Smackdown At Starbucks Shareholder Meeting

Submitted by: burbclaver 5 years ago in

Starbucks defends its support for gay marriage.
There are 27 comments:
Female 2,525
WHY DOESN`T YOUR BUSINESS DISCRIMINATE AGAINST PEOPLE I HATE?
0
Reply
Male 2,376
starbucks didn`t need to do this obvious set up. they already have the gay hipster crowed
0
Reply
Male 1,510
I`m Christian, and I don`t think the state should ban same-sex marriage. But I also don`t think the state should have ANYTHING to do with "marriage" straight or otherwise. Just have legal partnerships and have a "wedding" or "marriage" with whoever you choose.
0
Reply
Male 934
Stick that up your ass and pretend not to like it, christians.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
win
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@OldOllie: Pretty much every corporation makes political donations, usually to both parties at varying degrees. I`m not sure this is all that different.
0
Reply
Male 416
OldOllie: "Any publicly held corporation that takes an official stand on either side of a controversial political issue is breaching their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders by alienating half of their customers. I think this would be an interesting lawsuit on behalf of the shareholders who are the ones who will pay the price for the absolutely stupidity of this purely political decision by stunningly incompetent management."

This is an overly simplistic view of market management and investor relations. Starbucks products are not durable goods - people don`t simply buy one over an extended period of time - so they don`t respond in the way that you`re making it out to be.

Also, I`ll point out that Starbucks announced its support for the gay marriage resolution in Washington in mid-to-late January 2012. Since then, SBUX shares have risen by around 16%, compared with only about 10% for the rest of the NASDAQ.
0
Reply
Male 646
"How To Be Slick"

I love our ruling class.
0
Reply
Male 86
Not sure how this is a smack down, he is simply answering the questions in a very respectful and professional manner.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@OldOllie: Pretty much every corporation makes political donations, usually to both parties at varying degrees. I`m not sure this is all that different.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Any publicly held corporation that takes an official stand on either side of a controversial political issue is breaching their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders by alienating half of their customers. I think this would be an interesting lawsuit on behalf of the shareholders who are the ones who will pay the price for the absolutely stupidity of this purely political decision by stunningly incompetent management.
0
Reply
Male 719
"I don`t drink coffee, but if I did I certainly wouldn`t pay $5 a cup for it, no matter who was selling it."

Neither would anyone going to Starbucks.

Well, I guess you could spend $5 on coffee if you ordered two 20oz cups, but that`s obviously something different.

And you can spend $5 on a cup of a mixed drink, but that`s obviously not just coffee.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I agree that corporations are definitely not people and should not be recognized as such by the supreme court. However, I would argue that gay marriage should be addressed by these companies for a simple reason: health insurance. If Starbucks is willing to support gay marriage, that means they`re willing to offer plans for their employees that cover married same-sex couples.
0
Reply
Male 1,558
Piss off!! I`will never live my life according to anyone else. Narrow minded idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
Reply
Female 2,602
Call me cynical, but I`d say 99% of the reason that Starbucks voted for this is because that was the way the wind was blowing and they knew it made good business sense for them to take a position, because most of their clientele fall within a demographic that either don`t care about this issue or actively support gay marriage.

It`s the same cynical bandwagon jumping as occurred when Obama and his cronies belatedly de-criminalised gay service personnel, after having had the gall to block a court judgement that had *ordered* them to end the discrimination anyway. In both cases, the parties concerned were merely taking a populist position that they didn`t actually care about, but which they hoped would reflect well on them in the eyes of people whose opinions they were trying to influence.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
@Crackr:
They`re probably playing the long game. Most young kids support gay marriage and their biggest clientele are young hipsters who think it`s a good idea. They won`t lose much business supporting it and the PR value of speaking out in favor of it is worth something. If you`re a pretentious kid who hangs out at Starbucks to work on your screen-play then you`re probably the sort to enjoy a dash of politics with your coffee. Especially if it`s activism without activity. It`s a sound strategic move for Starbucks.
0
Reply
Male 1,754
I love Business gurus below me who don`t own a business. Y U NO TAKE MY ADVICE STARBUKS!? I BUSINESS MASTA!
0
Reply
Male 17,512
I don`t drink coffee, but if I did I certainly wouldn`t pay $5 a cup for it, no matter who was selling it.

As far as a company taking a position on controversial societal issues, that`s something they should avoid. No matter what position you take, as a company these days, you risk loosing business because of it.

Unless it`s an issue that directly effects your businesses bottom line, like taxes, government regulations or trade, it`s better to stay neutral.
0
Reply
Male 40,359
vv Well said @Gerry1.

Wait, what? You`re gay? ZOMG!
0
Reply
Male 2,737
That`s why I get my coffee at the corner gas station or the barber shop.

Oh, and Gerry is gay. That is all.
0
Reply
Male 39,610

Some of you may not have picked up on my subtle comments, but I am gay. Naturally, I am in favor of gay marriage.

That said, I fail to see how it is any of Starbuck`s business. Stay out of politics. If the goverment say gays can marry then they get spousal company benefits. If the gov`ment says the can`t, it`s not a companies role to change social mores.

I don`t want Chick-fil-A against me, nor do I need Starbucks with me.
Corporations are not people and are not entitled to opinions on matters like this.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
Wow... that was a decent arguement by both!
0
Reply
Male 468
BS....they cannot say they are not political.

They sell COFFEE! If I am a shareholder that would be ALL I want them to concentrate on. This is a play very much for special interest on the backs of others.
0
Reply
Female 6,381
Good for having corporate cajones. What the hell difference does it make to these religist busybodies if gay people marry? In Canada, the legalization was made quickly and without any fuss after courts said the Charter of Rights was on the side of same-sex couples. Today, the only difference is that gay partners you see on the street may have a legal bond between them. B.F.D.!! It doesn`t bother me or anyone else I know in the slightest. And I`d go have a Starbucks coffee in support if I liked the taste of burnt beans - THAT`S an issue!!
0
Reply
Female 2,602

0
Reply
Male 3,115
No smackdown here; People asking questions in a polite, respectful manner, and receiving answers in the same vein.
Would that our politicos acted similarly.
0
Reply
Male 878
Link: Smackdown At Starbucks Shareholder Meeting [Rate Link] - Starbucks defends its support for gay marriage.
0
Reply