I'm sure everyone by now has heard of the leaked memo from Starbucks Founder and Chairman that was written to other executives of the company that was "inadvertantly" leaked to the press, and has caused quite a stir.
Just in case, here's a link to the memo:http://starbucksgossip.typepad.com/_/2007/02/starbucks_chair_2.html
The big debate with the leaking of this memo, was the "inadvertant" leak, actually on purpose. Why, you ask, would they do such a thing? Let's wax philisophically for a minute on the potential benefit of such action.
While the content of the memo was less than flattering, the leak really got people talking about the Starbucks brand. By just Googling Starbucks memo, one could browse well over ONE MILLION Web pages with relevant content. That's pretty insane when you think about it, and it has brought Starbucks, a company that became famous for its lack of marketing, very much back into the spotlight.
So how about the downfalls of doing this? For me, when I first read the memo, the first thing I could think was "EUREKA." I knew that what Mr. Shultz had written as his concerns for the brand was 100% on target. The brand had become a commodity - the things that made the brand experience so amazing for its loyal customers, seemed to have been lost. I was never really conscious of this, but check it out - here are some pics of Starbucks - it LOOKS like a chain now, not a hardcore coffee shop for coffee lovers:
My take on this? I think the memo was leaked on purpose. And I think the executives at Starbucks carefully planned this, after weighing the pros and cons. The pros (taking into account the old adage that no publicity is bad publicity) probably way outweighed the cons.
What do you think? I'm interested in hearing your take on it!
Best,
Garret Ohm
1 comment:
Definitely a strategic move on their part. A move like that certainly takes some BIG coffee beans.
American brands need a few more Chairman like him.
Post a Comment