I'm not sure that a Starbucks in the Market is a bad thing. They'll heavily renovate, go out of business in about a year and leave behind an attractively retrofitted spot for a new coffee shop. Where's the problem?
I don't like Starbucks - either their coffee or the corporate mentality - but I generally believe in the market. So normally, I'd say sure, open a Starbucks and we'll see how long it lasts.
But the poster/petition raises a good point: One Starbucks can bring a rent hike to the entire neighbourhood, even if it ends up bankrupting itself. I'd rather not take that gamble.
yeah, but they won't go out of business - they will prosper. Starbucks knows their market and they know who buys their coffee. They will have absolutely no difficulty selling to hipsters and yuppies who shop in Kensington - if anything it will draw more condo dwellers to the area and increase business for everyone.
Piccola: Do you have any proof that "one Starbucks can bring a rent hike to the entire neighbourhood"? If Kensington Market is an attractive place for national chains, then the rents should already reflect that demand.
There's a (horribly managed) Second Cup on the north side of College across from Augusta, so I wouldn't really consider it "in" Kensington.
Personally I would never take Starbucks over a local coffee shop if I had the choice. Their products are never nearly as tasty and I'd muc hrather support the local businesses.
bigdaddyhame said: yeah, but they won't go out of business - they will prosper. Starbucks knows their market and they know who buys their coffee. They will have absolutely no difficulty selling to hipsters and yuppies who shop in Kensington - if anything it will draw more condo dwellers to the area and increase business for everyone.
actually, all Starbucks seems to do is find areas where local coffee shops thrive, and then they open up across the street from them.
not sure i am right? think of every great and mediocre independent or semi-independent TOronto coffee shop. then see if there's a Starbucks that's a stone's throw away. there always is.
i used to be indifferent about the Starbucks opening up in Kensington (since i think its destined to fail). but i also heard their rent is astronomical. its setting a bad trend for that area. landlords who think they can charge higher rents will push out their tenants.
If fans of the "small independent" Kensington coffee shops stay loyal, then those coffee shops will continue to do the same business and a Starbucks won't affect them at all.
What about that fancy new Good Egg store? How come that store is acceptable to the NIMBY police?
There's some thought that a Starbucks is actually helpful to the already existing independent coffee shop. In essence, Starbucks does the marketing, and creates the buzz, so the nearby independent place enjoys the spillover.
Isn't Cobs (the bakery) a chain? Of course it's not as successful and well-know as Starbucks so it managed to sneak in to Kensington under the radar...
Oh well, cities and neighborhoods evolve so lighten up folks...after all you don't see Eastern European Jewish community bemoaning the loss of "their" Kensington (from early last century)...
Lands Down: the landlords in Kensington are like the landlords everywhere else, in the business to make a profit.
Regardless of how much people who actually do live in the area protest it, the fact is Kensington is a tourist destination year round. Starbucks will thrive on the business from people visiting from inside or outside of the GTA, not just the local hipsters who need their over-priced, consistently burnt-tasting coffee.
What, no-one noticed the Second Cup at the top of Augusta for the last decade?
The animosity meted out to Starbucks must make the shareholders feel special. Obviously a Starbuck's location will function as a drain (on the coffers of small cafés and eateries) and a draw (Oh look honey just like our neighbourhood!).
The question is: what will be done (apart from vandalism) to compete with or combat the big bad coffee corp?
The reason almmost every stripmall, shopping plaza and downtown core in North America looks exactly the same as just about every other one is that the corporate sprawl of franchising works.
However, we must ask ourselves if all that metters at the end of the day is the bottom line. Ghandi said "Be the change you want to see in this world", so I say - are we okay with the homoginization of our small independent communities? Can we jsut throw our hands up and say" Well, thats the supply and demand market for ya" or should we actually take a stand on how we want the world to be?
Stopping a Starbucks in Kengsington won't destroy the area - no single thing will - however, lets not forget Queen Street West. Many years go, Le Chateau moved into the area...then a McDonald's...then a Gap etc etc. Now who can really tell the area from the Eaton Center?
Howdy to you kids who freaked out over this. While you protest this change of tenant at 234 Augusta, why not bone up on the generally accepted theories relating to how and why gentrification ignites and spreads in the places you love? If you need some help, look no further than the face of the Daily Photoist selections for September 3rd and 30th.
My dears, it's you, the future. You're the spark of gentrification. Starbucks and their ilk bank on your post-secondary education and imminent placement in the professional world for sources of future revenue. Kind of like the Crocs shop on Queen (I swear I feel like I've said this here before).
If corporate coffee chains spell armageddon for independent coffee houses and local business in general, how are there independent coffee shops on Bloor West between Jane and Runnymede thriving? There is a Timothy's, Second Cup, Starbucks and even Coffee Time and the neighbourhood hasn't become homogenized, pasteurized or otherwise drained of local culture.
