Starbucks Sued for $114M Over Recalled Employee Coupon

[deadparrot]

NEW YORK — Starbucks (SBUX) was sued Friday for $114 million over its recall last week of a coupon that entitled the holder to a free large iced drink.

Peter Sullivan, a lawyer who sued on behalf of a 23-year-old Starbucks regular who felt "betrayed" when her coupon was not honored, accused the Seattle-based company of fraud. He said he will request class-action status to include the "thousands who were misled" by the offer.

On Aug. 23, Starbucks e-mailed the coupon for the free "grande" drink to selected employees with instructions for them to forward the coupon to friends and family.

But Sullivan said Starbucks got jittery and refused to honor the coupon after the company saw how widely it had been distributed.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213352,00.html

[Catherine Vincent]

1. They were honored here in Houston.

[Ninga]

2. This is a cryin shame.

[negativenihil]

3. hrm

Ok first - let me just come out and say it - i'm a starbucks addict.

anyway - i really think this was a poor move - they could have gained more custoemrs by honoring the coupon than turning it down. It was their mistake for passing around such an easily copied coupon.

ah well - this will not change where i buy my coffee in the morning. Dunks vs Starbucks? no question imo - starbucks is far superior in terms of customer service (and imo quality).

[BlueCollar]

4. how much is 114 Million

as a percentage of their revenue?

I'm asking because I see another "frivolous lawsuit...yada,yada,yada...quack,quack" campaign coming out of this.

If you can show that this barely dents SBUX then it makes a difference in the argument

[Hamlette]

7. actually, I think this is a frivolous lawsuit...yada, yada, yada, quack.

This is it? We feel betrayed when a coupon, we didn't do anything to "earn" is not "honored"?

We are a nation of crybabies.

114 million because you didn't get a free cup of coffee?

Heck, Starbucks made a mistake. They had no idea what would happen. I know its easy to hate business, especially big business, but having been in business for myself, I could tell you stories. . . (like employees who stole cash from me, like customers who returned stuff they didn't buy from me...like bounced checks....)

[Greyhound]

12. I think the amount the suit was filed for is insane, but that's typical

for this kind of action (fishing for a settlement).

The point, and you made it yourself, is that $tarbuck$ made a mistake and they should live with the consequences of that mistake. If you or I make a mistake that ends up costing us $$, we just have to suck it up, learn the lesson, and move on.

Why should a large company that makes a mistake get to renege? Because it will cost them and hurt the bottom line for one quarter? It's not like this will bankrupt them, it doesn't even amount to a loss, only less profit for one quarter.

BTW I am a fan of $tarbuck$ too, although Seattle's Best was far superior until $tarbuck$ bought them and killed the line (another common business practice I object to).

[Hamlette]

13. I'm not a fan of Starbucks....nor do I care/hate them.

my point is, what's with suing because you can get a free drink? Yea, I know the amount is stupid but isn't any amount stupid?

Everyone in this country thinks a law suit is going to make them rich or right all the wrongs in the world.

I did not mean to imply that its good for businesses to do this. Ordinarily I'd say the business should/must live up to it's offer. It's a bad business decision on their part. But like with all law suits, I'm not sure we have all the facts. What if you decided to sell your house, put it on the market but something happened...should you be able to withdraw your house from the market before anyone gave you money for it? Yes. Here Starbucks made an offer but there was no consideration from the person who is suing.

Stop with the stupid lawsuits already. They give good law suits a bad name. IMHO.

[Fortunato]

5. Starbucks' lack of foresight, people's immaturity

Well, it was a pretty senseless move to send out a coupon via e-mail and NOT expect it to proliferate endlessly across the web. That's simply the law of nature. People will forward it to people, who forward it to more people never expected to receive it.

(Sort of like the Borders coupon I get every so often. I used to print out one a day across the four-day sale, thus getting four books altogether at 20-30% off. The last coupon said it could only be used once per customer per sale. They caught on and realized people would use it as much as possible, unless they drew limits, so they did.)

Starbucks, which prides itself in its imagination and people savvy, should have been smart enough to figure this out ahead of time.

On the other hand, I have no sympathy for people who are so immature they have to sue someone over not getting a $2.50 drink... especially when it was clear the coupon was not being used as intended. That's just pathetic and indicative of the attitude of entitlement running rampant in this country.

At risk of sounding caustic, I'd say, suck it up, princesses. Get a real life.

[MissB]

10. "suck it up, princess"

:applause:

[newyawker99]

11. Hi Fortunato!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[quiet.american]

6. If the 23-yr-old can hire a lawyer, she should be able to afford a cupper

I know, I know... it's the principle of the thing. :P

[SacredCow]

8. I wonder if I should sue them, too?

Not for the coupon thing- just for selling lousy, overpriced coffee.

[brentspeak]

9. Oh, the injustice of it all. Evil Starbucks.

:eyes:

[Selatius]

14. Is it at all possible the lawyer talked the woman into suing Starbucks?

Is that a possibility at all?