I'm seeing this in The Washington Post: "Incensed by the 'senseless upcharge' at Starbucks for nondairy milk, 'Succession' and 'Babe' actor James Cromwell and other members of PETA, where he serves as an honorary director, staged a protest Tuesday at a Midtown Manhattan location of the coffee chain.... As he reads his statement, the masked baristas behind him generally appear to continue working as if there isn’t a 6-foot-7 Oscar-nominated actor attached to the counter — and later they continue to as he leads the other protesters in chanting, 'Save the planet, save the cows. Stop this vegan upcharge now.' Eventually, the police arrive and tell customers the Starbucks is closed — though they can still pick up any outstanding orders. Cromwell and the other glued protester detach their hands from the counter and leave."
I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cow's milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices and thereby avoid giving people a money reason to choose cow's milk.
But I want to question whether it was "superglue."
When they were ready to give up, the protesters just "detached" their hands. "Super Glue" is a specific brand, and you're not going to want that on your skin. I don't know what they used, but if they'd asked me, I'd have recommended Elmer's Glue. 2 reasons. First, it's consistent with honoring bovines:
That's the present-day Elmer. Admittedly, earlier Elmers would fit the PETA cause better. Here's the Elmer I remember best (which lasted from 1962-1976). He's slightly smiling but seems rather stern and skeptical:
But it's the oldest Elmer — from 1951 to 1962 — who really looks pissed off (and would best serve the PETA cause):
The second reason I'd recommend Elmer's Glue for your skin is that I have fond memories of deliberately spreading a thin layer of it onto my skin, letting it dry, then peeling it off. This was a popular kid activity in the 1960s. The peeling was fun, because it looked as though you were peeling off skin, and the peeled off dried glue showed the fine details of the skin it had been attached to, and this was fascinating to behold, back in the days when we had so little to gaze upon.
Posts
148 comments:
“ I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cows milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices and thereby avoid giving people a money reason to choose cows milk.”
I can’t let this economic illiteracy go without comment. What do you think would happen if you were able to get a more expensive product at a lesser price using this logic? Do you think people would get cow vs almond milk in the same percentages? And why should others pay a premium price for a non premium product? Someone needs to watch some Walter Williams lessons.
God: I wonder what the humans are doing down on earth today?
Angel: They're making milk from soybeans.
God: What!? I gave them like 8 different animals to get milk from!? Why don't they use that milk.
Angel: They don't like that kind of milk.
God: You know that promise I made, the one with the rainbow, where I would never to send the waters again?
Angel: Yeah?
God: Well, I said "water", but I'm seriously thinking about soy milk this time around.
Why should I pay more for the vegan ingredients? Better way would be to have a vegan section on the menu? That way I do not have to look at it. I once ordered a fake meat thing by mistake and it was awful. If it was super glue they would have left some skin on the table.
This story is hilarious and these people are ludicrous. We should subsidize their preferences by averaging? GTFO
I love the symmetrical nature. Elmer's was started by Borden, a dairy, and contained casein. It's just pva now.
The other thing is vegans are nearly all pro abortion while antivegans are nearly all antichoice.
I'm gonna state an unpopular opinion here. Starbucks coffee is great. If you don't like it, you can get diner dishwater anywhere, don't go to Starbucks.
Nothing is better for the environment than having to use copious quantities of acetone INDOORS to free his hand from the counter. Pity he’s so stupid. He was so good as Babe the Pig’s co-star.
But Elmer's glue is made with milk, isn't it?
More of this, AA.
Why would he reject an organic solution for adhesion in favor of some lab-produced chemical? Shortsighted thinking takes many forms.
I'd always assumed that Elmer's glue was (at least originaly) made from cows. Not very PETA friendly...
I'd like to take this opportunity to point out how Delicious the taste of Delicious Whole Milk is
If you ask a Cow, she'd MUCH rather not have that milk in her udders (just yesterday, a passed a dairy farm with a herd a cows EAGERLY mooving on up to the barn, for their nightly milking
COWS LIKE BEING MILKED!! don't believe me? ASK A COW
One thing that makes Cows sad, and unhappy; is when people skim off their delicious butter fat from their milk
Cows WANT you to be satisfied.. And NOTHING satisfies like Delicious Whole Milk
mmmmmmmm
Your post prompted me to put elmers glue into the search box on youtube. It yields lots of arts and crafts videos, and this commercial from 1960.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2GZ53rRfno
If Elmer is a cow, and not a bull, her pronouns would be she/her -- not he/his.
First, it's consistent with honoring bovines
The reason there's a cow on the label is the glue is made from casein, a protein in dairy milk.
So it's probably not PETA approved.
A glue with nuts on the label would be more consistent with gluing your hand to a Starbucks counter.
I used to love to peel Elmer's. And that smell became part of the 'aroma' of middle school (which we called Junior High back then). That- and cinnamon (from cinnamon toothpicks).
James Cromwell is a great actor. And a completely bizarre, childish, extreme leftist. And honestly, anyone who regularly buys vegetable or non-dairy milks is used to paying more. Why? Because it costs more to produce, and is produced in smaller quantities. I mean, almonds cost a lot as it is. Can you imagine how many almonds you have to squeeze to get a quart of milk coming off of them? I'm sure- I have no doubt- that James Cromwell pays dearly for the fine Cabernets he consumes. Why? Why should he have to pay more for a fine cabernet? Or for that matter, why would anyone have had to pay more to eat raw veggies at Pure Food & Wine in Manhattan (before it was closed), a place that featured James Cromwell in a 'special charity dinner'.
They are all so special. All of these people. He's both a nutcase and a great actor. His problem is that life does not offer scripts to read full-time. So more often than not, he's left to his own thoughts and words. The results are...well...obvious.
That'll do, James.
