I usually get something .

But they have never said anything about having to order or leave.

...even if it’s just a bagel. Even though I know it’s not required it just seems like the right thing to do since I’m using their premises.

At the bare minimum, I’ll buy just a boring cup of black coffee and leave a substantial tip. That’s how those places stay open, but at the same time there are plenty of people who just go there and don’t buy anything. I guess it’s just goes with the business...

I hate public restrooms so I cannot imagine going into any store for that reason. But reading all the posts here today, I see it seems to be the waiting room and restroom of choice. Who knew?

I have been into Panera maybe three times total. Only in a Buffalo Wild Wings once.

I guess I am not into going into trendy places.

The few times a year that I might buy it out, I stop by Dunkin‘ Donuts. I am the same as you on trendy places. I remember being amazed at the prices; I love coffee, but those prices are just a ripoff.

and you are right about the prices. I often wonder where all the money comes from. I pack my lunches everyday. Otherwise I would be dropping $8 at lunch everyday.

I love coffee but I'm not too crazy about theirs, except for Pumpkin Spice Lattes. When it is not PSL season, I have no reason to buy anything there.

I've worked from Starbucks, had job interviews there, and even launched canvasses from there. Nobody has ever yelled at me.

If they didn't want people camping out all day, they wouldn't have wifi, comfortable seating, and outlets for laptops.

If I didn't get anything, I was with someone who did
I think if you use a private businesses facilities you need to purchase something there.
It's not a public waiting room

ordering much if anything. This is not about what a person should do at a business...this is about a double standard for White people and Black people...one rule for whites and one for People of color...and also a racist manager who was scared of Black people. Had that manager not been fired, I would never have set foot in their again.

The post was on the principle of using private facilities. I have used public restroom rarely, pretty much all are gross. But if I go into a private place, I buy something. Even if I am waiting for someone at a hotel and security approach me, I courteously tell them that I am waiting for X person who is a guest, never had issues. It boils down to simple conduct, businesses in big cities pay very high rents, two hundred people coming each day and staying but buying nothing adds up over a month when it is time to write a rent check and pay utilities.

stated that these young men did something wrong in this OP. They didn't. I can't imagine how it would feel to be treated this way. Starbucks singled out young men of color. Yes I know it was the manager...but he represents Starbucks. And Starbucks was slow to respond. I can't imagine how it would feel to be treated this way. I have spent much time in Starbucks and never once been asked to order something. My husband's old friend from the Bronx is a doctor. He is a super nice guy. He drives a nice car. He is stopped at least once a week by the cops. He told us he fears for his life every time. This guy drives like a little old lady ...never speeds. I have been stopped once in a number of years because my registration was expired. (And more recently was harrassed but that is another story.). I can't imagine how it feels to have 'arrived'...gone to college, got a good job and be rousted by a racist Starbucks manager or be followed around by security in a store or stopped by cops because a Black person in a nice car must have stolen it...it is not about using the bathroom...it about equal treatment under the law.

pht...phth....phthahaha! Look at that mug.

I have great paranoia about being arrested. I know young people are more comfortable in Starbucks, Barnes and noble, etc.

Quisnos Sub shop next door a couple years ago. I would buy a sub next door and eat it in Starbucks, I think I always bought a coffee.

I was hungry for a tasty pastry but they all looked dry and stale. Walked out. Went to Cafe Moka, a local French Bistro, and had a fresh baked almond croissant. But I’m an old lady and we have that wonderful ability to be totally invisible to anyone under 30 (and therefore the Starbuck’s staff), so no one chastised me for not ordering.

you are hanging in there without buying anything.

Also, I was in a study group...couldn't afford anything at the time.

I needed to use their WiFi to sync something for work. Sometimes I purchase something and other times I don’t. They usually seem too busy to notice.

To use the restroom.

To wait for a friend.

To wait for an Uber.

To wait for a bus.

To wait for my movie to start.

And so does everybody else.

