Gotta Love The Bux
Well, my local Starbucks has shifted over from whole milk to 2% milk as the default, just as Starbucks Gossip predicted. (I read Starbucks Gossip every day, by the way. Once a barista, always a barista.) They still have whole milk available, although you have to request it now. Starbucks claims it’s due to consumer demand; others say it’s a cost-cutting measure. And of course, some news sources are calling this part of the war on obesity. (Here’s a timeline of the change.)
Otis Kimsey has an interesting anecdote about Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and the issue of milk:
One part in [the Starbucks book] that struck a chord with me was when Starbucks wanted to introduce non-fat milk as an option. Howard would not budge on even offering non-fat as an option until he went in and observed a store and how many people asked for non-fat milk while wearing workout clothes. He still said that they would not change the default milk from whole because whole milk is what lattes are supposed to be made from (through his experiences in Italy).
I say thumbs up on the change. I drink nonfat sugar-free vanilla lattes when I feel like something sweet, although I’ve been trying to get my other drink more often, a lowfat misto. (The nonfat misto tastes too bitter to me, and I’m trying to cut down on artificial sweeteners.) Before, when I would order a misto with “lowfat” milk, I was never sure how much whole milk or how much nonfat milk the barista put in the cup. So I’m happy about the change. This guy named Ron Rosenbaum is really bitter about it, though!
As you might recall I discovered that some addled nutrition nut at Starbucks, one of those tunnel-vision ignoramuses who believe all food must be robbed of flavor, had convinced their New Agey management to replace steamed whole milk in their lattes, cappucinos and mistos with the watery diminished taste of 2% milk, which is not only less flavorful but steamed up with a nasty, stingy edge.
I don’t know, Ron. It tastes pretty good to me! Oh, and also, if this change were really about obesity, they would do something about their pastries. Ten million calories and tons of fat and sugar in each and every one.
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Cold Hard Cash, Food
Email us
I go to Starbucks because I can enjoy one of their lattes made with soy milk.
Oh, and also, if this change were really about obesity, they would do something about their pastries. Ten million calories and tons of fat and sugar in each and every one.
Making them taste like candles isn’t good enough? That’s probably an anti-obesity measure. “Hey, if we make them taste like crap, nobody will buy them! High-five!”
Or possibly it was a dare.
Anyway, like Tara, I don’t drink cow milk at Starbucks, so for me personally I don’t care. But as someone who was raised on skim milk and would use nothing else if I hadn’t switched to non-dairy, even I think that an espresso drink tastes better with whole. Then again, taste isn’t really the point at Starbucks, is it? Cost-effectiveness. Consistency and familiarity. Branding. But not taste.
Wow, I am such a doofus that I didn’t realize whole milk was different than 2% milk. I thought 2% was always the “worst” since you can always get the skim or fat free or 1% which all have less fat. I don’t drink coffee though, so I am clueless when it comes to all this Starbucks crap.
Hey now, I like Starbucks and I think the quality of their drinks is pretty high. Their pastries do kinda suck, though. I love sugar as much as (or perhaps a lot more than) the next guy, but much of their stuff is so sweet that it can be off-putting.
I don’t like a skim mocha because it does taste bitter to me. But I actually like a skim latte better than a whole-milk latte. The “bite” of the coffee comes through in a more pleasant way IMO. With a higher-fat milk it feels like my palate is overwhelmed with the “creamy” mouthfeel and flavor rather than tasting the coffee flavor. Whereas in a mocha, that creaminess seems to pair better with the chocolate syrup than the thinner-tasting skim milk.
Oh, and PQ, your ignorance of whole milk might be because you’re a whippersnapper brought up in the age of the Obesity Epidemic. I remember when I ordered milk as a child in restaurants and they would almost always bring whole milk without even asking. They just assumed that’s what you wanted. It’s pretty darn good… then again, I think straight half-and-half tastes good (I mean, not that I drink glasses of it regularly or anything, but I’m just saying it does taste good) so obviously I’m a little warped.
The fat in milk is not the problem, the sugar in milk is the problem. Frankly, I dump half and half into my Starbucks lattes, always have always will. (There isn’t enough fat in whole milk to make me happy.) I’d be much more delighted if Starbucks started serving Hood’s Calorie Countdown milk ( only 3 carbs per 8 oz)
BTW — fat free pasteurized milk kills calves. Even mixed with milk fat. So I don’t think it’s all that good for humans either. Anyways, I’m not going to drink it to find out. Eyuck! I have a hard time beliving anyone really likes the taste of fat free milk.
woot spacedcowgirl — half and half straight up! try heavy whipping cream — mixes nice with many types of alcohol, too.