Cromwell's sort of a nutcase. He's a Hollywood baby. His father, an actor/director who was blacklisted in the fifties, was in his first Broadway play in 1912 and in his last film in 1978.
He's slightly smiling but seems rather stern and skeptical
He?
You recommend they use a glue created by Borden “The Dairy Company” to protest dairy?
Testor's extra quick drying model airplane glue was far superior for skin peeling, but apparently kids were sniffing it and they stopped making it.
This is the opposite of social distancing: unnecessarily staying in the same place for a long time and forcing other people to be around you.
Superglue requires a solvent to release it, e.g. nail polish remover. It doesn't hurt skin, it just doesn't come off. It's used in surgery to close wounds.
Me?
I assume both protesters and Police have various solvents (which you also don't want to breath) to deal with the issue.
I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cow's milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices and thereby avoid giving people a money reason to choose cow's milk.
Why should I pay the freight for some rich actor's virtuous signaling?
"I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cow's milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices...."
Good idea! Taking that to the local car dealership. Average the price of all your inventory and give the customer their choice from the lot.
Elmer's Glue? An animal product? No, no, a thousand times no! Let all God's creatures roam free and unmolested.
"Average it out" ?
Have you seen a wine menu?
"I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cow's milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices and thereby avoid giving people a money reason to choose cow's milk."
Why should Starbucks support PETA? Using your logic, Starbucks should charge less for vegan milk to give people an incentive to not use cow milk.
There was no glue at all. The staff just hadn't cleaned the counter in quite a while.
I loved the smell of wood shop glue. I made a coffee table in wood shop. I was very proud of it. I also had machine shop class. No way kids would be allowed anywhere near a lathe today.
TomT wins it.
Vagan milk is gross industrial chemical soups designed to fool the mouth with gums, starches, enzymes etc. Almond milk is the worst as it's responsible for catastrophic groundwater raping in drought stricken California.
Superglue is very brittle -- one can often just pull away as the top layer of dead skin separates. Elmer's melts with water. The one I'd fear is Gorilla Glue -- that stuff penetrates and expands.
The vegan lifestyle is the ultimate luxury First World problem. Truly cheap protein was long ago discovered in India: cow milk. Sacred cows. Don't kill the cow, but use its milk, make a lot of cheese, and make a lot of butter.
If at some point cow's milk is more expensive I'm sure vegans wouldn't mind subsidizing the cost for none vegans. Right?
“ I can’t let this economic illiteracy go without comment. What do you think would happen if you were able to get a more expensive product at a lesser price using this logic? Do you think people would get cow vs almond milk in the same percentages? And why should others pay a premium price for a non premium product? ”
I think most people would order the type of milk they prefer, actually. Maybe milk preferrers would be miffed at the higher price, but sure the percentages would change. My proposal completely accounts for that.
Should I be as disrespectful to you as you were to me? No. It’s too annoying.
I’m assuming Starbucks would want the publicity and reputation for furthering vegetarianism. Milk preferrers should pay more because they have worse ethics, per PETA.
Starbucks doesn’t lose money, because they calculate the price using multiple factors!
“ Why should Starbucks support PETA? Using your logic, Starbucks should charge less for vegan milk to give people an incentive to not use cow milk.”
Right. That would fit the logic.
http://www.krazygoo.com/kg_story.html
Guess what this stuff is made from!!
Collagen was a byproduct of horses and cows used to make glue. It’s in their feet and connective tissues. Reading Animal Farm- I knew what the knacker’s wagon was for… there was such a truck that used to pick up carcasses and put down injured cattle. They made fertilizer. We always called it “Down and Dead”… the sordid details of morbidity on the farm.
So, honoring the cow on the label? I’m not so sure. A tribute, maybe. I guess everything’s synthetic now.
Milk: it does a body good. We farmers literally pay for our advertising. We ship to Organic Valley &our milk is also used in Stonyfield products.
Have you seen the OV commercials. Pretty funny.
Also- our market is now finite. Farms have a base- a ceiling on the amount of milk produced. This was to prevent those factory farms from flooding the market, but now they’re buying out the competition. The family farm… is being bulldozed under or paved over. Oh well. There is a season for everything, I guess…
Am recalling being admonished not to eat the dried Elmer's glue lifted from my fingertips.
I believe Elmer had a partner, Elsie, presumably both of them Borden trademarks. Elsie came first.
Old and slow said...
I'd always assumed that Elmer's glue was (at least originaly) made from cows. Not very PETA friendly...
And I assume that superglue (cyanoacrylate) comes from natural gas feedstock.
An oil industry supporting Vegan Unicorn?
“ Why should Starbucks support PETA? Using your logic, Starbucks should charge less for vegan milk to give people an incentive to not use cow milk.”
Right. That would fit the logic.
________________________________________________________________
Using that logic, Starbucks shouldn't offer anything but vegan milk.
tim in vermont said...
I'm gonna state an unpopular opinion here. Starbucks coffee is great. If you don't like it, you can get diner dishwater anywhere, don't go to Starbucks.
5/11/22, 8:26 AM
And better yet, buy your own pound of Starbucks and put your own half and half in it like I do. They can take their vegan crap and shove it.
The other thing is vegans are nearly all pro abortion while antivegans are nearly all antichoice.
It figures. Vegans are the sort of nuts that would glue their hands to the counter. Cromwell is a well known nut but apparently not as well known as he would like. My middle daughter was a vegan when she went to live in Spain. She came back a meat eater and stayed that way. She said vegans would starve to death in Spain.
Super Glue keeps you glued to something? Cromwell is so far behind the times.
I've built and flown model airplanes as a hobby since the early 80's. Cyanoacrylate or "super glues" were just coming into wide use at the time. There were horror stories about getting body parts stuck together. There was a story about a wronged wife, angry at her cheating husband, "super gluing" his junk to his thigh! That'll fix him!
