Wow.

In the spirit of conciliation, and because I am in the land of Starbucks this week, I just gave them another try.

In the end I had a triple child size latte (in order to have the right ratio of espresso to milk)

I'm sorry, but I still don't like it. It still isn't to my taste. The espresso left a very bitter taste, and the milk isn't quite right - it doesn't have that richness and creaminess found in other independent coffee places in the US, or in Europe.

I've also compromised in past by ordering a tall black eye made with Pike Place. (In place of ordinary filter coffee) The Pike Place isn't horrid, but again the espresso leaves an odd taste.

So, for those of you who like Starbucks, WaWa, Dunkin' Donuts, or what to me is the very worst, Tim Horton's, please enjoy a cup for me there. I'm sorry, I just cannot find the pleasure in their products.

I thought I read somewhere that a triple venti had the right amount of espresso to milk ratio.
I'm assuming you ordered a tall triple. I know there is a society or some such that qualifies these things, but I can't seem to find it. Can you point me in the right direction to locate it?

I will agree with you on Tim Horton's though, that stuff is HORRIBLE!

Consistently dreadful.

As exbayern wrote earlier in this thread:
"Starbucks is a pretty safe bet - safe to have poor quality coffee and espresso drinks."

Anywhere it's possible to purchase a venti, sugar-free, non-fat, vanilla soy, double shot, decaf, no foam, extra hot, peppermint white chocolate mocha with light whip and extra syrup is not somewhere that should be encouraged.

as an aside, the worse the coffee the better the corned beef hash

A very long time ago when Starbucks served 'short', 'tall' and 'grande' sizes, they had pictures on the walls with the 'correct' ratio of espresso to milk in each type of drink. (This was long before the days of sugar-free, non-fat, soy, extra syrup, sprinkles, and even before Frappuccino)

When the 'short' disappeared to be replaced by the 'venti' size, the pictures also seem to have disappeared. Ordering a 'short' often is denied in my experience, hence I sometimes have to ask for a 'child's triple latte' instead.

I'm veering way off topic, but I would be curious to know what ratio of Starbucks customers outside North America are local vs visitors. The few times I have ventured into a Starbucks in Germany it was either empty, or had people with American accents, or a few confused locals trying to understand the 'system'. The same was true in China.

Not sure what necessitated yet another rant against Starbucks, I was simply asking if you could point me in the right direction of the recommended amount of espresso vs. milk.
If you have that, I would appreciate it.

In Sydney it's mainly people who I would judge to be in their late teens, and Asians. We have a large Asian population, so I couldn't say if they were local people or visitors. (I'm not inside so i don't hear their accents to guess where they might be from).

And even though there are far fewer Starbucks now than when they first tried (and failed) to conquer, they never seem to be very busy.

I would guess it's just because they are.

It wasn't a rant. Starbucks has evolved quite a bit and the Starbucks of today little resembles the original.

I am somewhat certain that the ratio of espresso to milk varies by country, company, and location. There is a reason why a certain type of coffee beverage is called a caf� am�ricain in much of the world, just as there is 'Turkish' coffee and many other types.

And I suspect that the Starbucks ratio varies from other coffee houses even in North America, as I find the ratio to be very different in some places than in Starbucks, even in the US.

Again, it is a matter of taste. Here for example is a NY Times blogpost showing a different viewpoint: (not suitable for Badger Boi viewing )

http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ref=t-magazine

are?

Just because they exist.

I remember some years back I took a young friend of a cousin to a wonderful coffee place, the sort of place people would travel many kilometres just to enjoy their coffee and other delights. As we walked out she loudly proclaimed "that was the worst coffee I've ever had in my life. Of course, I discovered later that she was strictly a Nescafe instant coffee type of girl who had never had a "real" coffee before in her life. I can understand her feeling that way, I guess, because Nescafe tastes nothing like the wonderful brew that we were served, and if you weren't prepared for it...

I just re-read the title of this thread and thought that I might add that, with breakfast I enjoy a glass of half orange/half pineapple juice. But only when I'm on holiday, as a treat.

Actually I might have romanticised coffee in Paris a little - thinking about it I have had a few poor cups, notably a dishwater-like concoction that was sold to me under the guise of a grand creme in May this year. But to be fair, it was on the left bank, and that's not really Paris

Its the brand name and consistency in taste..

I'm a landlord of Starbucks, and soon to be Tim Hortons.. the deal is going to formal approval with TDL Group (Tim Hortons) execs, as per my conversation with the national leasing manager today..

Tim Hortons in Canada is the hottest business franchise to get your hands on.. as landlords, we weren't even allowed to get in the priority line for a franchise.. its that hot..

But I'm not a coffee drinker, so what do I know.. but from a business point of view, our properties increase in value having Starbucks and Tim Hortons as a tenant..

I drink coffee with breakfast, but not Starbucks. I can't stand their coffee. Starbucks is the closest non-alcoholic drink to poison I've ever drank, and I'm not a very picky coffee drinker. I'll drink gas station coffee if it hasn't been on the burner too long.