Chain Coffee Wars: Mickey D's Kicks Starbuck Butt

[Chris Amirault]

The LA Times and several others are reporting that Consumer Reports named McDonalds coffee as the best of the chains:

McDonald's coffee [was] "decent and moderately strong," with "no flaws," and that the Starbucks brew "was strong, but burnt and bitter enough to make your eyes water instead of open."

...

Consumer Reports co-taster Erin Gudeux, a magazine staff member, defended the test as a guide for consumers. "They've got the pocketbook and they've got the choice," she said. Other fast-food coffees fared worse, including those from Burger King ("tasted more like hot water") and Dunkin' Donuts ("inoffensive").

There are a few dozen jokes waiting patiently to be made here, of course. But I wonder whether this might be the first in a series of significant public declarations stating what a lot of the coffee geeks have been saying for years about Starbucks.

Let's not forget that the speedy rise of Starbucks was built largely on a marketing campaign predicated on the assumption that their brew was better quality than everything else available at chains. McDonalds is many things, but stupid about marketing ain't one of them. If Holly Moore weighs in on this, he'll likely remind us that McDonalds was built on providing quality eating experiences to the masses when most people thought it was impossible.

If nothing else, the report certainly made me want to try McD's brew at the place down the street from my house. But what do I know, given that I've been known to grab an "inoffensive" Dunkin' Donuts cuppa now and then.

[zpzjessica]

I happen to adore Dunkin Donuts coffee. I worked there one summer and became addicted to their hazelnut coffee. McD's, I'm not so fond of. But DD gets two thumbs up in my book

[MarketStEl]

The LA Times and several others are reporting that Consumer Reports named McDonalds coffee as the best of the chains:

McDonald's coffee [was] "decent and moderately strong," with "no flaws," and that the Starbucks brew "was strong, but burnt and bitter enough to make your eyes water instead of open."

...

Consumer Reports co-taster Erin Gudeux, a magazine staff member, defended the test as a guide for consumers. "They've got the pocketbook and they've got the choice," she said. Other fast-food coffees fared worse, including those from Burger King ("tasted more like hot water") and Dunkin' Donuts ("inoffensive").

There are a few dozen jokes waiting patiently to be made here, of course. But I wonder whether this might be the first in a series of significant public declarations stating what a lot of the coffee geeks have been saying for years about Starbucks.

Let's not forget that the speedy rise of Starbucks was built largely on a marketing campaign predicated on the assumption that their brew was better quality than everything else available at chains. McDonalds is many things, but stupid about marketing ain't one of them. If Holly Moore weighs in on this, he'll likely remind us that McDonalds was built on providing quality eating experiences to the masses when most people thought it was impossible.

If nothing else, the report certainly made me want to try McD's brew at the place down the street from my house. But what do I know, given that I've been known to grab an "inoffensive" Dunkin' Donuts cuppa now and then.

←

Consumer Reports' assessment of Starbucks coffee mirrors my own. And has it been only the coffee geeks who have been dissing "Charbucks" in this fashion?

I knew that McDonald's improved its coffee blend in the middle of last year. There was a big ad campaign promoting their new Premium Coffee at the time.

(Come to think of it, they've been running a promotion around these parts very recently, where their coffee is 69c no matter what size you order. Given what CR says about it, that makes it a real bargain.

I think Dunkin' Donuts' coffee is better than "inoffensive," though. (And their current ad campaign, featuring a guy who heads to a convenience store for "coffee" -- with air quotes as he [and everyone else in the ad] says "coffee" -- is clever.)

[Toliver]

America's Test Kitchen also tested coffees and Dunkin' Donuts failed miserably. This was regarding their bagged beans, though, not based upon their store brews.

Apparently, there's a high ratio of "Quakers" (poorly roasted beans) per bag of Dunkin' Donut coffee beans which lend a bitter taste to the final brew.