So I walk into my local hobby shop and see this henna haired older woman--aged 60 or so--lay a bead of "super glue" down on a balsa wood joint and spread it with her thumb! Woo hah--that's one tough lady! As I learned she was a master model builder.
Over 40 years or so I've used a lot of "super glue" under various brand names. Yes you can get your hands stuck to something. But "debonders" or acetone, or simply rolling your hand away and sacrificing a bit of skin will get you loose. Pro tip for folks who use these glues and find some of it stuck to your hand---Avon Skin So Soft and warm water will take the "stuck on" super glue off your hands. As for Cromwell's "dramatic gesture" he's relying on the ignorance of his audience--not to mention his own stupidity.
Yesterday, I went grocery shopping at Publix and saw a sign advertising "Vegan Cookies." I wondered if they were made from real vegans.
@Howard
"Vagan milk is gross"
Agreed. I've never heard of bisexual threesomes producing milk per se, but I'm sure it's gross.
I'm very surprised that this gambit hasn't been turned around on these jokers yet. Glue yourself down to protest? You're not stopping the activities around you. Now you're stuck with the activities we're bringing to you: 15 big, hairy, slobbering, smelly, laborers crowding close, eating greasy dripping free hamburgers that I provided. How does that work for you, you pompous prick>?
In clothing sales, different sizes are the same price, though larger sizes cost more to make. I’ve never heard small-size people complain. It’s actually perceived as fair. It would be mean to charge bigger people more.
Two comments:
1) A friend of mine's gruff old dad once said of her almond milk: "'Almond milk'? Since when do almonds have tits?"
2) Down here in Arizona I learned very quickly that white glue smeared over the skin is the best way to remove those nasty little cactus spikes that are almost hair-like and nearly impossible to just pull out.
"Milk preferrers should pay more because they have worse ethics, per PETA."
Hmmm... indulgences.
What do they think would become of milk cows, if no one consumed dairy products? Do they think we'd keep them around and go on feeding them, like ex-slaves?
Maybe they could learn to plagiarize.
The first commenter has it completely correct, Althouse. Why should I pay more for a Corvette than for a Chevy Malibu- why can't General Motors just average out the cost of the cars so that a Corvette costs as much as a Malibu? If General Motors did this, everyone would want a Corvette, and no one would want a Malibu- and this isn't a reductio ad absurdum argument on my part- it is directly on point.
In a competitive market, items at retail sell for a small margin above their costs of production, transport, inventory, and sales expenses. This is true of vegan dairy products and cow's milk in the United States. Vegan dairy products cost more at retail because they are more expensive to produce- full stop.
"It would be mean to charge bigger people more."
Ever bought a "big and tall" shirt from Land's End? It's like, ten bucks extra!
I'm oppressed! Who knew?
That guy can get fucked. He's a great actor (really he is) and 'Babe' is one of my favorite movies.
But over the years there have been stories that tell me that the guy is a 6'7" jerk and a super-lefty one at that.
Don't these Marxist morons understand supply and demand?
If you want to drink 'milk' made from unicorn tears you have to pay an upcharge.
Help me out here. Where am I trying to go with this? Something about "big and tall bodies", right? But who's the oppressor? Land's End? Ah! "Coastal Elites"! Coastal elites oppressing big and tall bodies. That's the ticket. Enormous lives matter.
On clothing- materials are by far the smallest cost items in their production- the differences in material costs between extra large and petite is on the order of a few pennies at most- the other costs are practically invariant, so clothing is a poor example of averaging pricing. Soy/almond milk is 2 to 3 times the cost to much to produce as regular cow's milk- it is completely unreasonable to expect them to cost as much at retail.
@Ann:I think most people would order the type of milk they prefer, actually. Maybe milk preferrers would be miffed at the higher price, but sure the percentages would change. My proposal completely accounts for that.
It's not good business to deliberately lose money on one product and try to make it up by charging over market for another. It's not just milk vs non-milk is competing for drinks, it's milk vs non-milk vs no milk vs not bothering with Starbucks and going to a competitor who's not trying to change you for your own good...
different sizes are the same price, though larger sizes cost more to make.
That's because only a tiny fraction of the cost is related to using more material; not true for almond or soy milk vs cow's milk. A better analogy would be a silk dress vs the exact same dress made of rayon...
'I think most people would order the type of milk they prefer, actually.'
This might work for something like dietary items, but would never work for cars, watches, houses, etc.
People will ALWAYS try to get the best thing for less money.
Is this a joke?
I buy milk and fake milk - both are super expensive in Biden's america.
Howard said...
"Vegan milk is gross industrial chemical soups designed to fool the mouth with gums, starches, enzymes etc."
Trader Joes makes a Soy Beverage (They have to say "beverage", by law they can't call it milk, for some reason)
There's only two ingredients, organic whole soybeans and water. That's it. No gums, synthetic vitamins, fillers etc. It's a bit expensive, but a little goes a long way, it doesn't take a lot to hit the spot, so I think it's a good value.
"James, cool it."
- Rolo Tomassi.
Nothing disrespectful above to show economic silliness. The difference in size of a small t-shirt and a large t-shirt is negligible. The slight addition of fabric is minute compared to the same design, infrastructure, advertising and distribution costs. Almond milk is expensive. The difference isn't negligible. It is a completely different product.
Just the headline writer again?
Meh. They're clueless.
I agree with you, Ann. It is a multi-variable calculation. That said, I would not assume that Starbucks is not fully aware of that calculation and has decided that it is sensible to pass on to consumers that marginally higher cost.
As for your point about clothing sizes, I think most people expect to pay more for Starbucks' larger-sized drinks. Why clothing is different, I don't know but suspect that in general the manufacturing costs per garment simply don't vary based on the marginal amount of fabric used.
The bottom line is that there is nothing unfair about Starbucks' pricing, but you are right that if it wanted to advertise some type of pro-vegan stance it could use pricing to do that.
