They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html

They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html

I wish someone would poison Cameron's coffee.

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" It sounds to me like really bad business to even think about investing more: after all, why would they invest more when they've yet to see a penny of profit after operating in the country for what – well over a decade?

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" It sounds to me like really bad business to even think about investing more: after all, why would they invest more when they've yet to see a penny of profit after operating in the country for what – well over a decade?

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" Certainly not drink Costa

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" Certainly not drink Costa

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" Your view is pretty much as I wrote on a newspaper website at the weekend. My point was - why worry? It would be great if they closed their whole operation here as it would create a gap in the market for other operaors selling more (IMO) more potable coffee and paying tax here.

Quote ="El Barbudo"They might hold off on their investment in UK. Oh dear, I am quaking in my boots, imagine if they decided not to sell more coffee in the UK, what on earth would we do? www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tacks.html'" Your view is pretty much as I wrote on a newspaper website at the weekend. My point was - why worry? It would be great if they closed their whole operation here as it would create a gap in the market for other operaors selling more (IMO) more potable coffee and paying tax here.

No change to my life then.

Always amazed me how successful Starbucks have been - their coffee is terrible. Sandwiches are decent, but the coffee is vile.

Cameron should double their tax bill in the hope they'lll fook off.

[i[size=85(edited)[/size[/i

Matter of opinion, their coffee for me is way, way better than Starbucks'.

Oops I meant Starbucks.



Costa is marginally better.

Of the three big chains (which, generally, I avoid), I'd put Nero first, Costa second and Starbucks nowhere.

But, anyway, what economic difference would it make to the UK if Starbucks didn't open any more shops here or (even better) pulled out?
Feckall difference IMHO.

The only one I ever use is Nero – and that's only when I'm staying in Manchester and prefer to take breakfast sitting outside the one on Piccadilly Gardens instead of in any hotel.

On the impact if they pulled put? Well, it would be bad for the workforce, obviously, but beyond that, I can't think of a major, negative impact on the economy.

Thank fook I've never had the displeasure of having to wilingly associate with any fooker that drinks in a [iCoffee-Shop.[/i

I can only imagine.......................

Yes, hundreds of people wouldn't lose their jobs, landlords have empty commercial premises, suppliers have none of the orders that they currently do, truly "feckall".

Whatever Starbucks are, or aren't, they are a sizeable employer.

If the demand for good coffee is there someone else will fill the gap in the market.



Which doesn't mean they should get away with murder.

I agree, but wwhat they do isn't illeagal, poor laws made by poor law makers, I don't blame Starbucks for taking advantage, it's the fault of successive governments failing to legislate.

Agreed to a point, but the consumer has the ultimate power, if they don't like the way Starbucks are acting they won't spend their money there. Starbucks agreed to pay SOME tax in a reaction to the consumer backlash.

Which shows how weak the tax laws are. If tax is so voluntarily why the fook have I been paying my dues for 30 odd years?

Anyway the idea Starbucks threat has any weight is a joke. As Mintaball pointed out if they are as unprofitable as they claim why wold shareholders want the board to pour more good money after bad anyway?

If on the other hand further investment in the UK is to the companies benefit then equally shareholders will still want to the board invest if money can be made. It's their second largest market I believe so it's not as if they can go elsewhere and have the same turnover.

Bluff needs to be called here. Don't bank on it though. instead expect it to be used as an excuse for even lower corporation tax rates.

As someone else said, if the demand is there, Starbuck's staff would find jobs with the current competition ... and the demand (apparently) IS there.
As for suppliers, I believe the largest of Starbuck's suppliers is Starbucks.

Do you really think GDP would suffer if Starbuck's ceased to be?
Would people stop having a sandwich or a cup of coffee ?

I am tempted to wonder if they pull this stunt in all the countries they operate in and that indeed they are a charitable organisation.
They are liars and should be challenged.
Income in this country less LEGITIMATE expenses incurred in this country is what they should be taxed on.
And a bill sent to them.

Excellently put, Sir!





Totally agree. Totally agree. And wouldn't be bleedin' surprised.

Starbucks remind me of those type of people you get on internet forums who get into a heated argument with other users and then start a new thread to say "had it with this forum, IM OFF, GOODBYE!".

Rarely do other users congregate to beg them to stay.

TBH I don't mind Costa.
Starbucks however is so foul it isn't funny.
I'm sure they add a tea-spoon of Yak urine to every cup on the sly.

Exactly there is no shortage of suppliers and it is relatively cheap for a new entrant to come in to the market. You don't have to invest in expensive technology to make coffee or sandwiches.

The real expense is that you need to have the money to pay the rent for prime location stores, however any large firm could do this even if they were in a different sector, it is not a difficult thing to open up an offshoot coffee business. And if there was genuine unmet demand by consumers for coffee, that was not being met due to the departure of Starbucks, then firms would recognise this as a profitable venture and so someone would do it.

Even the argument that they pay X amount of tax (not that they pay much) which will 'disappear' is not true. If consumers don't spend on Starbucks they will spend on other things in the economy which will lead to paying VAT on other things, giving profits to other firms that mean they will pay the tax. The only way that tax would disappear is if consumers decided that as Starbucks have gone, they would all put the money they usually spend in Starbucks, into savings accounts and not spend it!

Starbucks can't hold the government over a barrel about leaving the UK. They would have a strong argument if they were bringing a new and innovative product that had high barriers to entry so nobody could easily replace them, and had strong exports abroad so their departure would lower UK GDP and increase whichever country they relocated to's GDP through exports.

The thought that a company who basically makes people a brew feels absolutely entitled to private tete-a-tetes with government, and apparently regularly gets them, makes me sicker than a Starbucks milky lukewarm coffee. Fook them. The receptionist for the minister's assistant's secretary should have told them nobody would be available until a few million in tax had crossed the letterbox.

It does make you wonder just how a town like Totnes in South Devon can manage to not only survive but actually thrive these days. Apart from seeing off the threat of [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/02/totnes-costa-coffeeCosta[/url, they have previous by also refusing to allow major supermarkets to open out of town developments.

A town of 7,500 inhabitants manages to support 42 independent outets that sell coffee, albeit with the help of a major influx of tourists. The only major supermarket in the town is Morrisons and their store is very close to the town centre. So close, that Morrisons fuel station is on a completely separate site.

If Totnes can do it, there's nothig to stop other towns and cities across the country, although that might become more difficult if the [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9832505/Planning-laws-a-factory-next-door-but-residents-cant-complain.htmlproposed planning changes come into law[/url

Remind me what all that guff about 'localism' actually means ...