[zpzjessica]

Interesting...because like I said, I worked at DD one summer several years ago and always bought their bagged coffee with my discount and loved it. And nobody ever complained after buying it, either.

Good stuff. And 1/3 the price of Starbucks (which I happen to dispise). Plus, John Goodman is the DD voice now - how can you go wrong when Dan Conner is endorsing a product?!

[Andrew Fenton]

I had a cup of McDonald's coffee last week (along with an Egg McMuffin, the shining star in Mickey D's firmament), and it was pretty good. Given that it was less than a dollar, it was very good.

[Priscilla]

I haven't had the new, putatively improved McDonald's, but their coffee is a mainstay of road trips, is often freshly made, and there is real 1/2 & 1/2 provided, even if dread ultra-pasteurized.

Starbucks coffee is just so bad, SO bad. Doesn't need to be that bad, and shouldn't be that bad. It is a SIN it is so bad. What, do they squeeze .0003 more cups of coffee out of each lb. by overroasting it to that degree? Pfui.

[Lilija]

I'm not a big fan of McD's but last year, after they changed the blends, I stopped in just to try it (I must be a sucker for good advertising, because I totally caved after passing that huge banner featuring a rich, steaming cup of coffee every day). It's damn good. More flavorful than DD, and most convenience store blends, complete with a drive-thru, and unlike DD, I'm not tempted to order anything but a huge cup of coffee, when I stop there.

I'm not even going to mention Megabucks in the same breath. Overpriced garbage.

[Megan Blocker]

[Consumer Reports' assessment of Starbucks coffee mirrors my own.  And has it been only the coffee geeks who have been dissing "Charbucks" in this fashion?

←

Well, I'm no coffee geek, and I've felt that way for years.

The marketing campaigns for Starbucks have been incredible, and I don't think it's an understatement to say that they have greatly influenced what Americans look for in "good" coffee. My mother, usually a woman of impeccable tastes, makes it everywhere; we stayed in a friend's loaned house over Christmas, and she and her husband managed to root out the tiny bag of Starbucks coffee hidden behind the sugar jar and used it every morning.

Is it bad that I dumped it out and replaced it with the far-better suprmarket brand I found in the pantry? And even worse to admit to my own feeling of triumph when everyone remarked on how good the coffee was that morning?

Interesting about Mickey D's...I will have to walk over for a cup tomorrow.

[Rebecca263]

I have to disagree with everyone else, so far. (I hate when that happens!) I LIKE Starbucks coffee. Very much. But, then, I am 1/2 Italian, 1/2 Syrian, and grew up drinking a far stronger, longer roasted brew than most Americans have. I prefer their roasts. I really like that there is a fast food style coffee place wher I can order a French press of coffee, too! DD is not terrible, but it is uneven quality, sometimes bitter(this is not from a longer roast, as some assert, but is from old, underroasted beans), ofttimes weakly brewed. As I was forced to travel the highways quite a bit the past 5 months, I tasted McDonald's new coffee, and Burger King's, AND even had some White Castle coffee. I disliked all 3, intensely, and actually, I preferred 7-11 and WaWa to them. Of all of the cheap fast food coffee that I had this winter, WaWa was the best.

Although, you know, White Castle cups are very cool looking! I kept mine, for a week!

Rebecca(who has a thing for packaging)

[PaniniGuy]

McDonald's new coffee is roasted by Green Mountain, which happens to be a pretty darned good roaster, well respected in the coffee industry. It is far better than the dreck McD's used to serve.

As far as the taste test goes, the McD's was tested against the Starbucks standard house drip. I wouldn't judge all Starbucks coffees by this test. Yes, much of Starbucks coffee (especially the espresso and house blend) is overroasted, but if you get a press pot or fresh airpot cup of their varietals, it's usually pretty good (not up to standards of a top indie or even Caribou, but better than many indies).

As someone who lived in New England for 30+ years I used to be a staunch defender of DD - until I got into the coffee biz myself and learned more about quality. DD is pretty weak in hindsight.

