Proposal; five sources — Aime Lonsdorf

Proposal: Many people around the world have found themselves craving caffeine in one form or another. Recently, the most popular form of caffeine has become coffee, creating a recent boom in the industry. Starbucks is just one of America’s most prominent coffee chains and has changed the face of the coffee industry into a monopolization of the best international coffees, speciality drinks, sandwiches and store brand items. With Americans paying almost $4.50 a cup, the assumption would be that the economics behind the Starbucks corporation would be an even split that abided to both American and international labor and trade laws.However, that is not the case. But, how essential are these companies to the economics of both America and other nations world wide. In my research, i attempt to prove that the corporation is essential to increasing both the American and global GDP.

Source  1: <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/03/05/8401343/index.htm> This article was found through Academic Search Premiere. It talks about the 2007 law suit between the Starbucks corporation and Ethiopia. The article lists some detailed descriptions of what is like to be a non-American common worker in the coffee industry and even higher up management. The angst between the company and country is also quoted.

Use: I plan to use this source to talk about how the Corporation obtains coffee and treats its workers overseas. It is a good source for antidotes, and proof of violated laws overseas and the poor working and pay conditions the workers receive.

Source 2: <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2006/10/01/8387114/index.htm>

The source was found through the Academic Search premiere database and gives a detailed description of the number one selling coffees that are trying to oppose the Starbucks corporations and their economics.

Use: I attend to use this source as alternatives to the Starbucks Industry.

Source 3: <http://www.loansandcredit.com/loansandcredit-com-the-economics-of-starbucks_2011-02-16/Source 3:>

http://www.economist.com/node/1846165The source is a brief description of the salaries of Starbucks employees in America and some history of the coffee shops both national and international.

Use: To counter argue source #1. The second site will be used to support the fact that the company is creating international and local jobs, especially in urbanized areas.

Source 4: Will Your Recession Be Tall, Grande, or Venti?

A Picture of the Global Starbucks Economy

Starbucks’ Comprehensive Plan to Navigate Tough Economy, 2008

The above article(s) details the “Starbucks theory” which is similar to the McDonalds theory which states that by incorporating Starbucks Coffee shops into local and international communities, it is possible that the current recession the world is facing will deplete. The third source included is speech given by the current President of Starbucks.

Use: to prove the point that Starbucks is an essential unit in the global economy.

Source 5:  <http://www.economist.com/node/2361072&gt;

The above is a study done by The Economist that discusses the “crave” for coffee internationally. They compare it with the “big mac” study previously conducted by their publication.

Use: The source proves the “need” for quality coffee and also compliments source 4.1 in discussing the Starbucks theory in comparison to the McDonald’s theory of increasing international GDP.

Source 6: <http://www.economist.com/node/2042797&gt;

The source discusses recent coffee taxes, specifically on expresso.

Use: The tax will go towards helping underprivileged children in coffee bearing nations get an education. However, Starbucks along with many other coffee shop owners, are investing a large sum of money to prevent this tax from occurring.

This entry was posted in Proposals 5 Sources. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Proposal; five sources — Aime Lonsdorf

  1. aimelonsdorf says:

    please give me feedback/ a more narrow or different topic

  2. davidbdale says:

    Aime, I’m afraid I can’t tell quite what your proposal is. Caffeine is popular. Coffee is popular. Starbucks in the world’s most prominent coffee retail chain. Customers pay a premium price. Therefore we expect the company to abide by labor and trade laws but they don’t? But the company is essential to the world economy?

    I applaud you for looking at an everyday item for its counterintuitivity. But I don’t see that you’ve found one, or much of a topic to actually research. You could certainly research whether Starbucks abides by labor laws and trade laws.

    You could also research whether there’s a correlation between the fortunes of the company and the overall health of the world economy. Such a correlation might give you your own “Starbucks index” which demonstrates, for instance, that increases in the US Stock Exchange, the Nikkei, or any other big indicator of investor confidence coincides with the opening of new Starbucks stores, or with increases in the company’s sales revenues, or any other correlation you can demonstrate. That would be fascinating. It might also be by chance counterintuitive, but either way it would be interesting and worthwhile.

    What would be truly counterintuitive would be a research outcome I suggested in class during your presentation, that the growers or sellers of beans to Starbucks, which charges premium prices for its brews, are the most desperate or poorly paid growers in the world. (I’m not saying this is true; I have no idea if it’s true. It’s just worth studying and would be scandalous and disturbing if it were true.)

    Any of those approaches would be more specific and provable than where you are now. Do you agree? Is there an idea here that interests you?

    Sources and Their Uses
    Regarding your Sources section, you don’t begin to tell us what we need to know about your sources to judge what they contain or what use they’ll be to your argument, Aime.

    Source 1. “Talks about” the lawsuit doesn’t tell us what’s said about the lawsuit, or who sued who, or for what. “Detailed descriptions of what it is like to be a non-American common worker” does not tell us whether conditions for such workers are wonderful or catastrophic. What’s the significance of the word “non-American”? What is the source of the angst? Does the company have a gripe against the country or did the country sue the company? Over working conditions for common workers? We have no idea.

    You say you plan to use the source “to talk about” (not prove something?) “how the Corporation obtains coffee and treats its workers” but again you don’t indicate whether the company obtains coffee by stealing it off of plantations, or from other coffee companies, whether it pays a fair price or forces other competitors out of the market. Is the article a good source of “anecdotes”? If so, anecdotes about what?

    Your last few words come closest to helping us understand that you want to demonstrate violations of laws (presumably in Ethiopia)(whether US laws or Ethiopian laws we don’t know) and poor working conditions and low(?) pay for workers.

    I don’t mean to be picky, Aime. I do want to express the difficulty of finding the claims in your explanations.

    Skipping to Source(s) 4, I have tagged your urls to titles. I have demonstrated how to do this in class. Please work to create these links yourself. If you have difficulty, ask me for another demonstration on Tuesday.

    Your first source (Tall, Grande, or Venti) does not do what you say it does. In no way does it support the idea that more Starbucks stores can rescue the world economy. It is an intentionally silly piece of writing that makes the amusing but weak case that countries, cities, regions with high concentrations of Starbucks stores are financially unsound and in danger of economic collapse. (It makes a comparison to Thomas Friedman’s equally lighthearted “Big Mac” theory that countries with substantial numbers of McDonalds restaurants are more likely to negotiate disputes than go to war over them.) The second source is just an infographic that shows how big Starbucks is. The third is pure press release material from Starbucks headquarters that says, from the company’s perspective, that it will survive the tough 2008 economy by being more efficient and keeping their customers loyal. There’s little here of true research value, I’m afraid.

    I don’t want to discourage you about Starbucks as a candidate for good research, Aime, but I need to encourage you to look more closely and critically at the material you find and clarify your approach.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s