I won't be giving Starbucks any of my business. How about you?

What he said is that some things are more important then money. That stock holders are seeing a 38% return and if the investor wasn't happy with the return he should sell his shares.

I agree with him. The management is not violating their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, the shareholders are seeing terrific returns on their investments. They are talking a positive stand on social issue which i and 58% of the American people agree according to recent polling.

Starbucks is not my favorite coffee, but I am more likely to buy a cup from them then I was before Schultz's statement.

Weather you are for or against traditional marriage only, the point is that a CEO made an extremely political statement that a company shouldn't really make. They should invite customers and investors without knowing or caring about their political beliefs.

I'm truly offended by this. I don't like their coffee anyway, it's way to strong and bothers my stomach, but if I were the board of directors, I would be removing him immediately. No CEO should alienate a large group of customers one way or the other, just bad business.

Starbucks, a very bad more indeed, if you want to be in business in the next few years.

The very first paragraph: "Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz sent a clear message of his support for gay marriage at the annual shareholders meeting Wednesday in Seattle, telling an investor if he disagrees he should sell his shares and invest in some other company."

I'm glad you are much better than EVERYONE on earth. I'm sure Starbuck's won't miss you.

Who desires Starbucks besides? Has it no longer got here approximately to you that outdoors the u . s . a . , a lot of something of the international perspectives the Israeli apartheid regime as repulsive, thinking people do no longer opt to assist it and you're able to desire to understand that scholars are plenty extra delicate to this difficulty because of the difficulty of boycott of Israeli lecturing team, that is purely an extension of this thinking. the pupils think of it unacceptable that any small quantity of money that they spend could desire to attain Israeli coffers. to your tips, interior the united kingdom, Starbucks has many shops and had to open one regionally, citizens objected and Starbucks became refused, no longer something to do with politics, this is the two a foul high quality yet overpriced product and the type could have spoilt the character of the section. Conversely i think of that the attention is very sturdy for Starbucks type, in spite of everything, all exposure is sturdy exposure.

Republicans do not frequent Starbucks to begin with. I am with the Starbucks. Soon they will have one near my home, so I do not have to drive five miles to get my coffee.

Starbucks coffee is trash.

They assume you will be getting a coffee drink with a bunch of syrup in it.

I like black coffee...so I don't benefit from the flavor masking syrups, and can actually taste the lousy coffee they brew.

There are plenty of superior alternative coffee joints in any city (and plenty are big corporate chains).

Heck....most gas stations brew a better cup of black coffee.

might just buy some Starbucks stock

enjoy making my own coffee

have a simple manual drip maker and grind my beans

its cheaper and tastes better than Starbucks

don't enjoy waiting in line behind people

getting some kind of strange sugar cream brown drink

when all i want a first class cup of black coffee

I won't give Starbucks any of my business because a small cup of mocha costs more than a gallon of gas.

Buy a Keurig machine.

I don't give them my money now; never have. I make coffee at home, instead of paying 50,000 dollars for it.

Why are you under the delusion that anyone except you CARES that you're a sub-human, hate-mongering moron?

I make my coffee at home or grab some at mcdonalds. I can't afford starbucks.