And if you're drinking flavored coffee, you're not drinking coffee. You're drinking chemical flavors baked into beans that weren't worthy of standing on their own. It would be like walking into a debate on the merits of Grey Goose vs. Belevedere vodkas and saying you prefer Absolut Citron. It's simply not the same thing.

[mrbigjas]

i had a mcdonalds coffee relatively recently and thought it was terrible. and it was fresh--the guy was pulling out the pot to pour my cup as it was brewing.

i also recently had a starbucks regular coffee, and it was awful as well. but it cost like a dollar more than the mcdonalds.

edited to say: but also at the mcdonalds i ordered a hash browns, and after i pulled out when i opened the bag i found a sausage egg & cheese mcmuffin. this categorically cannot happen at a starbucks, and therefore mcdonalds wins the contest!

Edited February 6, 2007 by mrbigjas (log)

[MarketStEl]

Is it bad that I dumped it out and replaced it with the far-better suprmarket brand I found in the pantry?  And even worse to admit to my own feeling of triumph when everyone remarked on how good the coffee was that morning?

←

Are you old enough, Megan, to remember the "Secret Switch" TV ad campaign?

"We've secretly switched the fine ground coffee in Mr. Biederdorf's cup with Folger's Coffee Crystals. Let's watch as he tastes."

You should have blown your cover right after they commented on the coffee, just the way the announcer did on those TV spots.

--Sandy, who remembers the aroma driving past the Folger Coffee plant in the 700 block of Broadway in downtown Kansas City. Somehow, that coffee always smelled better than it tasted.

[LindsayAnn]

Love coffee, have since I was about 8 years old (YIKES - what were my parents thinking?)

I enjoy dunkin donuts, its not the best but I enjoy it.

I like startbucks NOT for their coffee but for their frapaccino (a coffee like blend that includes some cofee, ice, milky type substance....blend - and you get a frothy frozen goodness). Thier straight coffee is BELCH, but any of their "specialty" drinks that have passed these lips have been delish (lattes, etc...)

McDonalds is good too, depending on where from. I find it not consistent as well....some MCD have been great at serving me a quality cup, some average, and others pure BLECH.

Lovin me my coffee

[YWalker]

Let's not forget that the speedy rise of Starbucks was built largely on a marketing campaign predicated on the assumption that their brew was better quality than everything else available at chains.

I think that another factor in the speedy rise and current success of Starbucks is the sale of the frou-frou coffee drinks. I've been to many a Starbucks, but have never bought a straight cup of coffee. It's a Frappucino Light or a Mocha for me. Doctor it up with a nice mix of chocolate and flavored syrups, and you could start with a mixture of brewed twigs.

I wonder what percentage of their sales is straight coffee?

[pansophia]

My husband works for Starbucks and even he will admit that few of their "coffee of the day" brews are all that great. But they have some good beans they don't serve often but we use at home and like.

Like many in the Upper Midwest, I started on Caribou Coffee which now seems more like candy than coffee (and no surprise since they offer Andes mints, Snickers, Oreo, etc as mix ins).

Then I moved into my "Corporations are evil, I will only go to small coffee shops" phase. Fun, but unreliable - every barista made my drink differently. I'm adventurous, but not at 8am.

Once I settled on a regular drink (grande vanilla non-fat latte) I found that I could get it more reliably at Starbucks than elsewhere.

Hell of Frappucinos aside, I think Starbucks is more about espresso drinks than straight coffee. Granted, at their current rate they will be more about CDs, books, and movies than about any coffee!

My (potentially biased) two cents.

[menon1971]

I am a bit of a Vermonter when it come to coffee and try to find a local joint that gets it right. That said I have had Starbucks but two of three times and in each instance I came away with the exact same reaction as CR. I love strong coffee, expresso, Lebanese, Turkish, etc., but Starbucks seems to treat its beans and brewing process a bit like one might merge onto a highway in a Geo. They push it a little too hard for what it is and the result is not pretty.