(1) Lower the rent so that a family-run store can stay ($5000 a month!?!? Come on!!!)
-------------
And the person who owns the building has to comply because...?
Has to earn less money because...? Because hipsters say so? And the 5000/months figure sure looks like a lot to a young broke hipster, doesn't it. Maybe the group should do a little research and look like it has a clue about real estate and rental prices in the market before parading around the town square all huffed up.
If the 750+ members of the group keep on frequenting their favourite little coffee shops 2 or 3 times a week, those shops will be fine.
Strangely this new 'coffee revolution' probably wouldn't exist on this level, if it weren't for Starbucks in the first place.
We still would have had our Timmys and Coffee Times if Starbucks didn't exist. Oh, and caffeine isn't a revolution, it's more of an habit/addiction. It’s about as revolutionary and cigarettes. I enjoy a coffee once in a while, but calling it a revolution is kind of stretching it.
The funny thing about gentrification is that it starts long before Starbucks shows up. It starts when the bright, young, arty types move in to a neighbourhood and begin changing it to suite their tastes.
Starbucks is merely a symptom of gentrification, not the cause.
i go to Starbucks frequently because i KNOW they'll have soy milk. unfortunately, too many of the little indie coffee places that you'd think would be all over soy just don't have it. strange but true.
See, you actually get it. Starbucks is to gentrification as jellyfish are to ocean habitats: both are the environmental product -- one urban, the other marine -- of other changes preceding their arrival.
>We still would have had our Timmys and Coffee Times if Starbucks didn't exist.
Sorry I thought we were talking about COFFEE here :P
Don't be stupid. Coffee Revolution as in 4 dollar coffees, as in more coffee shops then you can shake a stick at, as in double latte, mocha blah blah blah
Maybe I can clear up some confusion. Kensington's, the independent coffee shop at the corner of Baldwin and Kensington was originally a Second Cup. This is going back a while, and it lasted about 2-3 years before it switched over to it's 'independent' status.
The urban legend is that the shop was boycotted by the locals, and as a result 'folded'. I suspect the truth is a bit less clear than that.
The issue of Starbucks opening in Kensington Market is complicated and actually has little to do with Starbucks. From what I gather, Starbucks is "off" the idea and the "threat" of them opening is over. The real issue remains: who owns the building, what is their selection process for prospective tenants, and what can other property owners in the area learn from this? As much as we would all like to dictate who and what should open up in the Market, we can't, but we CAN suggest what we don't want, and if the property owners choose to poll the neighbourhood on what they would like to see, well, how great would that be!
Just for the record - my store, Good Egg - is not "fancy" or "high-end." It's just plain nice, and what's wrong with that?
"Landlords don't "earn" money, they simply demand it."
Even for a flake-filled left-wing Toronto web-rag, this is a ridiculous statement.
Landlords take the financial risk of acquiring property, hoping to lease it. Along with the cost of buying/building the property, there are many other expenses: taxes, legal, maintenance, advertising, repairs, upgrades etc. Then there are the tenants; the deadbeats, midnight movers, vandals, professional squatters, the ones who bring in bugs and vermin, urinate (and worse) in the hallways and elevators, run drug dens, and illegally house more people than agreed to (often for profit). Add to that the legislation which governs the business of renting housing, including setting limits on profits.
Don't earn money? Only someone who has never actually risked anything, created something or worked at achieving something but expects those who do to give handouts would think that way.
If you love your local cafes, don't go in to the starbucks, they'll fail and you'll win. Everyone gets their chance though. Besides, why did the first business fail anyways? Because you didn't frequent it enough.
Goldsbie: Thanks for the info, looks like I had it wrong.
Regardless of my mistake, just don't drink at Starbucks and visit places like ideal. The seating sucks, especially during the winter, but it's still quite nice.
Out Cole
Doin' It All for the Cookie
Pages to Fold
A Trash Bin Quandary
Introducing Ask Torontoist
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I'm not sure that a Starbucks in the Market is a bad thing. They'll heavily renovate, go out of business in about a year and leave behind an attractively retrofitted spot for a new coffee shop. Where's the problem?
What about a Tim Horton's?
I don't like Starbucks - either their coffee or the corporate mentality - but I generally believe in the market. So normally, I'd say sure, open a Starbucks and we'll see how long it lasts.
But the poster/petition raises a good point: One Starbucks can bring a rent hike to the entire neighbourhood, even if it ends up bankrupting itself. I'd rather not take that gamble.
Leave the crackheads alone! We want to live in artfully messy squalor!
Thank you Adam, for saving us from economic development!
yeah, but they won't go out of business - they will prosper. Starbucks knows their market and they know who buys their coffee. They will have absolutely no difficulty selling to hipsters and yuppies who shop in Kensington - if anything it will draw more condo dwellers to the area and increase business for everyone.