It's fuckin' Starbucks.

Those men were arrested because they were black.

and black men are assumed to be of a lower socioeconomic class?

AT least I thought in this ONE case, as I suppose from a legal standpoint you have to go case by case, that this was the case. Geez, think I could say "case" a few more times?



But, as you say, businesses including Starbucks are getting aggressive with the homeless.

It is true many homeless shoplift, it is also true we have a system that rewarded Donald Trump to become the most powerful man on earth, so our capitalist system needs SERIOUS work.

I dont fault most homeless who shoplift, it is wrong and illegal and I expect them to be arrested, but I dont fault most of them. Drug addiction is treated like a crime in this country, so you are gonna have completely absurd behaviors as a result by those afflicted.

My then HS son was auditioning for a summer drum corp, all day. I had 8 hours to kill. At one point I went into a Starbucks and watched a movie on my tablet for a few hours.

I don't drink coffee. I had already eaten lunch. I had my own water. No one blinked an eye at me.

BTW, I'm a middle aged white woman.

I always buy something. The ones I frequent have signs on the bathroom, for customers only. The only place I use the bathroom without buying is McDonalds. I’ve bought there enough without using the bathroom, I figure they owe me.

Starbucks is a business. Their real estate costs money. Their heat/AC costs money. Their wifi costs money. Selling products is the source of said money. Only entitled assholes think it's ok to take services from a business without buying product.

It doesn't matter whether there is a Starbucks on every corner, or every 20 feet. The fact that it's "Convenient" to do so doesn't make it right. I'm sure the Starbucks near you does its best to tolerate the entitled assholes, but that doesn't make it right. Nor does the fact that you've gotten away with it make it right.

Fortunately, the vast majority of people who go in there do the right thing.

The best locations in a big city can have rents of $14,000-$20,000 per month, on top of that electric utilities can run $800-$2000 per month, natural gas can run $500-$800 per month depending on the menu. Then add in salaries and payroll taxes. It is preposterous for anyone to go into a private business, use the facilities even for a few minutes and feel that is their right to do without patronizing the place and leaving some revenue for it.

I'm not a fan of people hanging out in any establishment without at least buying something, but that isn't Starbucks' official policy, and if they allow whites to hang out there then the same should apply to these black guys who were using Starbuck's as it brands itself, as a meetup place.

Nor was I addressing Starbucks policy. I was stating the reality that businesses that rent in large cities face and why a person should at least buy a coffee or a pack of gum when going inside for any thing more than a minute. To me, that is simple common courtesy.

For more than a minute?

Someone said they will use McDonald's bathroom without buying. It's all the same damned thing.

SBX gets A LOT of money from me during the year, so if I stop to pee at one during a run, or lounge around in one while traveling for two hours to use wifi, you damned well better believe I will.

To say this isn't "the right thing to do," or cheating the store is LAUGHABLE. Folks just want to victim blame.

But we are, and instead we reward people like Rump.

The fact that many people have gone to other Starbucks and loitered with no issues isn't relevant to what occurred at this one location

they had waited for hours and were allowed to use the bathroom without buying anything.

Neither would I. Absolutely the policy should be uniform, always. My reply in this thread was motivated by this apparently prevailing attitude at DU which says that companies like this owe people the chance to take up revenue-generating space for free.

It's ironic really, because the same people who want (Rightly) for employees to earn fair wages will simultaneously claim that Starbucks or some other business should just let people take up that space for nothing, completely missing the fact that employee wages have to come from somewhere.

The poster who replied to me, that prompted you, was correct in enumerating this point. There isn't any magic way of keeping the lights on and employees paid by giving up revenue. Dollars in must greatly exceed dollars out, or no more business.

I think it's adorable you believe that denial of proper deference to a corporation makes one a self-entitled asshole.

I think it';s even more adorable you make that charge lacking any objective evidence at all to support it.

