<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;coffee&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Not Enough Flies In My Soup, Waiter...</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12400313269/dailydirt-not-enough-flies-my-soup-waiter.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12400313269/dailydirt-not-enough-flies-my-soup-waiter.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's actually somewhat difficult to avoid eating insects accidentally. Bugs (or bug parts) get into our food supply all the time, and it's not really a bad thing (unless you're a strict vegan). Some folks, though, want more insects in their food, and not just fried grasshoppers or exotic scorpions. Insect protein could be a more sustainable food source, and arguably, our distant primate relatives eat far more insects than meat from other animals like we do. Here are just a few interesting links on insects in our food.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://www.hotlix.com/candy/" href="http://bit.ly/125aoWB">For over 20 years, candy lollipops with entrapped insects have been on the market.</a> How many licks does it take to get to the insect at the center of a Hotlix lollipop? [<a href="http://www.hotlix.com/candy/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/03/starbuggs-strawberry-frappuccino-colored-by-insects/" href="http://abcn.ws/125akGk">The Starbucks Strawberry Frappuccino was once made rosy red, not with an artificial color (like Red #40), but from natural colors derived from grinding up the dried bodies of cochineal bugs</a> The bug-based coloring was safe to eat (as long as you weren't allergic to those bugs), but Starbucks had to <a href="http://blogs.starbucks.com/blogs/customer/archive/2012/04/18/cochineal-extract-update.aspx">switch to a vegetable-based dye</a> because people were either grossed out or vegan. [<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/03/starbuggs-strawberry-frappuccino-colored-by-insects/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://m.npr.org/story/150354933?url=/blogs/thesalt/2012/04/11/150354933/time-for-a-bug-mac-the-dutch-aim-to-make-insects-more-palatable " href="http://n.pr/ZFUi7o">Some European researchers are trying to make insects more palatable for people, and a popular Dutch restaurant called Specktakel tries to incorporate an insect into at least one item on its daily menu.</a> Insects are a good source of protein, and it is far less energy intensive to raise bugs than beef. [<a href="http://m.npr.org/story/150354933?url=/blogs/thesalt/2012/04/11/150354933/time-for-a-bug-mac-the-dutch-aim-to-make-insects-more-palatable ">url</a>]</li>

</ul>

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a> via StumbleUpon.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12400313269/dailydirt-not-enough-flies-my-soup-waiter.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12400313269/dailydirt-not-enough-flies-my-soup-waiter.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12400313269/dailydirt-not-enough-flies-my-soup-waiter.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110226/12400313269</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Printing Messages On Food</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100617/1031189864/dailydirt-printing-messages-food.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100617/1031189864/dailydirt-printing-messages-food.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Food labeling can be a controversial topic when it comes to getting everyone to agree what information should be included with various foods. That said, technology that just enables printing information on food can lead to some fun (not just informative) innovations. Here are a few cool ways to get a message across via food.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57440312-1/textspresso-machine-prints-texts-on-your-coffee-foam/" href="http://cnet.co/TZJGKy">A robot espresso machine can print short messages onto coffee foam -- and advertise for a text messaging startup at the same time.</a> If this catches on, YouTube will inevitably have a video of someone printing "Marry Me?" in coffee. [<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57440312-1/textspresso-machine-prints-texts-on-your-coffee-foam/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17623424" href="http://bbc.in/12qxokN">The killer app for 3D printing could be chocolate printers.</a> Printing Valentine's Day messages in chocolate is just the beginning. [<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17623424">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.amronexperimental.com/Fruit_Wash_Labels.html" href="http://bit.ly/UOsLun">Fruit labels usually leave sticky residues on your fruit that need to be washed away, so why not just make the label adhesives out of soap?</a> Soaps are usually pretty non-sticky, though, but the idea of using more friendly adhesives on produce is a good thought. [<a href="http://www.amronexperimental.com/Fruit_Wash_Labels.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6316425/Kelloggs-to-laser-brand-individual-Corn-Flakes.html" href="http://bit.ly/Vh1qzV">Are generic corn flakes really a huge problem for Kellogg? What if each corn flake was individually labeled with a Kellogg's signature -- written by lasers?</a> About 128 billion bowls of Kellogg's Corn Flakes are eaten every year, so that's a lot of laser printing... [<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6316425/Kelloggs-to-laser-brand-individual-Corn-Flakes.html">url</a>]</li>

</ul>

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100617/1031189864/dailydirt-printing-messages-food.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100617/1031189864/dailydirt-printing-messages-food.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100617/1031189864/dailydirt-printing-messages-food.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100617/1031189864</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:29:52 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Apps Are Not Coffee</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120821/02251520110/apps-are-not-coffee.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120821/02251520110/apps-are-not-coffee.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="https://twitter.com/nastybutler77/statuses/237803063979671552" target="_blank">Jameson Ahern</a> points us to a fantastic discussion by Josh Lehman, explaining <a href="http://www.joshlehman.com/thoughts/stop-using-the-cup-of-coffee-vs-0-99-cent-app-analogy/" target="_blank">why it's silly to argue that people are irrational</a> for spending $4 or more on a cup of coffee*, but <a href="http://theoatmeal.com/blog/apps" target="_blank">not $0.99 on digital content or apps</a>.  As with nearly all cases of seemingly "irrational" behavior in economics, the truth is that you just need to better understand the marginal <i>benefit</i> that people are getting and the true marginal costs, which often go way beyond the dollar amount.  Lehman points out a few key examples, with the focus on trust &#038; certainty, as well as the difference in the competitive market.