Isn't/wasn't there already a Second Cup in Kensington?
Piccola: Do you have any proof that "one Starbucks can bring a rent hike to the entire neighbourhood"? If Kensington Market is an attractive place for national chains, then the rents should already reflect that demand.
There's a (horribly managed) Second Cup on the north side of College across from Augusta, so I wouldn't really consider it "in" Kensington.
Personally I would never take Starbucks over a local coffee shop if I had the choice. Their products are never nearly as tasty and I'd muc hrather support the local businesses.
bigdaddyhame said:
yeah, but they won't go out of business - they will prosper. Starbucks knows their market and they know who buys their coffee. They will have absolutely no difficulty selling to hipsters and yuppies who shop in Kensington - if anything it will draw more condo dwellers to the area and increase business for everyone.
actually, all Starbucks seems to do is find areas where local coffee shops thrive, and then they open up across the street from them.
not sure i am right? think of every great and mediocre independent or semi-independent TOronto coffee shop. then see if there's a Starbucks that's a stone's throw away. there always is.
i used to be indifferent about the Starbucks opening up in Kensington (since i think its destined to fail). but i also heard their rent is astronomical. its setting a bad trend for that area. landlords who think they can charge higher rents will push out their tenants.
If fans of the "small independent" Kensington coffee shops stay loyal, then those coffee shops will continue to do the same business and a Starbucks won't affect them at all.
What about that fancy new Good Egg store? How come that store is acceptable to the NIMBY police?
And of course they express their anti-corporate sentiment in a corporate knockoff font, Arial. Black, no less.
You go, girl.
Coffee at I Deal is waaaaay better
I JUST MOVED to the market because I wanted a bit of a break from Starbucks and even supermarkets...I guess I waited a bit too long.
There's some thought that a Starbucks is actually helpful to the already existing independent coffee shop. In essence, Starbucks does the marketing, and creates the buzz, so the nearby independent place enjoys the spillover.
http://www.slate.com/id/2180301/
I think it’s pure hubris to imagine that a Starbucks would fail at that location.
Anyone else notice the curious, security-camered, gated little community being finished up on Baldwin?
Isn't Cobs (the bakery) a chain? Of course it's not as successful and well-know as Starbucks so it managed to sneak in to Kensington under the radar...
Oh well, cities and neighborhoods evolve so lighten up folks...after all you don't see Eastern European Jewish community bemoaning the loss of "their" Kensington (from early last century)...
Who are the landlords in kensington anyway? I figured it was owned by like-minded people...so maybe rent wont be hiked up.
Lands Down: the landlords in Kensington are like the landlords everywhere else, in the business to make a profit.
Regardless of how much people who actually do live in the area protest it, the fact is Kensington is a tourist destination year round. Starbucks will thrive on the business from people visiting from inside or outside of the GTA, not just the local hipsters who need their over-priced, consistently burnt-tasting coffee.
No Starbucks in Kensington!!! on Facebook.
What, no-one noticed the Second Cup at the top of Augusta for the last decade?
The animosity meted out to Starbucks must make the shareholders feel special. Obviously a Starbuck's location will function as a drain (on the coffers of small cafés and eateries) and a draw (Oh look honey just like our neighbourhood!).
The question is: what will be done (apart from vandalism) to compete with or combat the big bad coffee corp?
Oh, just noticed Spacejack's tag of the Second Cup...
A vote for Starbucks is vote for homoginization.
The reason almmost every stripmall, shopping plaza and downtown core in North America looks exactly the same as just about every other one is that the corporate sprawl of franchising works.
However, we must ask ourselves if all that metters at the end of the day is the bottom line. Ghandi said "Be the change you want to see in this world", so I say - are we okay with the homoginization of our small independent communities? Can we jsut throw our hands up and say" Well, thats the supply and demand market for ya" or should we actually take a stand on how we want the world to be?
Stopping a Starbucks in Kengsington won't destroy the area - no single thing will - however, lets not forget Queen Street West. Many years go, Le Chateau moved into the area...then a McDonald's...then a Gap etc etc. Now who can really tell the area from the Eaton Center?
So yeah....I am against it on priciple.
LULZ. BEST. DERIVATIVE. HEADLINE. EVAR. :D
Howdy to you kids who freaked out over this. While you protest this change of tenant at 234 Augusta, why not bone up on the generally accepted theories relating to how and why gentrification ignites and spreads in the places you love? If you need some help, look no further than the face of the Daily Photoist selections for September 3rd and 30th.
My dears, it's you, the future. You're the spark of gentrification. Starbucks and their ilk bank on your post-secondary education and imminent placement in the professional world for sources of future revenue. Kind of like the Crocs shop on Queen (I swear I feel like I've said this here before).
Try not to look so shocked and horrified.