Regarding clothes - do companies make as many of the smaller sizes as they do the larger sizes? Back in the day when I used to actually go into a department store it seemed as though there was one or two of the smaller sizes (0 or 2) and there would be five or more of each typical size (4, 6, or 8). It was a happy moment when you found a style you liked in your size.
It was frustrating but I didn’t expect companies to carry a larger inventory of the sizes fewer people purchased instead of the sizes they had a better chance of selling.
This was true even in the stores that catered to petite people (Petite Sophisticate - haven’t thought about that store in a decade or two).
Things are not static, if people who preferred normal milk found out they were subsidizing James Cromwell for gods sake, I expect they might take their business elsewhere.
But to be honest, I took my business elsewhere as soon as they became woke.
Althouse, you sweet, sweet summer child. "It would be mean to charge bigger people more." You must never shop at DXL or Big & Tall, or know folks who do. They upcharge fat people for clothes.
As a bigger person, I pay about $2 more for an inexpensive XXL "Faded Glory" or "George" brand polo shirt from Walmart. That's $2 more than those buying the normal non-fatass human sizes XS-S-M-L, which as you note, use less fabric than my plus sized shirts. So there is a 15% to 25% upcharge for bigger people even in such inexpensive clothing. I don't consider it mean, I consider it motivation to lose another 50 pounds this year.
Nice said:
I think it's a good value.
And that is what matters. Apparently vegan drinkers don't think their milks are a good value and aren't willing to put their money where there mouth's are. If they don't like, it they can buy something cheaper.
They are protesting the wrong people. Starbucks does not control the price of vegan "milks". I know I would not pay extra so that vegan can have their's at a discount. I would say it would get me to stop buy Starbucks, but I stopped going there years ago. I always patronize the independents.
I am patiently waiting for "Succession" season 4.
This story was fun to read. It's more appealing to worry about the milk options at Starbucks than the destruction of war.
I always patronize the independents
Come to think of it, aren't the vegan class and the "Don't shop at mega corps" Venn circles significantly overlapped? Maybe this will be a case of Starbucks caving to a group that actually are not their customer base and end up joining the "get woke go broke" industry.
Like you expect me to explain what appears in the Washington Post.
I suppose it could have been superglue, and they came prepared to unglue themselves without having to remove the counter with themselves still attached, or leaving their outer layer of skin on the premises. It is also possible the protestors claimed it was superglue when it was not, and the reporter took the claim at face value, which is not out of the question given the paper seems to exist as a propaganda arm for left wing causes. Or it is possible that the report has no idea what "superglue" is. Journalists are not the brightest bunch.
"I’ve never heard small-size people complain."
Not your exact example (which has been explained above), but compare airline obesity policies. When there is no real effect, no price difference. When there is a real effect, you pay more.
Or, and hear me out here, you could just not buy at Starbucks...nah, better to try to boss them around.
The Left have never heard of economics. They favor rent-control which always and everywhere reduces the supply of housing thus jacking up prices. They favor higher min wage which always reduces opportunities for the young and minorities, especially young black males. etc. They simply favor control even if the result is catastrophe.
I suspect most of the higher cost for nut and grain "milk" is due to spoilage. They have a shorter shelf-life after opening and are unlikely to go unused. The solution is to only buy the "vegan" milk in individual disposable plastic containers.
But of course, vegans would be horrified if the frothing pitcher or wand still had milk traces in them. So it might simply be an upcharge for the annoyance and disruption of the staff's workflow.
As for the clothing comparison. The cost of fabric, thread and the additional stitches in clothing production across sizes is trivial compared to the benefits of having a variety of sizes on sales price.
And better yet, buy your own pound of Starbucks and put your own half and half in it like I do. They can take their vegan crap and shove it.
And even better still, buy the bulk bean from Costco who gets it roasted by Starbucks and use your own half and half. Nothing beats that fresh ground scent in the morning air!
“Trader Joes makes a Soy Beverage (They have to say "beverage", by law they can't call it milk, for some reason)”
Can’t say milk b/c they were taken to court for it. The definition of milk is pretty specific and- mammalian.
As someone pointed out- kinda hard to milk a soybean or almond w/out the endowment of teats(just so you know, we refer to them as tits on this farm, but I clean it up when cityfolk are here!
https://mercyforanimals.org/blog/federal-court-dismisses-lawsuit-rules-almond/
I’m wrong! That sucks.
"catastrophic groundwater raping in drought stricken California."
Gaia had it coming, maybe even asked for it. She shouldn't have been flaunting it like she does out there in Californicate.
Thanks, Nice. I'll stick to goat milk.
'It's not good business to deliberately lose money on one product and try to make it up by charging over market for another.'
Sure, but they'll make it up in volume...
I bought print for decades.
A typical quote would be 1,000 pieces at $1/piece. 10,000 at $.25/piece. 100,000 at .03/piece. You get the idea. A lot of the cost of print is in the setup.
I would tell the printer, 'So if I buy a million pieces they'll be free?
I think this nation of cow milk drinkers already agreed to pay more for their milk when 61 million of them voted for Joe Biden. Wait...what? 81 million? Seriously? Well I find that hard to believe.
But, even more. They chose higher milk prices over plentiful gas. So vegans have no room to whine. We're all paying more for everything. I don't expect James Cameron to know this. But I loved him as Tootsie.
Wait...what?
Super Glue or the like is used as sutures
https://www.centerforfacialappearances.com/2016/07/15/replacing-stitches-with-super-glue-by-john-mccann-md-phd/
The people who go to Starbucks are already over paying for coffee as it is. I don’t think they would even notice the extra cost if Starbucks charged extra for vegan milk versus real milk. I don’t drink coffee and I don’t get how Starbucks is so popular. I am amazed at the people I know who do have to have their Starbucks coffee every day and who then complain about the cost of food at the grocery store, especially since Bidenflation hit the fan.