But then again, we all have our narratives and sacred cows.

other than simple math? Money in has to significantly exceed money out or business goes bye-bye. That's a fact, and facts don't care about feelings.

As to your claim about "Proper deference" is just histrionic and a little silly. What makes one an entitle asshole is believing that he or she is "owed" something like this.

Small in the sense that I'm the owner, the clerk, and the one who cleans the PUBLIC bathroom. We have some comfy chairs. We not only allow people to hang out in our space without buying anything, we take it as a compliment that we are succeeding in our effort to provide a comfortable and safe place for members of our community whether they have $10 or $20 bucks to spend or not. It is warm in here on crappy days when people have nowhere to be while they wait 30 minutes for the next bus, or for their ride to pick them up, or for their friend to show up for their dinner date across the street.

And you know what? Sometimes the snow on their boots melts on the floor. Sometimes people look at the products we sell and don't put them back exactly where they came from. Or they leave a little mess in the bathroom. But the people who do that are just as likely to be well-heeled, privileged folks staying out of the rain who feel ENTITLED to use our space without buying anything even though they could perfectly well afford it, as they are to be poor people who really don't have an extra $10 to spend.

I feel much more affinity with the latter. And I think my version of 'do the right thing' is very fucking different from yours.

It's a crime to be broke in America. And the irony is, these guys weren't broke. But they were black and that's close enough for the racists and those who think property is more important than HUMAN BEINGS.

But, IF you actually own a business, and IF you know what you're doing, then you already should know that your example doesn't apply here. Your product isn't the same as theirs, and your "Comfy chairs" don't represent part of your revesignaling. Parking yourself in the Starbucks chair with no purchase equates to grabbing a product off your shelf and leaving with it.

But I'll play; when those people come in who "Don't have the extra $10 to spend," are you fine with them taking the product off the shelf and leaving with it anyway? Because if you are (And we both know you aren't ), THEN your argument carries weight. Then you can draw some equivalence to the Starbucks scenario. Otherwise, this is really just cute virtue signalling.

I don't steal from businesses or people. Ever. That's my idea of right. Perhaps it really is different from yours.

did not need to use the facilities and left as soon as my order was handed to me.

They know me, as I was a regular customer. (Not so much now; discovered I prefer Dunkin's coffee!)

A friend of mine spends MANY hours there with his computer, and orders maybe one coffee.

Management of 'the' philly branch know they were wrong, as does the rest of the world. Foolish now to keep beating on this; just enforce the rules.

If I go in, I buy coffee at a minimum.

I take all the used coffee grounds they'll give me for composting every summer. 30-lb bags sometimes. Haven't been told to buy something or get out yet, but then again I'm white.

don't like it and have the right to make me leave. I've gone into department stores and markets to use the restroom but not a restaurant, coffee shop, coffee house etc.

IT IS LITERALLY NO DIFFERENT!

I guess I should've.

I have never gone there to just hang out. That said, I do see people yapping away at their laptops in there.

Retirees, freelancers, many, many college students, study groups (both college kids and also "adult" groups like conversational Italian). THAT IS LITERALLY THEIR BUSINESS MODEL.

What they are counting on is that, on balance, most of the people hanging out there are of the opinion that there is a social obligation to buy something. If that is a more accurate statement of their business model, then I would assume that I should buy something, rather than to have other customers essentially covering the expense of my having a place to hang out.

I've never seen a commercial to the effect of "Come hang out at Starbucks and don't buy anything."

That said, I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've been in one.

Are they normally filled with homeless people? Because I'm pretty sure that many cities are not lacking for people in need of a place to hang out during the daytime. If they aren't, then I'm curious how their "business model" has not attracted them. Either that or there has been some form of selective enforcement at work all along, but it is not organized along racial lines.

Why didn't our friend Laser get a meeting with the CEO?

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10025378592

where they TELL you what their "business model" is -

is presented to the general public and forms the expectations of the potential customer. So when those expectations are not only not met, but were found to be bogus, then the calls for a boycott should not be a surprise.

