It seems like most of the responses are focusing on whether or not Starbucks coffee sucks or not, and whether or not people who drink Starbucks are only doing so for the status symbol. Arguing that Starbucks has become so ubiquitous simply because people think carrying around a cup with their logo on it gives them some kind of cachet is like claiming that 7-11 succeeded because of their stylish slurpee cups.

Before 7-11, most places opened at 9 and closed at 6, and if you needed a cup of coffee or a pack of diapers between 6:01 pm and 8:59 am, you were SOL. 7-11 tapped a need in our culture previously unmet, garnered immense success, spawned legions of immitators and now few of us do not live within 5 square miles of a place to grab a soda and a box of tampons at 3am.

Starbucks offered something, besides coffee, to American culture that we did not have before. Europe has a history of cafe culture, places where you can sit for hours reading a paper for no more than the price of a cup of coffee, or places that you can arrange to meet someone for an informal chat, again, for no more than the cost of a bottle of water. In fact, I'm not even sure Starbucks requires you to buy something to sit at one of their tables.

Before Starbucks, there were no places that people could either arrange to meet, or sit by themselves, that were not restaurants or bars. I went to college in the old days, before Starbucks was everywhere. We used to gather for study sessions at Denny's, much to the wait staff dismay. Gradually there started to be more and more rules. You had to order at least a pot of coffee. Groups of more than two had to order at least $10 worth of something. You couldn't stay for longer than x after your plates were cleared.

This was understandable from a Denny's waiter POV. Twelve kids at a table for six hours ordering nothing but a 99 cent cup of coffee is a disaster for their tips. But for that group, there was a need too: someplace to go that wasnt home or work where they could just sit and be, the third place.

Starbucks has institutionalized and mass marketed the third place, and it has become successful because there was a need in our society for that. It has spawned legions of chain and independent coffee houses which are also successful. I live in the Pacific Northwest and you cannot spin a cat without hitting a coffee place, most of which are not Starbucks.

If you want to understand Starbucks by focusing on the coffee, you're focusing on the wrong thing.

Very well said. It sounds as if you have read Howard Schultz's book, which is where I first heard the phrase "the third place." Starbucks was extremely lucky with their timing (as all big businesses must be) but they really did have a wonderful concept, centered around the idea that to be truly successful, a business must focus on both its customers and employees. Hence, they were pioneers in providing health care to part-time workers and, at least in the early days, were extremely responsive to both customer and employee suggestions.

Just to be the devil's advocate, did that need for the "third place" really exist or did starbucks create the need and with some great marketing we (the consumers) suddenly felt some gaping black holes in our caffeinated souls that only a "third place" could fill? Like with all the television commercials advertising these great new inventions that we just can't live without and to pull out our credit cards and to pick up the phone and call, i.e. electric can openers that go around the can all on its own... i'm just saying.

It doesn't matter to me either way whether people like starbucks or not, or whether it's giant corporate monster trying to take over the world...as long as nobody is getting killed or tortured what is it to me? Don't forget we're in America, isn't this what America is all about, big companies putting "ma and pa" shops out of business. So technically, they're fullfilling their patriotic duty. So let's salute them!!