Yeah, enough of anything will kill a calf. I was raised on skim milk so anything else tastes weird to me — the mouthfeel is off, and I’ve come to expect milk to be refreshing rather than creamy. It’s just about what you’re used to. But I still prefer whole in a latte (if soy’s not available).
I agree that Starbucks’ coffee drinks are pretty good. But they’re not nearly as good as you could get in many independent coffee shops that are less institutional. The problem is that to find those great coffee shops, you have to risk the really, really bad ones. Starbucks drinks are fine, and totally reliably and consistently fine wherever you go (with the exception of the occasional barisa who really can’t pull espresso — which usually only matters if you’re drinking espresso).
I still say their pastries taste like candles though.
What’s a misto?
Whole milk is 4% fat. Then, you have 2%, 1%, and skim.
Food should be satisfying as well as nourishing, so along with my whole grains, lean proteins, and generous amounts of fruits and veggies, I enjoy full fat dairy products for the flavor and the satisfaction in my belly.
I can’t drink coffee on a regular basis because I’m sensitive to caffeine. One cup of coffee keeps me awake for two days. So, a moch or a latte is a treat I only have a few times each year, on those occasions when I need to be wakeful and can’t manage it.
When I have that rare treat, I want it to be creamy and satisfying and I don’t really want people looking at me funny because I’m a fatty ordering *gasp* WHOLE MILK *horror* in my coffee. It was nice going to Starbuck’s because not having to specify meant people didn’t think about it. Now, it draws unnecessary attention.
Also, I think it takes some of the joy away from the fitness nuts who got a sense of “being good” or feeling that they had “superior decision making skills” because they got to announce that they are having low fat or fat free lattes and mochas. Poor souls are just part of the crowd now.
I rarely if ever drink milk because my body doesn’t like it, but I think it is probably cost rather than fatness.
I always drink the same two things at Starbuck’s if I go and neither has milk.
For you non Seattle people do your Starbuck’s have the fancy lunch fixings? I wandered into a Starbuck’s recently and got the most delicious fruit and cheese plate. I was really surprised they had all sorts of tasty things that weren’t gut bomb pastries.
Although I must admit their Madeline’s are my krypotnite. I freaking love those like you people don’t even known. I will elbow someone out of line to get the last pack of them.
Maybe I shouldn’t have admitted that huh?
Whether it’s whole, 2%, 1%, or skim, or even half-n-half–it’s still Starbucks. And I find it over-roasted, bitter, and undrinkable. Standard disclaimer: that’s just my opinion, YMMV.
I buy good-quality beans, grind & brew my own, and take it with cane sugar and half-n-half. But if I get within two miles of a Seattle’s Best, the devil himself can’t come between me and a classic mocha. I don’t know what kind of milk they use, but with whipped cream on top, it doesn’t much matter.
I have to brew my own, because I’m not even fit to drive before my first cup–how the heck do you amazing people manage to make it out of the house before coffee?!
I love Starbucks so much it’s unnatural. Especially since I don’t shop at Wal*Mart, and isn’t that really the Wal*Mart of coffee? Either way, venti non-fat caramel macchiato, often with an extra shot. If I could make those at home, I’d be golden.
I think Starbucks’ coffee is overrated, but at least I’m not the only one who thinks their baked goods are crap. How can they get so much fat and sugar into something without making it taste better?
I’m another full-fat milk girl, and hey, I go nuts and demand the whipped cream on my whole milk iced venti mocha. Bring the fat, I say!
Their baked goods are too sweet, although, I do like their prepackaged shortbread cookies.
I’m not a big fan of Starbucks. It’s nice for when you’re out in the sticks, but I prefer the smaller coffee shops. They tend to have better food and better baristas.
Then again, Seattle is just an hour south of where I live, so I’m spoiled.
That being said….and I think skim milk is gross in coffee and only ever use whole milk or cream…but I think I have a mocha/latte/macchiatto(sp?) once a week.
What gets me is that the calories in the milk aren’t as big a problem as the sugar that they put in. Most of the drinks are always way way too sweet for me…
Then again, I drink doppios. (two undilluted shots of espresso. I call it rocket fuel) or a shot in the dark. (Shot of espresso in a regular cup of joe) most of the time.
Okay, now I feel dumb – I thought whole milk was way, way worse than 2%. Knowing now that it’s only a 2% difference, why is there such hysteria over whole milk being so horrible compared to 2%?