And it is interesting that you chose to insert a hypothetical scenario (treatment of a homeless person) that has absolutely nothing to do with this case (racial profiling), but it does help to obfuscate the central relevant argument by using a false analogy.

I'm referring to an actual incident which happened to a DUer:

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10025378592

There's nothing "hypothetical" about the fact that a DUer was kicked out of a Starbucks for hanging out, and neither you nor anyone else speaking on behalf of Starbucks had word one to say about it.

The company spokesperson said it was up to the individual store. Most likely because the "hey, come hang out here" thing accomplishes different results in different places.

I'm not a Starbucks customer, but I'm pretty amazed that nobody seems to find homeless people hanging out in them. I'm asking how that works. That's not making an analogy or obfuscating any issue around an incident where I was not a witness to any of the events in question. I'm simply asking those who seem to profess knowledge of what Starbucks "policy" is, contrary to what their spokesperson says, of how this works.

Does the Starbucks you frequent have a significant population of homeless nearby, and do you have any explanation for the magic filter that keeps them out?

And if you believe the marketing material on their website is intended to be a statement of their "policy" to recreate an Italian cafe, then I suppose they should kick out anyone who isn't speaking Italian.

laserhaas, but the difference here is (as you probably know better than me) is who is considered part of a "protected class". And I know that activists are furiously trying to expand the definition.

But again, this is not the case of "homeless" men being accused of "trespassing", having an employee call 911, and then having the police remove them. But unfortunately there are too many out there who have a subconscious "perception" of them being exactly that, or being criminals or thugs. But that is not these customers' problem, but the problem of the accuser, and that is the mitigating factor that needs to be considered when coming upon this type of situation.

Regarding Starbucks and situations such as you describe, I have only been to one maybe 4 times total in my 56 years of life (at 3 different locations in 2 different states) and in all 4 cases, I went in, bought a coffee, and left. I am not a millennial who hangs out in coffee shops on wifi snapchatting or instagramming or tweeting or whatever nonsense they do. Before I retired, there were several local coffee lounges near my office that had the similar setup of sofas and tables and one even had a small library with gently used books and board games. I never sat there and "worked" (God forbid), I just got my coffee and maybe a bagel and left.

In fact, I just got in from being at a car dealer all day posting from an iPad while waiting for the car to be inspected and to get oil/fluid changes, tire rotations, etc. The service waiting room tables, chairs, stools, sofas and soft chairs as well as 2 TVs, a coffee machine and several cold beverage and snack vending machines. In addition, there were explicit signs that said "wifi here". I.e., a "lounge". I was there from 7 am when they let me in, until around 3:00 pm when they were done.

I cannot speak for other cities but I know here in Philly, there are hotlines that residents and businesses can call who will send out counselors to handle the homeless. That is a type of "resolution" that should be used (when available) to take care of the situation that you describe.

It’s not always clear whether sitting in a Starbucks or using a Starbucks restroom without purchasing any items is allowed. A company spokesperson said Starbucks does not have a broad policy prohibiting people from using restrooms or sitting inside for free, allowing individual stores to set their own rules.

...always order something. After my order is ready, I usually leave because they are mostly small and crowded - no place to sit.

Maybe there are nice luxurious Starbucks where one can sit all day, but I haven't found it yet. The ones I have been to are usually small with uncomfortable seating.

I am from Philly and currently live in the burbs. I often meet friends and co-workers in a Starbucks. Many times, I have sat and waited without ordering something (I like to wait for the other person/people before ordering). It's very common in Starbucks.

Never had anyone say anything to me. But, I'm white.

But I have never drank coffee.

Let alone enter a Starbucks.

I can't imagine a hot murky liquid when I can have wonderful ice water instead.

I have been in buildings that eventually became a Starbucks. I feel so sorry for those structures, and the sad decline in stature.

and must be required to enforce it more equally.

