many things, including the lack of "theater" in newer stores, the change from emotional experience to fast foodery and the reminder to put people first. Such an interesting read. I first read the article Saturday in the print edition of the WSJ.

Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz wrote this to CEO Jim Donald earlier this month. The memo's authenticity has been confirmed by Starbucks.

From: Howard Schultz
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
To: Jim Donald
Cc: Anne Saunders; Dave Pace; Dorothy Kim; Gerry Lopez; Jim Alling; Ken Lombard; Martin Coles; Michael Casey; Michelle Gass; Paula Boggs; Sandra Taylor

Subject: The Commoditization of the Starbucks Experience

As you prepare for the FY 08 strategic planning process, I want to share some of my thoughts with you.

Over the past ten years, in order to achieve the growth, development, and scale necessary to go from less than 1,000 stores to 13,000 stores and beyond, we have had to make a series of decisions that, in retrospect, have lead to the watering down of the Starbucks experience, and, what some might call the commoditization of our brand.

Many of these decisions were probably right at the time, and on their own merit would not have created the dilution of the experience; but in this case, the sum is much greater and, unfortunately, much more damaging than the individual pieces. For example, when we went to automatic espresso machines, we solved a major problem in terms of speed of service and efficiency. At the same time, we overlooked the fact that we would remove much of the romance and theatre that was in play with the use of the La Marzocca machines. This specific decision became even more damaging when the height of the machines, which are now in thousands of stores, blocked the visual sight line the customer previously had to watch the drink being made, and for the intimate experience with the barista. This, coupled with the need for fresh roasted coffee in every North America city and every international market, moved us toward the decision and the need for flavor locked packaging. Again, the right decision at the right time, and once again I believe we overlooked the cause and the affect of flavor lock in our stores. We achieved fresh roasted bagged coffee, but at what cost? The loss of aroma -- perhaps the most powerful non-verbal signal we had in our stores; the loss of our people scooping fresh coffee from the bins and grinding it fresh in front of the customer, and once again stripping the store of tradition and our heritage? Then we moved to store design. Clearly we have had to streamline store design to gain efficiencies of scale and to make sure we had the ROI on sales to investment ratios that would satisfy the financial side of our business. However, one of the results has been stores that no longer have the soul of the past and reflect a chain of stores vs. the warm feeling of a neighborhood store. Some people even call our stores sterile, cookie cutter, no longer reflecting the passion our partners feel about our coffee. In fact, I am not sure people today even know we are roasting coffee. You certainly can't get the message from being in our stores. The merchandise, more art than science, is far removed from being the merchant that I believe we can be and certainly at a minimum should support the foundation of our coffee heritage. Some stores don't have coffee grinders, French presses from Bodum, or even coffee filters.

Now that I have provided you with a list of some of the underlying issues that I believe we need to solve, let me say at the outset that we have all been part of these decisions. I take full responsibility myself, but we desperately need to look into the mirror and realize it's time to get back to the core and make the changes necessary to evoke the heritage, the tradition, and the passion that we all have for the true Starbucks experience. While the current state of affairs for the most part is self induced, that has lead to competitors of all kinds, small and large coffee companies, fast food operators, and mom and pops, to position themselves in a way that creates awareness, trial and loyalty of people who previously have been Starbucks customers. This must be eradicated.

I have said for 20 years that our success is not an entitlement and now it's proving to be a reality. Let's be smarter about how we are spending our time, money and resources. Let's get back to the core. Push for innovation and do the things necessary to once again differentiate Starbucks from all others. We source and buy the highest quality coffee. We have built the most trusted brand in coffee in the world, and we have an enormous responsibility to both the people who have come before us and the 150,000 partners and their families who are relying on our stewardship.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge all that you do for Starbucks. Without your passion and commitment, we would not be where we are today.

Onward…

WSJ unboxed

Over at Brand Autopsy, way back in January, they did an "unboxing" of ("Gadget geeks get their kicks unboxing the latest gizmos" according to the site) the Wall Street Journal's new redesign. I was excited about this back then and it was neat to see someone take an equal interest in the redesign.

Watch the video here.

Why is the redesign so important? Well, many people say newspaper is becoming irrelevant. I agree. But the WSJ rethought their paper's content. I think their content choice deserves more emphasis than the visual redesign. They're putting more analysis and in-depth coverage in the papaer, and placing their timely material online. Makes sense, right? So now having an unchangeable, paper document I can't cutomize makes sense because the content within is less timely and more about analysis than getting "the scoop."