Gilbar said:
"If you ask a Cow, she'd MUCH rather not have that milk in her udders"
Did the cow also choose to have the farmer artificially inseminate her? Because without that, there's no milk.
Your attempt at a `gotcha!' answer demonstrated how little you understand about dairying, Gilbar. Yeah, cows do like the relief - but that milk is caused by something the cow might very well wish to avoid.
Grocery store foods are by and large commodities. They are sold for production and delivery cost plus a modest profit. The gourmet and deli sections have greater mark up, and places like Whole Foods charge a whole lot more. Bulk natural foods like oatmeal aren't marked up as heavily processed and advertised breakfast cereal. Etc.
Clothes are largely fashion items, and routinely marked up by a huge, huge amount. This is why "Buy 2 get 1 free" or "Save 50%" sales are routine. The manufacturing cost can be 10% or 15% of the price tag. The rise of H&M and Uniqlo in part follow from reducing profit margins to commodity levels (and they cut quality too). Costs related to size differences for a shirt or pair of jeans amounts to maybe 1% or 2% of the retail price.
James Cromwell was the commencement speaker when my older son graduated from the Savannah College of Art and Design. As my wife said: "All he had to do was say, 'That'll do, graduates. That'll do,' and they would have loved him and told their grandchildren about it." Instead, he delivered a tirade against "The One Percent" (Cromwell is in the Two Percent.) and voter suppression in Florida. It was so undistinguished the local newspaper didn't even quote him in their story. He's a self-aggrandizing prick.
“ The first commenter has it completely correct, Althouse. Why should I pay more for a Corvette than for a Chevy Malibu- why can't General Motors just average out the cost of the cars so that a Corvette costs as much as a Malibu? If General Motors did this, everyone would want a Corvette, and no one would want a Malibu- and this isn't a reductio ad absurdum argument on my part- it is directly on point.”
Under the calculation I proposed, if 100% took the Corvette, the price would reflect the cost of making the Corvette.
But that’s not what would happen with milk and milk substitutes. Some would want milk. I would. I’d just adjust and say
I understand Starbucks’ support of vegetarians and think I’m helping make the world a better place with more vegetarians. Or I could go somewhere else. Would Starbucks end up selling less overall? Not clear. It would get some good publicity and some might go out of their way to go there.
Does Chik-fil-A sell more overall because of its virtuous display of staying closed on Sunday?
“ I believe Elmer had a partner, Elsie, presumably both of them Borden trademarks. Elsie came first.”
Elsie is on cans of evaporated milk, a topic discussed in the first post of the day.
Would we still keep cows around if we didn't milk them and eat them? A vegan civilization wouldn't have much use for them.
Cow’s milk is subsidized already — https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/06/12/best-way-help-dairy-farmers-is-get-them-out-dairy-farming/
So its perceived relative cheapness is fake.
And stores sell milk cheap to get people into the stores to buy other things.
How surprised would you be if Starbucks changed this rule?
I think the almond milk upcharge is something like 70 cents. Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart.
'And even better still, buy the bulk bean from Costco who gets it roasted by Starbucks and use your own half and half. Nothing beats that fresh ground scent in the morning air!
I buy Peets in bulk at Costco. Great deal.
I also buy Peets gift cards so I get my Peets at their stores at a 20% discount.
Starbucks is undrinkable at their stores...I'm sure I could make a better cup at home even using their coffee.
'Under the calculation I proposed, if 100% took the Corvette, the price would reflect the cost of making the Corvette.'
If the average price were set before you knew that everyone would take the Corvette, then you'd lose money as the Corvette costs more to make than the Malibu.
If the price were corrected after you knew everyone would choose the Corvette, then sure.
But the average price of the two cars would be less than the cost to produce the Corvette, hence a money loser.
But it would be a fair assumption that most people would choose the Corvette.
Stay in the legal field. You would get crushed as a car dealer.
Ann Althouse said...
Does Chik-fil-A sell more overall because of its virtuous display of staying closed on Sunday?
Hell Yes!
Nothing (i mean, NOTHING) makes one Crave Chik-fil-A more than driving by a closed store.
IF they were open 24/7, their sandwiches would quickly become old hat..
BUT! Since they are Frequently Closed; people's cravings are Continually renewed
'Does Chik-fil-A sell more overall because of its virtuous display of staying closed on Sunday?'
'Virtuous display'?
Judgmental much?
It's not a 'display.'
It is because of a sincerely-held religious belief of the founder.
So sincere that they surely lose revenue because of it.
Mark said...
Gilbar said: "If you ask a Cow, she'd MUCH rather not have that milk in her udders"
- but that milk is caused by something the cow might very well wish to avoid.
NOW, who's being naive?
'I think the almond milk upcharge is something like 70 cents. Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart.'
I can buy a bottle of wine at the store and pay $20.
The same bottle at a restaurant will be $40 or more likely $50.
I may not like it, but that is the reality of restaurant sales.
And yes, Starbucks is a restaurant.
But I'm also smart enough that when I want to have a $100 bottle of wine with dinner when I go out, I bring my own and pay the $20 corkage fee.
That way my bottle costs $120 and not $250.
I think the almond milk upcharge is something like 70 cents. Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart.
If you are talking margin, maybe not. if almond milk is 33% more than cow, than is $0.70 33% more of the milk component of the actual beverage? Dunno, I don't shop there. Does seem a bit steep, though. $4.50 for the drink. $1.70 for the burnt beans, $0.70 for flavors, $2.10 for the milk. 33% upcharge on $2.10 is $0.70.
