Complicated Starbucks Orders Is A Language I Don’t Speak None To Good

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

12 Responses

  1. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    A complicated order is like “flair” on the waitstaves’ suspenders at one of those goofy-crap-on-the-walls restaurants.

    If you just wanted coffee, black, why in the heck would you go to Starbucks? “Coffee, black, two sugars” is barely better.

    Your order should be as unique as you are. Are you a black, two sugars? Heck no! You’re a Venti Iced Caramel Macchiato with 1% milk and an extra shot of espresso! With a caramel drizzle, baby!Report

    • InMD in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      My understanding is that flair was ended as a direct result of being a punchline in Office Space. Maybe we just need Mike Judge to step in.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to InMD
        Ignored
        says:

        If Mike Judge gave Luanne and Peggy an episode where they tried to outdo each other on the most outlandish Starbucks order they could possibly come up with, it’d be in the ballpark of what ChatGPT would come up with if you asked it for a “funny” Starbucks order.

        Hey, let’s ask ChatGPT right now!

        I’ll be in italics, ChatGPT will be in bold:

        Hey, as a joke, I’m coming up with a convoluted Starbucks order. I’d like the most convoluted Starbucks drink order you can possibly come up with (but it has to be something on the actual menu).

        Can you do that for me?

        (Don’t worry! I’m not really going to order it! I’m just going to post about it online!)

        Here’s a hilariously convoluted Starbucks order that you can post:

        “I’d like a Venti, iced, quad, ristretto, 1/2 decaf, whole milk, 4-pump vanilla, 2-pump hazelnut, 3-pump white mocha, light ice, double-blended, extra whipped cream, extra caramel drizzle, 1.5 pump classic syrup, topped with a sprinkle of cinnamon dolce, no foam, with a shot of almond milk, in a Trenta cup, double-cupped, with a short straw, and a side of steamed oat milk.”

        It’s a wild mix of options, but all of it is technically possible with the Starbucks menu. Perfect for a fun online post!

        The “side of milk” is probably a little out there but everything else is probably within the ballpark of what our local barista sees every three minutes during morning rush.Report

    • Fish in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Venti soy vanilla latte with an extra shot, thankyouverymuch.

      I rarely go to Starbucks anymore (mostly due to a need to closely regulate my caffeine intake), and I’ve migrated my bean custom to a local roster.Report

  2. Damon
    Ignored
    says:

    Back in the day, when Starbucks did mail order sales of coffee, I realized that all their coffee all tasted the same to me. I was buying all kinds of exotic coffee beans. Turns out it was the roast I didn’t like. I ended up buying the grocery store pre ground stuff and it’s fine. Coffee is a caffeine delivery method for me.

    @ Andrew, why the hell are you getting your kid’s coffee? If she wants it, she can order it her self. Doesn’t want to make the trip? No coffee.Report

  3. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    14 words? Oh Andrew….Report

  4. Marchmaine
    Ignored
    says:

    My tepid steel-man defense of Starbucks would go like this:

    The coffee our elders drank was the coffee of soldiers mixing a few beans in a tin cup over an open fire concocted in a wet hole thousands of miles from home; and they liked it; and that’s what restaurants served in tiny 6oz cups. It was, however, terrible coffee by any standard. It is very much akin to the beer situation… f*cking close to water as the old joke goes. It’s hard to remember the disastrous American food culture of the 60s & 70s and 80s… littered with canned foods and time-saving pouches of fake stuff. And aspic.

    Its not until the 90s that we see ‘authentic’ foods emerge and get picked up by young GenX’ers coming into funds: Coffee, California cuisine, Micro-breweries, etc. etc. And, this was good.

    But, in full agreement with your post, that which was merely ‘authentic’ (the GenX anthem) became ever more expansive to the point that my GenZ daughters introduce me to Chocolate Tahini in my coffee (delicious, by the way); but chasing ‘novelty’ decoupled ‘authenticity’ puts us in a place where complexity becomes the enemy of excellence and we’re faced with a thing that is marvelous in it’s opulence, but unable to deliver on it’s promises… even the things that it once did better than anyone else.

    So my paean to Starbucks changes to an elegy as I lament it’s demise even as I sometimes still stop by for a simple small Mocha… well, small Mocha breve with extra whip.Report

  5. Chris
    Ignored
    says:

    I think one of the strangest phenomena I’ve seen in the restaurant industry is fast food companies decreasing their quality, and increasing their prices, to just about the price of the often much better fast causal restaurants in the same market. So if I go to McDonald’s, for example, to get my 4yo a Happy Meal, it’ll cost me like $5.60, but if I go a few blocks further to one of the half dozen fast causal places in a major shopping center and get a kids meal (sans toy), it’ll cost me like $6 with much better food. Why would I go eve go to McDonald’s, then (except that the 4yo really wants the toy, even if she will never, ever play with it).

    Starbucks here is in a similar situation, with local or smaller chain coffee shops popping up everywhere, serving much better coffee and fresher food for a very similar price. People still order complex drinks at the nicer cafes, just perhaps with fewer squirt flavors (and as a result, less sugar). If I stop in a Starbucks, it’s going to be because there’s no line and I’m in a big hurry.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to Chris
      Ignored
      says:

      “fast casual” still takes several minutes to cook the food, and it’s generally not a form that’s easily eaten while driving. McDonald’s has that burger in your hand thirty seconds after you pay for it, and it’s eminently roadable food. So I’d say that the fast food companies have identified the market price for “burger” and are now trading on speed of service. (I don’t really find the quality any less than it was before, although “less than it was before” does not imply “good”.)Report

      • Chris in reply to DensityDuck
        Ignored
        says:

        While it is true that fast casual will never be as fast as fast food, so as long as fast food exists, there will be a market for it, if the only people who eat at fast food restaurants are the ones who either need the food in 30 seconds and/or to be able to eat it while they drive (which you should not do, by the way), or the people who want to save the small difference in price between fast food and fast casual, then some fast food restaurants will survive, but with much less revenue.

        I already see this playing out here, where the dining rooms are empty and the lines in the drive-thru probably takes as long as ordering at fast casual would, which probably reduces the fast food customer base even further. Add in food delivery services, and you have even less reason to order Burger King or McDonald’s, much less Subway, which isn’t as fast, isn’t so easy to eat in the car (and definitely isn’t easier than a sandwich from a better shop), doesn’t have a drive-thru anyway, and in cities at least, has a ton of competition from better sandwich shops*.

        *Last fall we visited a friend who lives in a small town in Scotland, about 30 minutes outside of Sterling (so, in the middle of nowhere). This town has a population under 6k, but has 3 really good restaurants, and a handful of nice faster food (chip shops, Indian food, Scottish pub food, etc.). In another, even smaller town, mostly just farms, even further into the middle of nowhere, I had this incredible sea food mashed potato dish (I forget what it’s called) in a restaurant and pub so old that Robert Burns once ate there (they made sure everyone who entered knew that). And for another meal in that tiny town, spectacular fish and chips at what is effectively a fast food place. American small towns could learn a thing or two from small Scottish towns’ restaurant game.Report

        • Slade the Leveller in reply to Chris
          Ignored
          says:

          I was over visiting my best man in Dundee and we drove up the coast to do some sightseeing and we ended up in Stonehaven for lunch. We went to The Bay for fish and chips and it was fantastic. A selection of fish and how you wanted it breaded, which I’d never seen before. If you get back, I highly recommend it.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *