Coffee portion size latest
A tall story
I have mentioned before how much I like the coffee chain EAT. Of the chains, it's the smallest; they do ground decaff rather than instant, which is by no means a given, and the soya milk's organic. (As is their dairy milk, lactose fans!) Because I have takeaway coffee so rarely, I have decided I can live with the dose of soya, as long as it's organic. There's also a nice chap called Arthur who works at the Regent Street branch of EAT who I usually have a natter with when I pass through on a Sunday morning, on the way to work. It's a pleasant place to visit and it's actually opposite a Starbucks, so you can enjoy the act of not giving them money and look at their logo at the same time.
They do two coffee sizes, Tall and the ubiquitous Grande. The Grande, which seems to be about half the size of a Costa Grande - you can certainly lift one - costs just two pounds, even if you have decaff or soya. There is no surcharge for these lifestyle choices. A Tall costs 1.70. Anyway, I ordered my usual Grande Decaff Soya Latte to take away on Wednesday and the person at the coffee machine accidentally prepared me a Tall Decaff Soya Latte. I pointed out the excusable error, and the coffee was decanted from a Tall cup into a Grande cup. To my astonishment, it almost filled the Grande cup!
It turns out that the Tall cup is wider than the Grande cup, so that even though it's shorter, it contains almost the same amount of coffee. The difference is a quick glug of froth. So, from now on, I shall always order the Tall, save myself 30p and get virtually the same hot drink.
I don't mean to do EAT down here - I'm sure cup discrepancy is similar in other outlets - but it's worth knowing. If I drink two cups a week, that's 60p I'll save, which is 2.40 a month! I could almost afford to buy a coffe in Caffe Nero with that money!
posted by Andrew Collins @ 11:39 AM
12 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
12 Comments:
I agree with you about the cost of Nero's drinks - they're extortionate! However I feel compelled to sing the praises of their iced mint frappes.
A friend introduced me to them in the Summer and now I'm completely hooked. It's like drinking a Mint Aero. At an overpriced £2.50 a pop they ain't cheap but they certainly fill you up till dinner time as they are so rich.
Try one!
I think you should write a book about your experiences in coffee shops, Andrew. It would be fascinating.
I've just run my Irony-ometer over that last comment and I'm getting a reading ...
Getting nothing here... oh hang on that's the iron...
I'm afraid I've got there first - my treatise on coffee shops "Che Java-rah: Musings on the British coffee revolution" hits the stores in January. Here's a waft of the first few chapters to get those coffee loving juices flowing:
1 Ground zero - in which I open with a review of beans, grains and grinding technology
2 Encounters with pastries - an expose of cake technology and an insightful case study of the relative merits of Costa's bakewell slices versus Starbuck's almond croissants.
3 Is cup size important? Experiments with different drink size and its correlation with time of day including entirely new material on how the Costa massimo contributed to the war in Iraq.
4 Music to my ears. How the unique acoustics of coffee grinder ambience and soft furnishings render John Coltrane as indistinguishable from Kenny G
5 Strange Brew - In which I examine the place occupied by herbal teas and other coffee-less beverages.
6 Sit in or take away - How porcelain fairs against cardboard for flavour, heat conservation and sense of wellbeing
7 Sofa so good - comparative assessment of comfy chairs. Why are the chairs in US coffee shops so much larger?
8 Fair trayed - Food transportation technologies - plastic tray versus cardboard sleeve and the correlation with scalding accidents. I let the facts speak for themselves.
9 Carlisle to Seattle - From the North West of England to the North West USA - home to the coffee Emperors. But not by train. I examine why Seattle produced musical genius in the form of Kurt Cobain and Jimi Hendrix, yet is home to three of the largest (and most evil?) multinationals in the world, Starbucks, Microsoft and Boeing. See my exclusive pictures of Bill Gates playing a strat left handed in a vain attempt to get with his homies. See also my evidence of subliminal messages planted in software, telling users to fly in more airlines and drink more genetically modified coffee. It's all true I tell you.
10 Er ...
11 That's it
David
Your book sounds fascinating. I am just off to my local independent non global multinational book retailer to order myself a copy!
What is it about coffee shops and serving sizes? It’s a whole new branch of unilateral volumetric mathematics where you’re just allowed to invent new sizes.