Mark: cows come into heat every 21days. In “the real world”- (whatever that)is since the Dawn of domestication/genetic manipulation- something would certainly breed her. Then, a 9month pregnancy, calving and milk. Our herd average is around 22,000. That’s a yearly average of #milk/cow. Modest- but, we’re organic. Only milking 2x/day. Some farms milk 3x and robots average higher.
I’ll tell you a little something about a bovine in heat… don’t turn your back on her. She’ll jump you from behind. Squirrelly girls.
Now I’m going to check out that Wapo link!
OMG 70 cents. Which is 64 cents in pre-Biden inflation money.
Can we riot?
Also, I’m sick of paying for bottled water when they give other people tap water for free. They should equalize the prices rather than punishing me.
Where on earth are you getting $2 quart for almond milk? Never seen legitimate almond milk for under $3, and that's the cheapest (silk at Wegmans), its crazy expensive compared to the barebones milk you can buy at wal-mart. Wife (and I'm guessing most people) drinks almond milk with coffee not because of anything vegetarian related, but because its deemed to be healthier with weight control.
Does your argument becomes much more compelling when you glue your hand to the counter???
I don't think so.
Superstars becoming super unglued over Milk vs Mylk -- now that's funny.
Elmer is a bull. Elsie is a cow.
Ancient Romans used almond milk and called it milk (lac, Latin.)
Factory Mylk's premium pricing is justifiable because of its more expensive blending, bottling procedures, and packaging materials.
Dairy Milk has almost no associated R&D or marketing costs. The most outstanding share of the few cost components of dairy milk goes to the raw material. Analysts and dairy farmers found that dairy milk is actually underpriced.
Dairy cows are not natural creatures; they were invented and are totally dependent on human care. Not drinking milk kills cows.
Drinking any kind of Mylk does not save cows. Cows must be artificially milked every day. Not milking a dairy cow, can cause a lot of problems. A dairy cow will produce about 8 gallons (30 liters) a day and stopping the milking of them will cause the udder to expand until it can't expand any further. The cow will be in serious pain at this point. Driven by the enormous size of the udder it will also be in the way of everyday activities, preventing the cow from properly standing, sitting, or lying down. If pressure still isn’t released, the udder can rupture (not explode) or get infected, ultimately leading to the cow's death, if she is not treated and pressure is released.
Dairy cow milking neglect can cause mastitis, a bacterial infection. It causes udder inflammation leading to open teat ducts, allowing bacteria to enter and infect the udder. The untreated infection will kill the cow.
Not drinking dairy cow milk will kill the cows, not save them.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna887941
I found the above w/a cool video when I couldn’t get into the Wapo article.
Farming has always been low parity. Does the government pay us? There came a time that (I think)a law was passed or program created that said if milk prices dropped below a certain amount/cwt then we’d get compensation. It’s an insurance, of sorts. We pay a fee for it. It’s not free $$.
We call it the welfare check.
Farmers on welfare.
To artificially suppress the cost of human food. There’s also something called CCC. The milk and cheese programs for WIC etc are part of that, if I’m not mistaken.
Oh, it’s all rigged.
Starbucks is brilliant.
Putting soy milk in your coffee is virtue signaling. Starbucks is just charging for your charade. Genius!!
Clothes makers charge a premium for for XXL and above.
So which is better to subsidize - vegan milk or cow’s milk?
I know this could never happen but what if there was a nationwide shortage of baby formula? Which would be a better base? Almond milk or cow’s milk? Which industry is more important for the health of our children?
Clothes makers charge a premium for for XXL and above.
“ I understand Starbucks’ support of vegetarians and think I’m helping make the world a better place with more vegetarians.”
These wackos are vegans, not vegetarians—vegetarians drink milk. And if you think the world would be a better place with more vegans you’ve apparently never met one.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2021/11/16/wisconsin-dairy-farm-families-share-challenges-during-difficult-time/6397570001/
I have to confess- when the people who are pushing for the “destruction” of the old ways finally win, I hope they come to the realization, afterward, that they were wrong. And, I hope they feel the despair viscerally. Like these families do.
Althouse logic: "Starbucks should charge the same for all sizes of coffee! Why not, clothing manufacturers do it!"
The "perceived relative cheapness" of milk at Starbucks is, in fact, real, because Starbucks does not subsidize milk production. Starbucks is a beneficiary of the subsidy, it buys the cheap milk.
Have you looked into government subsidies for almond farmers and made the comparison?
Why are you digging your heels in on this? You may think it would be a good business decision for Starbucks, but the critics have valid points also.
Why would we call this an upcharge? If kale costs more than romaine, is that an upcharge? Almond milk isn’t milk. It may be a milk substitute for some people, the way kale, romaine, and arugula can be used in some of the same circumstances, taste depending, but the cost of production, the demand, and the actual substitutes as shown by consumer preference all differ.
If coffee with milk can be had anywhere (in the office staff room, at 7-11), but a good almond milk coffee drink is harder to find, we should expect it to cost more, no?
Even assuming that is wrong, is there some reason to thinking that Starbucks is bad at pricing for maximizing profit? If they charge more of almond milk, I assume they are still charging the most profitable price. If they could make more by equalizing out the “milks,” they would.
I think "gouging" is rarely a meaningful term. Not saying it's impossible, but here's what I suspect happened:
Manager of A Starbucks in Pig Knuckle Arkansas: You want us to start carrying 15 different types of fake milk?
Starbucks Corporate Headquarters: Yes, it's part of a big vegan friendly initiative.
MOASIPKA: But it's gonna take up five extra shelves in the fridge. And nobody orders it anyway, so I'm just gonna throw it all out every week.
SCH: I understand, but we need this to be available in every Starbucks. How about a 70 cents per drink upcharge for it to cover the extra hassle and wastage?
MOASIPKA: Better than nothing, I guess, and I don't have much choice do I? Whatever. Nobody's gonna buy it anyway so I'll probably still come out behind... Sigh.
"Almond milk is expensive. The difference isn't negligible."