<br /><br />
For the first point, he notes that you know exactly what you're getting with a Starbucks cup of coffee and how much you'll enjoy it:
<blockquote><i>
I know I&#8217;ll like my cup of coffee. It will fully meet my expectations. For the $4 I spend I don&#8217;t expect it to change my life. I don&#8217;t expect it to even last beyond its last drop (and a trip to the bathroom later). It&#8217;s an experience I can fully trust will be pretty much the same each time. There&#8217;s no gamble here. Ask me if I&#8217;d like to drop $4 on a cup of your new &#8220;Instant Refresher Juice 1.0&#8243; and there&#8217;s a very good chance I&#8217;ll pass. Or, maybe I&#8217;ll ask for a free sample to see if your $4 Instant Refresher Juice 1.0 is as good as Starbucks Coffee. In short, I know what I&#8217;m getting for $4 and I&#8217;m getting that same experience every time I hit the drive thru.
</i></blockquote>
What he's really pointing out here is that there's a much bigger cost to your content than just the $0.99 it's being offered for.  It's the risk of not getting any actual value out of it.  And since people are, quite naturally, loss averse, they're much more hesitant to spend under such circumstances.  This is completely rational behavior.
<br /><br />
He also points out the general nature of the market, and whether or not there are reasonable "free" alternatives:
<blockquote><i>
When you walk up to the counter of your local coffee shop you are not asked, &#8220;would you like a cup of our free coffee, or would you like to select from our paid options?&#8221;. If Starbucks gave out free coffee every day there would be mile-long lines at the drive thru. If the free coffee was anywhere close to as good as their paid stuff people would abandon the paid en masse. Some would pay maybe because they felt bad, as a freeloader. Others would pay because they preferred the options available to them in the paid column vs. the free. Now imagine the free selection at starbucks was nearly as large, or larger, than the paid selection: Welcome to the App Store.
</i></blockquote>
In other words, as we've explained for years, the nature of the wider market <i>really matters</i>.  In competitive markets, price gets driven down towards marginal cost.  There are ways to prevent that -- and one is to build up brand value through things like trust and certainty (see the point above).  So while there are cheaper alternatives, or even in many cases "free" alternatives at people's workplaces (contrary to Lehman's suggestion that there are no such alternatives), people still flock to the one they know and trust.  But if there are lots and lots and lots of free alternatives, then you have to work much harder to justify the price.  In some cases, for some people, you can.  But the market situation between coffee and apps is not very close at all.
<br /><br />
Lehman makes some other points as well, but the key one is that these are totally different markets with different factors playing on pricing.  Comparing them in absolute dollar terms misses the full costs and full benefits associated with the purchase.