There are two separate issues here:

(1) Whether or not it is morally/ethically OK for customers to use a commercial establishment as a meetup place, waiting room, restroom, etc without buying anything (or buying something small and staying hours).

(2) Whether an establishment can selectively apply such policies on different categories of people.

The civil rights movement was fought primarily because businesses engaged in (2) while claiming 'private property', thereby effectively excluding classes of people from the public square, where American life fundamentally takes place.

Remember, businesses like Starbucks receive many state and local tax breaks and other incentives on the basis that they are a public accommodation that exists to serve all customers equally.

Starbucks official and unofficial policies is to allow (1), so it must equally apply it to all customers, and can't have two sets of (official and unofficial) rules for different groups.

If they want to change their policies, fine, I'm actually no fan of loitering for anyone, but it has to apply equally.

Last edited Mon Apr 16, 2018, 11:48 PM - Edit history (1)

Which one do you think might have the greater propensity to drive away paying customers?

They could be tattoo aficionados who plan on holding a knitting group.

As long as individuals/groups aren't being criminalistic or disturbing the peace or vagrants - and the official policy is to allow anyone to hang out there, then it can't apply it selectively.

If it wants selectivity it can simply require people to get approval before holding meetups/events in their establishment... or not allow it at all.

...wouldn't that hurt whatever "tough guy" image they would want to project? Seriously. I've lived in areas where there are real gang bangers and they wouldn't be caught dead near Starbucks. The general perception is that the clientele is corporate or student.

Starbucks stores are the office of many business people. The success of Starbucks largely depends on it. If Starbucks started turning away non-customers, many of their actual customers would start going somewhere else. If they advertised nobody is required to purchase anything, they would attract loitering to an even greater extent.

managers tried to enforce hourly limits on people using wifi and not buying anything. It didn't work out well for them. I'm pretty sure there was a story about the same thing happening at McDonalds where groups of seniors would meet for coffee. I found an old article about a 30 minute time limit. This was even after you purchased something!

I am not making a comment about the present story just pointing out that the loitering issue has been around a while. And I know it's not the same as doing business at a store.

(A friend lived in the town). One hour max time for a table EVEN IF YOU BOUGHT SOMETHING -- and, this was a huge SBX in a suburb.college town. Guess what happened? Students quit going there, adult study groups quit going, casual meeting with friends people quit going there. The very nice small local chain advertised everyone was welcome at their three locations, and could stay as long as they liked.

Business for SBX tanked, and they had to go major PR and giveaways to get people back.

Coffeehouses have been around for centuries, and all have have the same business model: to hang out with friends, to make a cup of coffee last for five hours.

People in this thread saying it isn't moral and ethical to do that are hysterical.

a group of us wanted to drink coffee. At a Denny's. You know, that upscale dining experience, lol.

They made us pay a minimum of $1.50 in order to have the bottomless cup of joe. I always got a small side salad. Others would get some orders of toast or something. We did what we had to do!

Many in the group did not speak English. We discussed politics and everything under the sun. I don't remember being loud or anything but we probably were annoying to them.

It has never occurred to me to go into a restaurant or coffee shop and just sit there without ordering something.

I try to buy something whenever I have to go there, but if there's a line out the door of people ordering 9 adjective coffees (or as we now say, covfefes), sometimes not.

People don't seem to notice things without it costing.

STARBUCKS!!!??? Nothing is higher than the stars in our human eyes. So why buy something that says the "bucks" are not just sky-high but "star" high!!!

(Disclaimer: my wife and daughters have forced me to buy them something from the drive-thru at many Star-High Bucks way too many times!)

Of course, Starbuck was the one always preaching the corporate good and the bottom line over individual fulfillment.

my friend ordered something.

A bit over a decade ago I used to hang out at Panera with some friends. We always bought something, although we then stayed for two or three hours. Around the time the lunch rush was occurring we left, so we wouldn't be taking up space that could go to someone else.

Panera is another place that people hang out in and have business meetings in, which I saw many times back in the day.

