Like your latte skinny? You may not even know it, but Starbucks Corporation (NASDAQ: SBUX) will soon replace the whole milk it pours into your coffee drinks by default with 2% low-fat milk in stores throughout the U.S. and Canada. Here in Oregon, where Starbucks had been testing the concept, I've been getting (ahem) skinnier for months already, and to be honest, I haven't noticed the difference in taste at all (when I'm in the mood for milk fat, I'll order a 'breve,' made with half-and-half instead of regular milk -- but I'm pregnant so you'll just have to indulge me and excuse my occasional luxury).Starbucks is banking that customers won't notice the difference, and if they do, they'll thank the beverage giant for the savings in calories and fat. It's somewhat ironic, as although Starbucks has been conducting a health campaign of sorts these past several months; switching to trans-fat-free pastries, hormone-free milk, and offering a "light" version of the chain's popular Frappuccinos; Starbucks' beverages and treats are famous for being, often, higher in both fat and calories than many competing options (just check out That's Fit's "How Many Calories?" feature -- which often features Starbucks drinks). Even switching to 2% milk won't (for instance) negate the considerable caloric surge of three pumps of sweetened syrup -- the default for a grande beverage.
I think the switch is a smart one, both for the bottom line and the size of the average customer's bottom. It doesn't make sense to pour whole milk by default if most customers are used to drinking 2% in their homes (which seems to be the case). However, if I were consulting Starbucks on the overall health profile of its beverages, I'd suggest a switch to far less syrup in each beverage -- all that sugar has got to be worse for us than a little milk fat. What would you change about Starbucks' beverages if you were on the product development team?
Why Facebook's Falling Share Price Really Doesn't Matter
Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan: A Romantic Facebook Timeline


Reader Comments (Page 4 of 4)
6-22-2007 @ 8:33PM
pedro bonilla said...
LATTE,FRANPUCHINO VANILLA FLAVOR COFFEE WHAT IN THE WORLD IS HAPPENNING? COFFEE SHOULD BE TAKEN AS IS. ALL THESE ADDITIVES ADDED TO THE COFFEE ONLY WHO KNOWS WHAT IS DOING TO OUR BODIES. PEOPLE ARE BEEN TAKEN FOR A RIDE. A STRONG CUP OF COFFEE SHOULD BE WHAT IS MEANT TO BE COFFEE. THESE YUPPIES HAVE CHANGED WHAT A GOOD CUP OF COFFEE USED TO BE.AND ALL THESE WATERED DOWN TYPES OF MILK DOES NOT A BETTER FLAVOR COFFEE MAKES.
7-25-2007 @ 10:31AM
The Redhead Said... said...
OKay, as a Starbucks officianado I can tell you there is a BIG difference between a Latte made with nonfat milk & one made w/whole milk! It just comes down to a matter of personal taste. If you take cream in your coffee then you know that all the nonfat milk in the world is not going to make that coffee any creamier. I always ask for whole milk but do not alwys get it. A lot of the time, I have to ask them to make it again with whole milk. This is the whole point of a Latte- if you don't want the milk, why not order an iced coffee?
8-02-2007 @ 9:46PM
KitKat71 said...
Just so people know...the amount of pumps of syrup in a Grande are 4 not 3 and that amounts to 90 extra calories (not that many really).
Just a heads up to others on the Atkins diet getting their breve lattes...it amounts to approx 660 calories and 55 grams of fat for a grande...because a serving size for half&half is 15ml and a serving size for regular milk and non-fat is 1cup.