<br /><br />
<em>* Moreover, despite the "$4 coffee" being an oft-repeated trope about Starbucks, it's not really true. The biggest cup of <strong>coffee</strong> at Starbucks costs a little over $2. The drinks that are pricier than that are generally about nine-tenths milk, and milk is much more expensive than coffee. Indeed, the drinks that so many people think are a "ripoff" are not where Starbucks makes the majority of its money&mdash;they tend to be much lower-margin items than the plain coffee, because milk and whipped cream and fancy syrups are all high-cost and expensive to store. Is Starbucks still "expensive"? Maybe so -- but anyone who opens that discussion by talking about the "$4 cup of coffee" demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how the business functions (and even of what's on the menu).</em><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120821/02251520110/apps-are-not-coffee.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120821/02251520110/apps-are-not-coffee.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120821/02251520110/apps-are-not-coffee.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>advanced-economic-concepts</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120821/02251520110</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Everyday Scientific Mysteries</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/23433715857/dailydirt-everyday-scientific-mysteries.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/23433715857/dailydirt-everyday-scientific-mysteries.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There are all kinds of scientific complexities around us. Just try to seriously answer all the questions that a curious five-year-old can come up with, and you'll get a feeling for how little we actually know about the world around us. Thankfully, we have some modern scientific equipment to help sort out these minor mysteries. Here are just a few answers for some common phenomena.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139681851/scientists-crack-the-physics-of-coffee-rings" href="http://n.pr/n06R22">The physics of dried out coffee rings has been clarified.</a> Yay! Now there's at least some reasonable explanation for why coffee drops dry out into dark-edged rings. [<a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139681851/scientists-crack-the-physics-of-coffee-rings">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20099450-1/physicist-cuts-plane-boarding-time-in-half/" href="http://cnet.co/np6u6p">Maybe Southwest Airlines' method of boarding isn't optimal, but compared to some Monte Carlo simulations, it's not too bad.</a> Did it really take an astrophysicist to prove that boarding by blocks of rows isn't the most efficient way to pile into a plane? [<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20099450-1/physicist-cuts-plane-boarding-time-in-half/">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.photo-mark.com/notes/2011/sep/20/crayon-colors/" href="http://bit.ly/r93blZ">If you've ever wondered what the difference between the green-yellow and yellow-green crayons was, here is your answer.</a> This is what you get when you stick 24 Crayola crayons in a spectrophotometer. [<a href="http://www.photo-mark.com/notes/2011/sep/20/crayon-colors/">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more interesting science-related stuff, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:343" href="http://bit.ly/hpjT2s">check out what's currently floating around the StumbleUpon universe.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:343">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/23433715857/dailydirt-everyday-scientific-mysteries.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/23433715857/dailydirt-everyday-scientific-mysteries.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/23433715857/dailydirt-everyday-scientific-mysteries.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110908/23433715857</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Weird Foods That Are Also Natural And Organic</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110519/14404914345/dailydirt-weird-foods-that-are-also-natural-organic.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110519/14404914345/dailydirt-weird-foods-that-are-also-natural-organic.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ In the strict chemical sense, it's actually not that easy to find inorganic foods (ie. foods that are not organic). But you might find some if you practice geophagy. Here are just some examples of foods made from all-natural ingredients.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-civet-cat-dung-secret-indonesia.html" href="http://bit.ly/lK0zoh">Coffee made from beans excreted by civets seems to be pretty popular.</a> But the knock-off coffee made from chemically-digesting coffee beans (in lieu of the animal-digested beans) doesn't sound so bad, actually. [<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-civet-cat-dung-secret-indonesia.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://inhabitat.com/poop-burger-japanese-researcher-creates-artificial-meat-from-human-feces/" href="http://bit.ly/k6cyYz">How about some artificial-meat made out of protein... extracted from human feces?</a> When they're extracting the protein, maybe they should also extract the undigested pharmaceuticals while they're at it. [<a href="http://inhabitat.com/poop-burger-japanese-researcher-creates-artificial-meat-from-human-feces/">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://links.ealert.nature.com/ctt?kn=46&#038;ms=MzY2NDYzNzkS1" href="http://bit.ly/l04MP3">Eating marine mammals like dolphins might be a growing trend for poorer nations.</a> Making dolphin hunting illegal, however, is probably not the right response. [<a href="http://links.ealert.nature.com/ctt?kn=46&#038;ms=MzY2NDYzNzkS1">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/food/2011/01/i-think-ill-go-eat-dirt" href="http://bit.ly/lQkRDh">Eating dirt is called "geophagy" -- a practice that expectant mothers sometimes engage in.</a> Yum! pfft! [<a href="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/food/2011/01/i-think-ill-go-eat-dirt">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011" href="http://bbc.in/lHzFhc">Speaking of mothers... A flavor of ice cream with a "yuck" factor twist: Baby Gaga ice cream is made from human breast milk.</a> It's also probably the most expensive ice cream you've never wanted to taste. [<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110519/14404914345/dailydirt-weird-foods-that-are-also-natural-organic.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110519/14404914345/dailydirt-weird-foods-that-are-also-natural-organic.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110519/14404914345/dailydirt-weird-foods-that-are-also-natural-organic.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110519/14404914345</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 10:40:32 PST</pubDate>
<title>Forget Hot Coffee, Now Disney Is Sued For Severe Burns From Nacho Cheese</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Perhaps no legal liability lawsuit brings out passionate arguments (on all sides) like the infamous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants" target="_blank">McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit</a>, in which McDonald's was sued and lost for providing a woman with coffee that was too hot (on appeal the case was eventually settled).  Some feel that the case is the quintessential example of bogus lawsuits, while others suggest that the case <a href="http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm" target="_blank">actually had merits</a>.  Of course, given its high profile nature, there have been attempts here or there to replicate it in some form or another, and up next, we've apparently <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/the-daily-disney/os-disney-lawsuit-child-burned-cheese20110210,0,2488936.story" target="_blank">got a lawsuit against Disney for serving nacho cheese at Disney World that was too darn hot</a>.