Apologies if this is old hat, by the way, but did you know that Starbucks has a secret serving size that they refuse to publicise but will always sell, that’s cheaper and tastes better than their bespoke neologistic servings? For the mythic “Short” espresso and latte size, attend herein: http://www.slate.com/id/2133754/
OK, so here’s my Moral Dalai Lama: should I eschew teh 'Bucks entirely as an international Gruppenfuhrer of Mammon, or patronize it as often as I can, but always order Fairtrade organic and soya. It feels like that’s my Consumer Vote, and it won’t count unless I drink it. Um, does that make any sense?
Altogether now “One Dalai Lama…there’s only one Dalai Lama…”
I have a local Starbucks in New York and they always give me free stuff. First I ordered half a pound of ground coffee, but they only had one pound bags, so they gave me a full pound for the cost of half a pound. Next time I asked for a cake and it was broken so they gave it to me for free. Since then they're always generous, even though the staff always change. My girlfriend says it is because I look poor and they feel sorry for me, but I think it's because I'm cute. Either way, I like Starbucks. They have good products. It's not enormous because they're inherently evil; it's because we, the masses, want it. (By the way, I don't like the 'unique' size nomenclature either. I just say "small" and they understand.)
But Starbucks give stuff away cos they're loaded, and can afford to, not because you're cute or they're kind, Dom! I boycott ver Bucks, in the same way I do Tesco - because they're too big and powerful, which is dangerous. I realise this is only political protest akin to Woody Allen refusing to eat grapes for a week, but you've got to start somewhere, haven't you?
hmmm... when my Italian friends come over here or go to the States, they always complain 'but why do want coffee in a cup the size of a bucket'...
I'm with you, Clair. The bigger the company, the less they need my custom, and the more likely they are, in some way, ruining the world. If only it was as easy to avoid the biggest media conglomerates. But they have their tentacles everywhere. I would take issue with your optimistic view that we create the corporations, Dominic. If Starbucks open up two coffee shops - as only a big corporation can afford to do - we have half as much choice than we would if they opened up one, and their expansion policy has been so aggressive, this is precisely how they have come to dominate the world coffee market. The same with any large supermarket or burger chain: they can afford to write off losses that smaller, more local companies can't. If you own one coffee shop and you lose money, you close. If a branch of Starbucks loses money, the company weathers it in the name of keeping out the competition.
So that's why I boycott them. It is, as I always say, a futile gesture, but one that eases my conscience - and reminds me that I have one and it's in working order.
I was forced to do some "big shopping" in supermarkets this Christmas, as we have a houseful coming over, and all it did was remind me that I can't remember the last time I went in Waitrose or Sainsbury's and used a trolley. Long may that be the case.
Hmmm, now I'm confused. It's true, I will buy my fruit and vegetables in local shops because I always imagine the money given to big supermarkets goes to some corporate machine rather than the people who did the work to produce the goods. At the same time, though, I remember when Starbucks opened in HK the two dramatic changes for the consumer were that the existing coffee shops finally started making decent coffee, and a whole bunch of new shops opened up in competition because the market became bigger. I don't really understand the economics and implications of chain stores, but I always guessed the problem was that the more powerful the corporation, the more damage they can do; but I always assumed this was due to human nature's inherent impulse to better oneself even if it's at someone else's cost. Or, in other words, if we all understood our world would be better if we all had an active interest in each other's well-being, then big chain stores could still exist because they would supply a good product in an efficient way (whilst distributing their profits fairly). I think small companies could still flourish in this environment (so, I don't have a problem with chain stores, I have a problem with corrupted people).
I guess boycotting large corporations is a way to make this point, but it seems indirect to me. After they all close down the problem, which is in us, will still be there.
Like I said though, I'm confused now. Chain stores shouldn't dominate High Streets and cities, and I see your point - if a Starbucks and a local coffee shop opened up on the same street, the Starbucks would have an unfair advantage. Okay, let me think, I just may join you, but I still think human values have to be reassessed most urgently!
Also, I don't think one person acting is futile. I turn my lights off whenever I don't need them, even though I know it's not going to make any difference in the world's resource consumption and pollution, but at the same time I know one of the biggest obstacles in getting anything done is the masses who believe they can't help so they never try.
Post a Comment
<< Home