Friday, August 05, 2011

Starbucks To Crack Down On Squatters

I've never been a fan of Starbucks, primarily because the prices are outrageous and there is typically little seating available because of the squatters who plop down every day with their laptops and spend hours hanging out, making it difficult to find a place to sit down. Some Starbucks locations in the Big Apple have had enough and are starting to crack down on squatters:

They’re called Starbucks “squatters.” You know, those folks with their laptops who take all the seats and never seem to leave.
But, as CBS 2′s Scott Rapoport, reports the coffee house giant has a plan brewing to fix that.
You know how some Starbucks customers and their computers like to make a permanent home in the coffee emporium, hogging up all the seats for hours, mooching off the free Wi-Fi and preventing you from sitting down and enjoying the latte you paid $5 for?
Well, now some Starbucks in New York City are reportedly pulling the plug on that idea, actually covering up their electrical outlets to discourage squatters.
I'm not sure covering up the electrical outlets will work. They'll probably just bring back up batteries to keep their laptops running. The Starbucks on Mass Avenue has a particularly bad squatter. This guy pulls up in his Mercedes every day with his laptop and takes a window seat. I'm convinced the guy uses the place as a substitute for an office because he seems to be meeting people there to discuss business on a pretty regular basis. I'm guessing he sells real estate, but I'm not sure. He's an arrogant a_ _ hole who acts like he owns the place. I've often wondered why the manager on duty doesn't tell him to get lost because he's bad for business.

1 comment:

Morning Constitutional said...

I'm not a big fan of Starbucks, either, liking my coffee rather plain and black, and, more importantly, cheap, but doesn't Starbucks like any other business establishment have a right to say "so much minimum purchase per time period or you're outta here?". Now of course that minimal cost might well still be cheaper than paying office overhead for the person you describe, but I suspect that he's not typical of the problem. I guess it comes down to what Starbucks perceives as its public image, as asking folks to buy or go awaay creates the potential for confrontation in front of other customers. Maybe a totally free-market apprach works best here.....adopting the policy, taking the risks, and seeing what falls out.