<br /><br />
A San Diego couple, Michael and Maria Harris claim that their 4-year-old son Isaiah had his face burned from "scalding hot" nacho cheese served to them at Disney World.  They appear to be claiming that Disney was negligent in making "no effort" to keep the nacho cheese at a reasonable temperature, and are claiming "permanent scarring, pain and suffering" to Isaiah from the burns, while the parents have suffered "emotional distress."  Perhaps there's more to the case than is in the article linked above, but shouldn't parents be at least somewhat responsible for keeping things that are scalding hot from their children's faces?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110211/12372613059/forget-hot-coffee-now-disney-is-sued-severe-burns-nacho-cheese.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>keep-it-cool,-yo</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110211/12372613059</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:03:59 PDT</pubDate>
<title>And On Second Thought, Maybe Starbucks Shouldn't Be In The Music Business</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080425/013655943.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080425/013655943.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've chronicled Starbucks' <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050629/0129204.shtml">successes</a> and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060524/116211.shtml">failures</a> as it tiptoed into the music industry over the past few years.  The ubiquitous coffee shop was trying to position itself as a "lifestyle" brand.  After successes in selling the albums it regularly played in stores, the company went so far as to set up its own <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070312/172451.shtml">record label</a>.  While we noted that this was an interesting play, it seemed like it would really only work if the the company didn't try to become a normal record label.  Unfortunately, it seems like that's exactly what it did.  It focused on selling albums, rather than the wider musical experience, and pretty much relied on the Starbucks connection to boost sales.  That just wasn't going to cut it -- so it should come as little surprise that the <a href="http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/04/24/more-grounds-for-pessimism-at-starbucks.aspx">suddenly struggling</a> company is <a href="http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-starbucks-cedes-management-of-hear-music-label-to-partner-will-focus-on/" target="_new">handing over the record label to someone else to deal with</a>.  Starbucks will continue to look for music to sell in its stores -- it just won't be producing albums anymore.  This makes plenty of sense since Starbucks never really seemed to have much of a plan to do anything really innovative in the music business, and right now it probably has a lot more important things to concentrate on.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080425/013655943.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080425/013655943.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080425/013655943.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>core-competencies</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080425/013655943</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:08:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Starbucks Adds AT&#038;T WiFi; Now You've Got A Choice</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080211/105201225.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080211/105201225.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ For many years, Starbucks has provided a huge footprint for fee-based WiFi from T-Mobile (originally Mobilestar).  While many, many others had determined that it made more sense to offer free WiFi in coffee shops and other places to attract users, Starbucks stuck by the relatively expensive T-Mobile WiFi offering.  The deal was apparently somewhat (though not fantastically) profitable for both companies, which is why they never seemed to budge from it, even as the idea of fee-based WiFi lost a lot of its luster.  However, it looks like things are finally shaking up a bit.  Starbucks has now announced that it's also <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008175.html" target="_new">adding AT&#038;T's hotspot offering to its stores</a>, which is a pretty big deal, since AT&#038;T offers access to its WiFi hotspots for free to most DSL customers.  Prior to this, most of AT&#038;T's hotspots were found in McDonalds -- so adding Starbucks is a big win. 
<br /><br />
 It's interesting to note, however, that Starbucks <a href="http://jkontherun.blogs.com/jkontherun/2008/02/starbucks-adds.html">hasn't dumped T-Mobile</a>, it's just added AT&#038;T.  It's not clear if this means that Starbucks will be installing separate WiFi equipment for both services, but given the recent <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070905/115922.shtml">deal</a> between Apple and Starbucks to let iPhone users access iTunes via WiFi for free, you had to figure that the company was going to be changing some of its WiFi backend equipment.  Also given AT&#038;T's iPhone connection, it shouldn't be a huge surprise that AT&#038;T was a part of the new Starbucks offering.  The other interesting bit is that for non-subscribers, the AT&#038;T WiFi will be noticeably cheaper in one-off use than T-Mobile's -- meaning even if T-Mobile hasn't been "dumped" it may have just lost many one-time users.  If anything, this may continue to push Starbucks to move closer and closer to finally <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070306/082736.shtml">giving up</a> the paid solution and offering WiFi for free -- just as many Starbucks managers have been <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20041119/1153233.shtml">begging</a> the company to do for years.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080211/105201225.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080211/105201225.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080211/105201225.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>would-you-like-the-tall-or-the-vente-wifi?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080211/105201225</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>