STARBUCKS DOMINATION?
“Ethics is knowing the difference between the right to do and what is right to do” by Potter Stewart enlightens us the narrow distinction between what the business can do but are they supposed to? Our human minds are always programmed to innovate and create but do the aftermath of the invention worth its consequences should always be a question. A good business is a business which keeps the social welfare over the profits as its primary objective.
The basic business ethics revolve around the fair competition among other competitors in the market. It should nurture a healthy competition, but is this being followed in the reality? Starbucks, the world’s largest coffee chain store with more than 12000 stores around the world, has been facing many lawsuits. The most recent one was filed by Simon Property Group owner of shopping centers across the country against Starbucks for the closing of its Teavana stores in the pretext that they have been underperforming and would continue to be the same. The underlying truth is that they have been performing well that they never lost money but not well enough for satisfying Starbucks.
The issue is that only two of the Teavana store’s lease expires out of 78 stores in the Simon Property Group. Simon says that Starbucks is breaching the lease obligations and fails to serve the people and the community in need of that. This was not the first time Starbucks took up unethical decisions. Previously it had been sued for using unhealthy competitive methods to eliminate competitors. Penny Stafford, owner of Belvi Coffee and Tea Exchange filed a lawsuit that it was using its monopoly power and paid the leases the excess of the market value if the landowner would refuse to provide occupancy for its competitors. Stafford also added it used very aggressive marketing strategies like providing free samples in front of the local coffee stores to attract the customers.
Starbucks is unethical, focusing on only the profits and not the benefits of the society. They are selfish to try to dominate the entire market with its unrestricted aim of monopoly by destroying small business in the place and increasing the consumer’s expenses by pricing high for just a cup of coffee. This goes to the wasteful disposable expenses of a consumer. Instead of paying more for the landlords to prevent other competitors, it could have productively used the money. I think Starbucks should consider little more of the society into consideration to emerge as world’s pioneer in coffee distribution.
Bibliography:
http://www.seattletimes.com/business/starbucks-sued-over-unchecked-ambition/