If corporate coffee chains spell armageddon for independent coffee houses and local business in general, how are there independent coffee shops on Bloor West between Jane and Runnymede thriving? There is a Timothy's, Second Cup, Starbucks and even Coffee Time and the neighbourhood hasn't become homogenized, pasteurized or otherwise drained of local culture.
david - As mentioned by other posters in every comment section related to this issue, the Second Cup isn't in Kensington Market.
Strangely this new 'coffee revolution' probably wouldn't exist on this level, if it weren't for Starbucks in the first place.
The facebook group says
-------------
We demand:
(1) Lower the rent so that a family-run store can stay ($5000 a month!?!? Come on!!!)
-------------
And the person who owns the building has to comply because...?
Has to earn less money because...? Because hipsters say so? And the 5000/months figure sure looks like a lot to a young broke hipster, doesn't it. Maybe the group should do a little research and look like it has a clue about real estate and rental prices in the market before parading around the town square all huffed up.
If the 750+ members of the group keep on frequenting their favourite little coffee shops 2 or 3 times a week, those shops will be fine.
Strangely this new 'coffee revolution' probably wouldn't exist on this level, if it weren't for Starbucks in the first place.
We still would have had our Timmys and Coffee Times if Starbucks didn't exist. Oh, and caffeine isn't a revolution, it's more of an habit/addiction. It’s about as revolutionary and cigarettes. I enjoy a coffee once in a while, but calling it a revolution is kind of stretching it.
The funny thing about gentrification is that it starts long before Starbucks shows up. It starts when the bright, young, arty types move in to a neighbourhood and begin changing it to suite their tastes.
Starbucks is merely a symptom of gentrification, not the cause.
i go to Starbucks frequently because i KNOW they'll have soy milk. unfortunately, too many of the little indie coffee places that you'd think would be all over soy just don't have it. strange but true.
@tripper
See, you actually get it. Starbucks is to gentrification as jellyfish are to ocean habitats: both are the environmental product -- one urban, the other marine -- of other changes preceding their arrival.
>We still would have had our Timmys and Coffee Times if Starbucks didn't exist.
Sorry I thought we were talking about COFFEE here :P
Don't be stupid. Coffee Revolution as in 4 dollar coffees, as in more coffee shops then you can shake a stick at, as in double latte, mocha blah blah blah
davedave - Landlords don't "earn" money, they simply demand it.
If Starbucks leased the place and opened a very unStarbucks coffee shop, indistinguishable from the rest in Kensington, would this still be an issue?
All coffee tastes like crap to me.
Re: Second Cup in Kensington
Maybe I can clear up some confusion. Kensington's, the independent coffee shop at the corner of Baldwin and Kensington was originally a Second Cup. This is going back a while, and it lasted about 2-3 years before it switched over to it's 'independent' status.
The urban legend is that the shop was boycotted by the locals, and as a result 'folded'. I suspect the truth is a bit less clear than that.
The issue of Starbucks opening in Kensington Market is complicated and actually has little to do with Starbucks. From what I gather, Starbucks is "off" the idea and the "threat" of them opening is over. The real issue remains: who owns the building, what is their selection process for prospective tenants, and what can other property owners in the area learn from this? As much as we would all like to dictate who and what should open up in the Market, we can't, but we CAN suggest what we don't want, and if the property owners choose to poll the neighbourhood on what they would like to see, well, how great would that be!
Just for the record - my store, Good Egg - is not "fancy" or "high-end." It's just plain nice, and what's wrong with that?
"Landlords don't "earn" money, they simply demand it."
Even for a flake-filled left-wing Toronto web-rag, this is a ridiculous statement.
Landlords take the financial risk of acquiring property, hoping to lease it. Along with the cost of buying/building the property, there are many other expenses: taxes, legal, maintenance, advertising, repairs, upgrades etc. Then there are the tenants; the deadbeats, midnight movers, vandals, professional squatters, the ones who bring in bugs and vermin, urinate (and worse) in the hallways and elevators, run drug dens, and illegally house more people than agreed to (often for profit). Add to that the legislation which governs the business of renting housing, including setting limits on profits.
Don't earn money? Only someone who has never actually risked anything, created something or worked at achieving something but expects those who do to give handouts would think that way.
this is bang on.
Waste your time and sign up for gothamist
in the USA.
This has something to do with the Spadina area?
You poor sad people.
If you love your local cafes, don't go in to the starbucks, they'll fail and you'll win. Everyone gets their chance though. Besides, why did the first business fail anyways? Because you didn't frequent it enough.
Actually, Matt, the J & J Fruit Market was closed down by Public Health.
Goldsbie: Thanks for the info, looks like I had it wrong.
Regardless of my mistake, just don't drink at Starbucks and visit places like ideal. The seating sucks, especially during the winter, but it's still quite nice.