Starbucks App and Cards Hacked
-
I don't understand why anyone would want to auto-load the app or card anyway. From my understanding it loads instantly, wouldn't it be better just have low balance alerts and only load when needed. $25 is at least 5 days worth of coffee. Its not like these people are loading $5 at a time.
-
This is why my Starbucks card does not auto reload.
This is also why none of my clients have SIP trunks that auto reload
-
When you load your card, do you only put $5 on it? probably not. I normally put 20-40 depending on what I expect my spending pattern to be.
Auto loading is all about convenience. If I have to load it manually every time I run out.. now every 5th or so trip I'm having to do two transactions at the window.
- reload my card
- pay for my drink with my reloaded card
So now the question becomes, why bother with the Starbucks card at all? That's easy, because for every 12 drinks you buy (actually it's every 12 individual purchases you make over x dollar amount) you get a free drink. If you have a regular 5 coffee a week habit, that can be a pretty big savings over a year of free drinks.
-
Now all that said, I've just never bothered to enable auto reloading on my SW card, even though I do have a card on file with them.
-
We have Tim Hortons here. We don't need no Starbucks! Let the south keep their Subways and Starbucks! Oh, and we have plenty of Dunkin Donuts too!
-
I just reloaded mine with $25 this morning. That is pretty normal. I will load $20 or $25 and that carries me through a typical 3-4 weeks.
-
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/ -
@Dashrender said:
If you have a regular 5 coffee a week habit, that can be a pretty big savings over a year of free drinks.
If you are going to Starbucks 5 days a week, I don't think you can use the word savings in the same sentence. That is an expensive addiction. I drink coffee daily ,too but from a coffee maker.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/That article is from 2010 and it's not uncommon for businesses to follow the economy by either going up or down.
-
@IRJ said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/That article is from 2010 and it's not uncommon for businesses to follow the economy by either going up or down.
The point was that Starbucks/DD are part of discretionary spending, not out of necessity. So when they are doing better, it means people are spending more freely on non-essential items. It's an older article (I was just finishing high school when I first saw it) but the principle is just as applicable...
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@IRJ said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/That article is from 2010 and it's not uncommon for businesses to follow the economy by either going up or down.
The point was that Starbucks/DD are part of discretionary spending, not out of necessity. So when they are doing better, it means people are spending more freely on non-essential items. It's an older article (I was just finishing high school when I first saw it) but the principle is just as applicable...
I would assume many restaurants follow a similar pattern.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
-
@IRJ said:
@Dashrender said:
If you have a regular 5 coffee a week habit, that can be a pretty big savings over a year of free drinks.
If you are going to Starbucks 5 days a week, I don't think you can use the word savings in the same sentence. That is an expensive addiction. I drink coffee daily ,too but from a coffee maker.
I go to much higher end places than SB. Going to one right now, actually, but the cost of coffee at the really good places around here is still only about $1.50. So not cheap, but not crazy.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@Dashrender said:
If you have a regular 5 coffee a week habit, that can be a pretty big savings over a year of free drinks.
If you are going to Starbucks 5 days a week, I don't think you can use the word savings in the same sentence. That is an expensive addiction. I drink coffee daily ,too but from a coffee maker.
I go to much higher end places than SB. Going to one right now, actually, but the cost of coffee at the really good places around here is still only about $1.50. So not cheap, but not crazy.
$1.50 is doable. The problem with Starbucks is their coffee. I like to drink coffee black and I find Starbucks to have some of the worst coffee. If you add all the creme and sugar it tastes good, but what coffee doesn't taste good when it's drenched in caramel, creamer, and sugar galore?
-
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
That's exactly what I said. The point was if they were hacked, the numbers are possibly skewed.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
That's exactly what I said. The point was if they were hacked, the numbers are possibly skewed.
Probably not enough to make a real difference in the overall picture though.
-
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
That's exactly what I said. The point was if they were hacked, the numbers are possibly skewed.
Probably not enough to make a real difference in the overall picture though.
That's a fair statement. Even if they stole millions, we're talking about billions of dollars for Starbucks, so you're probably right.
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
@Dashrender said:
If you have a regular 5 coffee a week habit, that can be a pretty big savings over a year of free drinks.
If you are going to Starbucks 5 days a week, I don't think you can use the word savings in the same sentence. That is an expensive addiction. I drink coffee daily ,too but from a coffee maker.
I go to much higher end places than SB. Going to one right now, actually, but the cost of coffee at the really good places around here is still only about $1.50. So not cheap, but not crazy.
$1.50 is doable. The problem with Starbucks is their coffee. I like to drink coffee black and I find Starbucks to have some of the worst coffee. If you add all the creme and sugar it tastes good, but what coffee doesn't taste good when it's drenched in caramel, creamer, and sugar galore?
I found that with effort I can normally find something okay there in their vein of brewed American coffees. But nothing really good, just passable. It's definitely the low end of coffee.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
That's exactly what I said. The point was if they were hacked, the numbers are possibly skewed.
Probably not enough to make a real difference in the overall picture though.
That's a fair statement. Even if they stole millions, we're talking about billions of dollars for Starbucks, so you're probably right.
I thought that they stole from customers, not Starbucks?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Starbucks Hacked - Maybe Not Such a Great Economic Indicator?
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/06/30/using-starbucks-dunkin-donuts-to-track-economy/Actually I might say the exact opposite. When businesses that rely on discretionary funds are doing will, that probably means the economy is doing well too because people have extra discretionary funds to spend.
That's exactly what I said. The point was if they were hacked, the numbers are possibly skewed.
Probably not enough to make a real difference in the overall picture though.
That's a fair statement. Even if they stole millions, we're talking about billions of dollars for Starbucks, so you're probably right.
I thought that they stole from customers, not Starbucks?
No they did. But my point is that if they steal from customers, that's going to hurt Starbucks too, because people report the fraud, and then stop going there because they don't trust it, tell others the same, etc.