We can't say that without knowing how much almond milk Starbucks buys. If the vast majority of its customers use regular milk, then the cost of averaging the two is a drop in the bucket.
Milk was $1.50/qt before Biden. Alas, no longer.
A large, messy human glued himself to a food-dispensing countertop. All of the chatter here about the properties of superglue and the cost of fake milk ignore the OCD gross-out of what he did. There aren't enough sage smudge sticks to purify that.
Elmer's would be inappropriate for gluing yourself to the counter. It takes way too long to dry.
Cromwell is said to be 82. Being myself in my mid 70s, I suspect Cromwell would soon need to go to the restroom. I would have enjoyed watching him squirm with his hand glued to the counter.
I share the sad disillusionment about Cromwell, Babe's innocent farmer. Heck, I remember him in All in the Family. And his role in L.A. Confidential was jaw-dropping. One of the greatest reveals of all time.
So many great actors are not only terrible people, but complete and utter morons. A stunt like this at Starbucks is something I might have done as a stupid leftist teenager. For someone his age to do it... Hard to imagine.
different sizes are the same price, though larger sizes cost more to make.
If you think about it, why should Starbucks charge more for larger sizes of drinks? People will just order the size they want. I'm tall, I need a larger drink to fill my belly than a tiny person needs. Why should I have to pay more for equal satiation?
Let us place the order, and Starbucks can charge the same for everything. That would be very popular, and it would seem fair.
To be clear - there is no such thing as vegan milk, almond milk, oat milk, etc. The definition of milk is: "an opaque white fluid rich in fat and protein, secreted by female mammals for the nourishment of their young."
@Ann:I think the almond milk upcharge is something like 70 cents. Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart.
If you want to never be able to buy anything personal-sized, we can call this "gouging", sure.
I guess it's "gouging" when you pay $2.00 for a can of soda from a vending machine vs $2.00 for a liter bottle at the grocery store. Because convenience has no value to the consumer, I suppose.
"Superglue is very brittle -- one can often just pull away as the top layer of dead skin separates. Elmer's melts with water. The one I'd fear is Gorilla Glue -- that stuff penetrates and expands."
Might I suggest 5 minute Epoxy?
"I think the almond milk upcharge is something like 70 cents. Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart."
If you think they are gouging buy coffee elsewhere. They are offering a product and others are agreeing to pay the price. That is kind of how commerce works.
"I assume the vegan milks are more expensive than cow's milk, but Starbucks could average it out and adjust all the prices and thereby avoid giving people a money reason to choose cow's milk."
And here, just today, I was just thinking as I walked out of the hardware store with 2 small items I needed and could not possibly fabricate myself, what a genius system is capitalism. I felt truly grateful.
But that was before I was made aware of the crushing oppression visited upon Starbucks patrons with a vegan fetish. Now I see all things should cost the same, regardless of the cost to make them. Average it out! Turned me right into a communist, that.
And stores sell milk cheap to get people into the stores to buy other things.
That hardly seems fair. What if you don't want milk? They should charge the same price for the other things that they pay for the milk. Just average out everything at the whole store, and charge the same price for every item. Otherwise, charging more for the other things is gouging.
"Aren’t they gouging? I think in a grocery store, milk is something like $1.50 a quart and almond milk is $2 a quart."
In a restaurant a bottle of wine sells for about 4x its retail price in a liquor store. Is the restaurant "gouging"?
Starbucks coffee beans cost about $8/lb in a grocery store, and $11/lb, in the local Starbucks. Are they "gouging"?
No. There are different cost drivers between food service and retail, thus a price differential between the two. The higher price in the food service establishment reflects the actual cost differences between the two types of sellers.
Milk is a common loss leader in grocery stores. This is true. Lots of products are used as loss leaders to drive store traffic. Starbucks has other items tagged as loss leaders to get the traffic into the store. Loss leaders should be highly popular, high turnover, and preferably a commodity. None of which is true of almond milk.
Could Starbucks use almond milk as a loss leader? Sure. But they'd make it up somewhere else. They virtue signal as part of their business model. But don't expect them to take a hit on the bottom line just because some high profile white male Karen thinks he's being "discriminated" against.
There's no such thing as price gouging. If he's charging less than it's worth to you, you make a profit on the difference. If not, don't buy it.
I've been drinking Klim (milk backwards, a product that has been around my entire life). Put in half the amount recommended and it passes very nicely for skim milk. Somewhat past the best-before date, is why I'm using it.
IIRC Starbucks used to charge the same for almond milk but then started upcharging. I didn’t say, that’s it, I’m done with Starbucks. I’m with TIV—I like the coffee. And I like their almond milk too which is a bit sweeter and thicker than the store brand I buy. I’m sure Howard is right though. We’re screwing the environment in pursuit of unattainable earth justice. Anyone read The Vegetarian Myth?
My head is spinning. Starbucks is a private company, they can charge whatever they damn please for their products, and if you don't like it, go down the street to a different coffee store.
Umm -- isn't that the Twitter argument? We're private company and we print what we want and censor what we want?
But here there is no argument that Stabucks is a utility or a common carrier.
Why can't people grok the difference between a common carrier, a public utility and a private store?
I suppose the federal government could say if you buy federally subsidized cow milk, you can't sell it for less than vegan milk -- but I think you'd find almonds ARE federally subsidized as well.
Why shouldn't football stadiums "average out" the cost of front row seats and top end seats?
Ann -- "uncharge? oh a restaurant can't "uncharge" for truffles rather than mushrooms? "Gouging"? thats the language of
Leninists -- the hoarders! "Gouging" is a concept when goods are in short supply. It is NOT a concept relevant to differential pricing goods NOT in shorty supply, especially goods that are NOT staples.
Oh, Ann....I thought you were smarter than this.
Why are we arguing economics when the topic is virtue demonstration?