Edited February 11, 2007 by menon1971 (log)

[MarketStEl]

I like startbucks NOT for their coffee but for their frapaccino (a coffee like blend that includes some cofee, ice, milky type substance....blend - and you get a frothy frozen goodness). Thier straight coffee is BELCH, but any of their "specialty" drinks that have passed these lips have been delish (lattes, etc...)

←

And...

I think that another factor in the speedy rise and current success of Starbucks is the sale of the frou-frou coffee drinks.  I've been to many a Starbucks, but have never bought a straight cup of coffee.  It's a Frappucino Light or a Mocha for me.  Doctor it up with a nice mix of chocolate and flavored syrups, and you could start with a mixture of brewed twigs.

←

And...

My husband works for Starbucks and even he will admit that few of their "coffee of the day" brews are all that great.  But they have some good beans they don't serve often but we use at home and like.

And...

I am a bit of a Vermonter when it come to coffee and try to find a local joint that gets it right. That said I have had Starbucks but two of three times and in each instance I came away with the exact same reaction as CR. I love strong coffee, expresso, Lebanese, Turkish, etc., but Starbucks seems to treat its beans and brewing process a bit like one might merge onto a highway in a Geo. They push it a little too hard for what it is and the result is not pretty.

←

And one more like these:

This morning at Commerce Bank, one of the tellers was talking about coffee drinks, explaining that she loved Starbucks' chocolate mocha latte.

"But their coffee--I can't see how anyone can drink it," she went on. After I gave her an "Amen!," just about everyone else on duty chimed in in agreement.

Yeah, YWalker: just how much of their sales volume comes from straight coffee? (And how much of that volume consists of coffee sold to people like me who, while driving down the turnpike, decide they need a cuppa and pull into the service plaza, only to find that the only coffee options available are Burger King and Starbucks?)

Like many in the Upper Midwest, I started on Caribou Coffee which now seems more like candy than coffee (and no surprise since they offer Andes mints, Snickers, Oreo, etc as mix ins). 

Then I moved into my "Corporations are evil, I will only go to small coffee shops" phase.  Fun, but unreliable - every barista made my drink differently.  I'm adventurous, but not at 8am. 

Once I settled on a regular drink (grande vanilla non-fat latte) I found that I could get it more reliably at Starbucks than elsewhere.

Hell of Frappucinos aside, I think Starbucks is more about espresso drinks than straight coffee. Granted, at their current rate they will be more about CDs, books, and movies than about any coffee!

My (potentially biased) two cents.

(emphasis added)

←

Consistency is the reason chains exist at all. From White Castle on down through the years, the idea is that the patron will get a product of uniform and predictable quality no matter where he or she may be.

Fans of independent establishments rightly point out that they have personality that the chains lack. If that personality clashes with your own, well, there are other similar establishments out there. But what if the personality keeps changing with the personnel, as in this case? You may, as pansophia did, opt to go to a place where personality isn't part of the formula. Which, in most cases, means a chain.

Edited February 12, 2007 by MarketStEl (log)

[scubadoo97]

Hell of Frappucinos aside, I think Starbucks is more about espresso drinks than straight coffee. Granted, at their current rate they will be more about CDs, books, and movies than about any coffee!

I'd say they are more into the milk business than coffee.

[pansophia]

My hubby the Coffee Master has asked me to point out that the CR article doesn't say WHICH Starbucks coffee was brewed for the test. There is a huge difference between "the ash tray like notes of French Roast (burnt and lacking in complexity)" and "the slightly floral, well balanced, slightly earthy notes of Ethiopian Sidamo."

Personally, he likes the more earthy and well balanced flavors of the African coffees as opposed to the acidic and bright notes of South American coffees.

It's really all down to personal taste and finding an area you like.

(Yeah, he's a coffee geek.)