Friday, November 7, 2008

Dunkin' Donuts is quaint – but wrong


There is something QUAINT about the Dunkin' Donuts claim to have beaten Starbucks in a scientific coffee-a-coffee taste test. It's like a cheap PR STUNT from an old black-and-white movie. "Here's the ticket, JB – we dress a beautiful babe in a lab coat and tell the boys downtown that she's discovered a secret formula for changing oatmeal into silk... Then we..."

The flaw in Dunkin's campaign is the premise – that competition with Starbucks is "all about the coffee." If that were true, you could sell a great cup of joe straight from a garden spigot for LESS money and make a fortune. No, you good-hearted Dunkin' bozos. It is NOT "all about the coffee." It's about Starbucks' creation of an urban refuge in a menacing modern metropolis.

brandsinger  

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Okay, Brandsinger, maybe you're right that the "brand experience" at Starbucks is a tad more sophisticated than the "grab and run" experience you get at Dunkin Donuts. Still, if you can got to DD and get a cup of coffee that's cheaper AND tastes better, maybe you DO start to question your blind adherence to the Starbucks habit. Maybe you DO give up the longer lines, bebop jazz, leather seats, hip chit-chat, etc., etc., and start going to DD for your large (trans: venti) cup of steaming joe in its inimitable styrofoam cup - and get a non-lowfat doughut to go with it!

brandsinger said...

Thanks oh one with no name. Let's agree that each rival has a differentiated line of products and services. One can like and patronize both... depending on whether one wants to casually commune with the ascendant professional classes or dash in and out in spiritual solidarity with working-class heroes.
-brandsinger

Rob said...

I would have to disagree. I think the Starbucks brand had declined so much that Dunkin' can make the claim. I think the Starbucks machine has gotten too big for it's britches and is losing it's long devoted customer to niche cafes that are more relaxing and less crowded than Starbucks. I feel that "urban refuge" exists where it's not needed. I feel the large Starbucks store as an experince exists better in suburbia where the small coffee shops are hard to find and it gives people that oh so clever taste of "urban chic."

I'm a converted Dunkin fan. I used to swear by Starbucks, then realized I hated getting treated like a moron by baristas as I overpayed for coffee. Not by a matter of class, but by a matter of "just coffee" I would rightly choose Dunkin.

Rob said...

btw, im a big fan of your blog.

Anonymous said...

I understand what you're saying about the oasis of calm--however, Starbucks has really gotten away from that with their many kiosks in malls, supermarkets, and travel plazas. My local Kroger has a starbucks inside, as do the many service plazas on the Pennsylvania Turnpike, to name two examples. Sure, they put plush, earth-toned seats near the counter, but that hardly takes away from their form as a quick-service coffee counter in the mold of Dunkin' Donuts. So, I can definitely understand why Dunkin' Donuts would be making these claims.

brandsinger said...

Thanks, oh un-named opiner. Sounds like Starbucks is losing track of its brand – and thus leaving Dunkin's an opening to strike back.
-brandsinger

Joe Banks said...

I agree that it is a cheap P.R. stunt. Science should be taken more seriously if we are to face ignorance.
-JB

brandsinger said...

Hi Joe - thanks for your comment. Your respect for science is admirable. Personally, I have a soft spot in my heart for cheap PR stunts. Just the term "cheap PR stunt" sounds like dialogue from a tawdry film noir with slinky dames and guys in snap-brimmed hats who crack wise.

Keep smiling - brandsinger