These days I go to Panera only occasionally, but I still enjoy them.

They very often ask people to leave who are just sitting there not ordering anything.

and that was my first thought, although I've seen the video and it looked pretty quiet.

I routinely wait for friends to arrive before ordering so we all have hot coffee at the same time and nobody feels rushed. If someone were to come up to me and say it was busy and the tables had to be reserved for paying customers, I would say I was waiting for friends but I'd go ahead and order in that case. I think the biggest issue here is the fact that they immediately turned the volume to 11 and called the police.

I'm just saying that a Starbucks in the middle of a big city can definitely have different rules in place for loitering and the like.

I have a friend who let a person use the restroom in her big city restaurant. The guy went in there and OD'ed. Fortunate for him my friend and an employee had mental clocks running in their heads and went to check on him, after hearing nothing she used a key to open the door and found the guy passed out. She called 911 and EMTs should up and shot the guy up with something, he was taken out on a stretcher with a crowd gathered. Really not a good look for her place, but she is good, so she overcame that issue.

Business owners in big cities have a lot to deal with, my friend says that she prefer people come in, order in a reasonable timeframe, consume the meal, chill out for a few minutes or order desert or coffee, then move on so that her staff can prep tables for the next customer(s), that is how she earns enough to have her business survive.

I would feel rude to sit in any type of coffee shop or restaurant without buying something. I've had job interviews and work meetings at Starbucks. There are often college students working on school projects there with laptops. One can get a comfy seat and wifi for the price of a cup of coffee.

Starbucks advertises as a place to meet people to socialize and do work.

Those of you saying it is unethical and immoral to hang around a SBX or use their bathroom without paying something are being ridiculous.

If I need to pee and don't want to buy something, I walk on to a place where I do want to buy something after peeing and washing my hands.

I do order something out of courtesy because I am occupying their space, but I think Starbucks sucks.

I generally avoid public restrooms at all costs anyway.

I do always order something but routinely wait for friends to arrive before ordering so we all have hot coffee at the same time and nobody feels rushed to finish theirs. No one has ever called the police on me.

I'll tell them, if they ever show up.

Ran into the one next to where I get my hair cut on Saturday, to use the bathroom before my haircut.

Yesterday evening, when I was out running and needed to pee.

I've also hung out in many over the years for a long time without ordering anything.

I spend enough at SBX, that if something weird happened, I would arise hell, and would go buy a Nepresso for my iced lattes and espresso con pannas.

Many are smaller venues and the whole point is for them to sell coffee (or other products) and for their customers to enjoy the space. Using the bathroom is one thing. But hanging out and using their wifi and not bothering to by a stupid coffee, pastry, etc. I think is rude.

about this issue.

I just think common courtesy is if you are going to use a public business you should try to give a small part back (buying something for profit.) No the profit on a cup of coffee isn't going to make or break Starbucks. But it shows a token of appreciation for being able to use a nice space with Wifi and clean bathrooms. All things that cost them money to operate.

It's way too hard to get a parking space, why bother if I'm not ordering something.

Starbucks encourages this in many ways so they can't have their cake and it eat it too -

The local Starbucks stores in my area hosts local performers - singers, bands, etc. Some People come in watch the performances and don't buy anything. I don't recall the police being called.

we at least order a beverage.

I only go in to buy things.

But if Starbucks were so afraid of me that they would only use armed, taxpayer-funded bouncers to get rid of me, I wouldn't go in at all. And I won't again until Starbucks makes some changes.

would sure not refuse to leave when the police were called and asked me 3 times to leave the premises.

If you ignore the owner/manager and then the police once they are called, you get arrested.

Only been there once a long time ago and that is because it was someone else's choice that wanted to meet there

They are in an untenable situation. I suspect that they are going to be inundated around the clock by daily protests of people loitering around for hours & not buying anything, thus making it impossible for paying customers to be seated.

Shame for the people that worked there that might lose their jobs