Actually, on the pastry front, they still have em but they’ve also introduced a whole lot of stuff under 500 calories. Which I think is pretty damned cool. I don’t do milk as it tears me up but I’m wary of processing anything, including milk. the more we process stuff the more it seems to hurt our bodies. God I sound like a raging hippie.. oh yeah, I am ;) Anyway, keep up the good posts ;D
I was raised drinking skim milk, and whole milk makes me gag. Just a different perspective. (I don’t know why a calf came into the discussion – it’s like saying we shouldn’t eat chocolate because it kills dogs.)
Fun fact: according to Coffee Geek and other sites, a lower fat content actually makes for better foaming capability of your milk.
Another non-Starbucker weighing in…I like elaborate coffees, but no matter what they’re made with, I think they fall into the category of the twice-monthly treat, not the daily food group (the caffeine! the sugar or sugar substitute, neither of which is really our friend! the waste paper! and, for heaven’s sake, the COST!)
But if we’re going to do elaborate coffees, I’m with those who advocate finding an independent shop (preferably one that will let us use refillable mugs and uses fair trade coffees.) What I hold against Starbucks is less its middling-quality coffee than that it has largely created a luxury demand where only a moderate one was before, in the same way that DeBeers has convinced the world that the diamond=love. As with the readily-available and yet politically fraught diamond (slave labor, anyone?), Starbucks has built its demand largely by appealing to our basic snobbiness: terra-cotta tiles, logo mugs and gadgets (made in China), soft lighting, and a vocabulary of “baristas”, “ventis” “mistos” and so on. (On the rare occasion when I find myself in one, I’m that annoying person demanding “medium” at the top of her lungs.) Like diamonds, coffee is not a particularly harmless indulgence unless it is fair-trade and shade-grown: people cut rainforests, the lungs of the world, to plant coffee, and contribute to the ongoing extinction of multiple species. And while I can’t swear this is true of Starbucks, my local chain coffeshop won’t put their mocha into my refillable mug unless it’s their mug, claiming sanitation issues which somehow their mugs are spared. Riiiiiight.
So, I futilely urge us all: let’s not let the skim milk cloud our judgment. Starbuck’s is not about what’s good for us or what we really want, and they don’t really deserve our daily patronage.
I cannot bear the taste of whole milk (urgh, creamy) but that’s just a personal thing… but so is liking whole milk better, isn’t it?
Starbucks treats its employees well and does offer fair-trade coffees. Granted there is always room for improvement, but I don’t feel that they are by any means the biggest corporate evil in the world today. In fact, I think they’re a generally responsible company and I have no problem at all with going there. Also, the ones I’ve been to will put refills in your non-disposable mug as long as you remove the top for them (presumably so they aren’t getting their germs on it, or getting your germs on their hands). YMMV, I’m sure, though.
Also, I don’t live in a part of the country where a local independent coffeehouse is really part of the landscape. We have diners, sure, and certainly I love a good cup of diner coffee, but it’s not always what I’m looking for. The “little guy” coffee shops that do exist are generally businesses that sprang up to ride the “coffee wave” in the wake of the Starbucks craze and make crappy, half-assed, stale coffee with a bad aftertaste but still charge 3 bucks for a latte. Besides, again, I LIKE Starbucks’ espresso drinks. And their brewed coffee is often strong and bitter, but the mellower blends of their brewed coffee are still much more to my taste than the thin, acidy brews that our “local chains” make. I really think this is a matter of personal taste moreso than the quality of Starbucks somehow being objectively lower than any given independent shop. I’m sure if you live in the Northwest or something, you probably feel differently, and I hope to get out there myself someday and caffeinate my way through Seattle and Portland in the name of “researching” where to find the best coffee. :)
(OK, I’m lying when I say there are NO good independent coffee shops around… there was one that I absolutely LOVED near my old workplace–though as a shit-stirrer I must point out that I really didn’t like their actual coffee any better than Starbucks’–but I am rarely anywhere the town that it’s in anymore so I really can’t go there these days.)
spacedcowgirl,
Couldn’t have said aby of that better. I once had a soy green tea latte at a small coffee place by my house, and it couldn’t hold a candle to Starbucks (I’m not dissing them; I go there every day for their coffee and it’s tasty and kicks my ass awake). I have no problem giving SB my business because I heard (correct me if I’m wrong everyone) that aside from their Fair Trade coffees they provide health benefits to their employees. I also enjoy the option of buying really cool cds there.:D
Oops,
That was supposed to say, “any”.