========
Q: should there be upcharge for virtue signalling or subsidy [oh no back to economics again]
Althouse seems to be channelling Bernie Sanders.
Its nor right to gouge people for their almond milk lattes!
BTW, I use almond milk all the time for cereal, but it is horrible in coffee. The idiots who ask for that should be charged. (I use lactose-free whole milk in my coffee).
Perhaps Starbucks could charge the same price for the tall, grande, and Venti.
Althouse, you need to buy milk somewhere else if you are paying $6/gallon. 2% and Whole milk that I buy was $3.29/gal just this afternoon, which is 82 cents/quart. The almond milk I bought a couple of weeks ago was almost $6/gal ($2.98 for the half-gallon I did buy).
A 70 cent upcharge on a venti isn't unreasonable given they cost about $5-6 already. If it is gouging, they are gouging on the regular milk items, too, but then I don't really call what they charge gouging- too pejorative. It is what their market bears.
My grandparents owned a dairy farm in Wisconsin. I want various States' Attorneys General to launch consumer protection lawsuits against any industry or business that sells, "Milk" that doesn't come from a mammal.
LOL! Under your proposal, more people would take the almond milk and fewer would take the real milk, unless you just don't believe in the demand/supply curve. Starbucks would end up losing more money on selling the almond milk at a loss while making less and less on the real milk priced at a greater amount to the marginal cost. Rinse and repeat.
Sure, loss-leaders are real thing, and I am sure Starbucks have a few within their items for sale like a lot of retailers, but it is very unlikely almond milk drinkers are the kinds of massed consumers you target with loss-leading items- they just aren't going to be the majority of the customer base anywhere. You might as well say they should sell the different sizes for the same cost- there is no difference in kind for that argument.
And Barry beat me to it.
Regarding price gouging, seen in an article about how the government (or their concessionaires) adjust prices on FasTrak type toll road lanes:
When the government does it, they call it "Demand Management".
When you do it, they call it "Price gouging".
" I want to question whether it was "superglue." Then you're probably asking the wrong question.
People use "superglue" as a synonym for "cyanoacrylate adhesive," but, really, "superglue is not a material, it's a brand name.
And, Superglue (the brand) has been doing brand-extension lately, with the result that one can now buy Superglue brand epoxy glue, or a Superglue brand solvent glue, or Superglue brand wood glue (etc. etc.).
This brand-extension seems ill-advised to me, as I don't doubt people are buying Superglue brand glues without reading much beyond the brand name, only later to realize they've bought something other than what they thought they were buying.
In any case, I fail to see why Starbucks should not charge whatever it wishes for what it offers, and if you don't like it you can go elsewhere or do without. It's not as if there aren't hundreds of Starbucks-clones (let alone as if what they dispense were somehow essential to life).
Blogger Fritz said...
""Superglue is very brittle -- one can often just pull away as the top layer of dead skin separates. Elmer's melts with water. The one I'd fear is Gorilla Glue -- that stuff penetrates and expands."
Might I suggest 5 minute Epoxy?"
Red Loktite. Cures in the absence of air and takes 450 deg.F to break the bond.
“…preventing the cow from properly standing, sitting, or lying down.”
Lol. Silly, cows don’t sit. Not on their asses, anyway. Not intentionally.
"You might as well say they should sell the different sizes for the same cost"
Hardly as absurd as it's being presented. Panera lets you refill your coffee for free. IHOP will refill your coffee as often as you want. Nearly every fast-food chain offers free refills on soft drinks.
They should continue to charge whatever they want for the vegan milk.
And they should leave this giant dork superglued to the counter for a week or so with nothing but cow's milk to drink.
Althouse said
In clothing sales, different sizes are the same price, though larger sizes cost more to make. I’ve never heard small-size people complain. It’s actually perceived as fair. It would be mean to charge bigger people more.
Is is true that a size 8 and a size 12 are the same price, but it is very common for Women's sizes or Big and Tall men's clothes to be priced a bit higher than regular sizes. Not a huge difference, but enough to make up for the extra fabric. I doubt that people buying petite clothes have ever given a thought to the price of X-Large items, much less pondered whether or not the prices for different sizes are fair.
Extending Joe Smith's analysis of the pricing of Corvettes and Malibus, I think Ann's proposal does not take into account enough of the consequences. If Corvettes and Malibus are priced at the average of the current prices, some people who need a four door car will not buy Corvettes, but will instead shop for a car that is competitive to the Malibu but lower in price, possibly or probably from a competitor to GM, certainly some will buy from a competitor. Presumably no one will buy a Malibu because they are too expensive. Since no one will buy a Malibu at something like a 50% premium to the prior price, GM will end up selling no Malibus and Corvettes at a presumed loss. So, GM will need to abandon this average pricing policy (because no Malibus to average and to avoid Corvette losses), and go back to pricing Corvettes normally, and try to recover lost Malibu sales by lowering the price, probably lower than prior prices in order to attract new customers. All around, this would be a financial and customer satisfaction disaster for GM, even accounting for the effect of the satisfied customers who bought Corvettes at a substantial discount. This analysis of consequences should be obvious, but apparently is not. GM would (and should) never undertake such a policy.
Zev said...
"They should continue to charge whatever they want for the vegan milk.
And they should leave this giant dork superglued to the counter for a week or so with nothing but cow's milk to drink."
Sounds about right.
farmgirl said...
“…preventing the cow from properly standing, sitting, or lying down.”
Lol. Silly, cows don’t sit. Not on their asses, anyway. Not intentionally.
Search "sitting cow" for many photos of sitting cows. Don't search "sitting bull" as that is a set of totally different photos.
https://youtu.be/lLuC1id9_dg
Yeah- they get up butt-1st, so older, weaker or injured girls try to get up this way.
Horses do get up front 1st.
Thank you 4the link.
Post a Comment