Starbucks - Not very charitable

[JacquelineSE21]

I approached staff at the branch within Sainsbury's Dog Kennel Hill today to ask if they could help supply some paper napkins for a 'Stand Up To Cancer' bake sale my daughters are holding on Sunday.

They advised me they couldn't help as they didn't have enough stock. Very poor excuse especially when it's such a good cause.

Won't be visiting Starbucks again. Showing their true colours I think.

The bake sale is being held this Sunday 15 April on Thurlow Hill 2.30pm-4.30pm. If you are in the area please pass by to make a purchase.

[Willard]

Just don't complain about the coffee there, you'll be old and weak yourself one day.

Good luck with the bake sale.

[Mick Mac]

Terrible. Pales into insignificance compared to their billion dollar tax avoidance.

[yeknomyeknom]

I?ve asked Pret A Manger before. They are very charitable. Try them.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Starbucks manage to make huge tax avoiding profits because people don't give a hoot about their questionable ethos, especially when something as important as their regular latte is at stake.

Serves you right for having such high expectations.

It was Starbucks who infamously refused to give cups of water to the firemen who attended the Twin Towers.

[Pugwash]

When you can get paper napkins for as little as a ?1 - I would not bother contacting Starbucks etc.

[Sue]

It's only a small Starbuck, isn't it?

Perhaps they genuinely didn't have enough stock? They obviously need to keep enough for their customers.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Sue. Very generous of you, but highly unlikely

[nods]

Highly unlikely but feasible, yes the have questionable ethics but it is possible for a coffee shop irrespective of its size to be low on napkins. Why is that so hard to fathom.

But let's bash them anyway....

[Sue]

nods Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Highly unlikely but feasible, yes the have

> questionable ethics but it is possible for a

> coffee shop irrespective of its size to be low on

> napkins. Why is that so hard to fathom.

> But let's bash them anyway....

Exactly.

And the decision not to give napkins will hardly have been made by those who set Starbucks policy on other matters.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Maybe they were low on stock, but a token gesture goes a long way in the world.

There's a bit of a feeling here that it's not ok to criticise anyone (let alone Starbucks).

Utter BS.

[Inbound]

Starbucks is a franchised chain and as such, each is its own business. The Franchisees are responsible for submitting their own tax returns. And no doubt they pay their own fair share, I think you are misguided to lay the blame on these people when it is the Starbucks Corporation that avoids or mitigates away its responsibility