> Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.

> Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> chiming in.

> On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> because of international sales)

> On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > chiming in.

> > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> simply want convenience.

> Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> Peabody?

> On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > because of international sales)

> > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > chiming in.

> > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -

> What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> demented approach.
> I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> expense etc.
> I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> stock, based on forward-looking view.
> And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > simply want convenience.

> > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > Peabody?

> > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > because of international sales)

> > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > chiming in.

> > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> By the way, in my area there is a line in SBUX all day long... and the
> new drive-thru located before office complex is mobbed until noon.
> If recovery does in fact occur, SBUX will be fine... no one's going to
> stop drinking this sh1t. People don't change just like that, and
> everybody's addicted to caffeine.
> I totally disagree with the naive view that SBUX doesn't fit in to the
> new emerging consumer-saving economy... But I'll also admit that I
> have no idea what I may be talking about. That's just how it appears
> to me.

> On Aug 6, 8:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > demented approach.
> > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > expense etc.
> > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > simply want convenience.

> > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > Peabody?

> > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > > because of international sales)

> > > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > > chiming in.

> > > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -

> That wasn't so hard, was it?  I just wanted to make sure you weren't a
> 12 year old...

> You make some good points.  I go to starbucks around 5 days a week.
> My local bux is also always full, but my location is a high traffic
> area that caters to locals and also beach traffic.  If I drive inland,
> to some of the newer locations in big box retail centers that are half
> vacant, there is generally nobody there after the morning.  They need
> to close those stores QUICK.

> The whole foods argument is a good one.  I wanted to buy it but the
> pullback I was waiting for never came.  People don't tend to break
> their routines to save a marginal amount of money.

> On Aug 6, 5:35 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > By the way, in my area there is a line in SBUX all day long... and the
> > new drive-thru located before office complex is mobbed until noon.
> > If recovery does in fact occur, SBUX will be fine... no one's going to
> > stop drinking this sh1t. People don't change just like that, and
> > everybody's addicted to caffeine.
> > I totally disagree with the naive view that SBUX doesn't fit in to the
> > new emerging consumer-saving economy... But I'll also admit that I
> > have no idea what I may be talking about. That's just how it appears
> > to me.

> > On Aug 6, 8:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > > demented approach.
> > > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > > expense etc.
> > > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > > simply want convenience.

> > > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > > Peabody?

> > > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > > > because of international sales)

> > > > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > > > chiming in.

> > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -

> I know... WF had a juicy pullback at the end of that 6-week broad
> market pullback we had before the July rally. I think it was down
> around 17, and I knew I should've bought back... though I did get in
> late around mid-20s.
> Also, regarding SBUX, I think the Via instant may do really well. If I
> could make instant coffee without having to ingest some sort of crap
> like Maxwell House...
> One thing I am having a problem with is that SBUX, in my opinion, does
> not need to shift its business or change... on the contrary, I think
> what SBUX needs to do is just to stick to selling coffee, and perhaps
> adjustment prices a tad to appeal universally. I personally do not
> like all this food, music, book, alcohol, and whatever else nonsense.
> I think Shultz should stick to what made Starbucks... its coffee. No?
> I agree completely with immediate shut down of stores taking any sort
> of loss... we'll see.
> Touched 19 today...

> On Aug 7, 12:30 pm, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > That wasn't so hard, was it?  I just wanted to make sure you weren't a
> > 12 year old...

> > You make some good points.  I go to starbucks around 5 days a week.
> > My local bux is also always full, but my location is a high traffic
> > area that caters to locals and also beach traffic.  If I drive inland,
> > to some of the newer locations in big box retail centers that are half
> > vacant, there is generally nobody there after the morning.  They need
> > to close those stores QUICK.

> > The whole foods argument is a good one.  I wanted to buy it but the
> > pullback I was waiting for never came.  People don't tend to break
> > their routines to save a marginal amount of money.

> > On Aug 6, 5:35 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > By the way, in my area there is a line in SBUX all day long... and the
> > > new drive-thru located before office complex is mobbed until noon.
> > > If recovery does in fact occur, SBUX will be fine... no one's going to
> > > stop drinking this sh1t. People don't change just like that, and
> > > everybody's addicted to caffeine.
> > > I totally disagree with the naive view that SBUX doesn't fit in to the
> > > new emerging consumer-saving economy... But I'll also admit that I
> > > have no idea what I may be talking about. That's just how it appears
> > > to me.

> > > On Aug 6, 8:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > > > demented approach.
> > > > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > > > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > > > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > > > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > > > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > > > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > > > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > > > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > > > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > > > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > > > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > > > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > > > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > > > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > > > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > > > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > > > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > > > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > > > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > > > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > > > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > > > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > > > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > > > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > > > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > > > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > > > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > > > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > > > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > > > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > > > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > > > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > > > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > > > expense etc.
> > > > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > > > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > > > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > > > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > > > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > > > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > > > simply want convenience.

> > > > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > > > Peabody?

> > > > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > > > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > > > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > > > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > > > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > > > > because of international sales)

> > > > > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > > > > chiming in.

> > > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Umm...so you like Starbucks, as a stock, because people go there and
> drink coffee and it is crowded. Ha

> I agree Starbucks is a good company, overall good strategy, food,
> coffee, etc. And ya I like going to starbucks every once in a while,
> that is NOT what I'm trying to argue. I was saying that their stock
> price is way overrated. It has nothing really to do with Starbucks as
> it does with the idiots who are buying and selling in New York.
> Starbucks doesn't make more money because their coffee is better, or
> their store is cleaner. A dollar is a dollar. And right now not nearly
> enough are coming in to justify a 55+ times earnings price tag.

> Not to mention when their competitors (MCD etc.) are trading around 12
> times.

> And CP, once again, you're wrong about what Starbucks should do. They
> shouldn't just sell coffee. Why you ask? Because people will pay them
> to provide other things, and as a publicly traded corporation they are
> by law required to maximize stock holder value by increasing profits.
> They will be able to make more (although I don't see it being alot) if
> they sell other things. Just because something "made you" doesn't mean
> it is the only thing you can ever do.

> On Aug 7, 1:03 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I know... WF had a juicy pullback at the end of that 6-week broad
> > market pullback we had before the July rally. I think it was down
> > around 17, and I knew I should've bought back... though I did get in
> > late around mid-20s.
> > Also, regarding SBUX, I think the Via instant may do really well. If I
> > could make instant coffee without having to ingest some sort of crap
> > like Maxwell House...
> > One thing I am having a problem with is that SBUX, in my opinion, does
> > not need to shift its business or change... on the contrary, I think
> > what SBUX needs to do is just to stick to selling coffee, and perhaps
> > adjustment prices a tad to appeal universally. I personally do not
> > like all this food, music, book, alcohol, and whatever else nonsense.
> > I think Shultz should stick to what made Starbucks... its coffee. No?
> > I agree completely with immediate shut down of stores taking any sort
> > of loss... we'll see.
> > Touched 19 today...

> > On Aug 7, 12:30 pm, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > That wasn't so hard, was it?  I just wanted to make sure you weren't a
> > > 12 year old...

> > > You make some good points.  I go to starbucks around 5 days a week.
> > > My local bux is also always full, but my location is a high traffic
> > > area that caters to locals and also beach traffic.  If I drive inland,
> > > to some of the newer locations in big box retail centers that are half
> > > vacant, there is generally nobody there after the morning.  They need
> > > to close those stores QUICK.

> > > The whole foods argument is a good one.  I wanted to buy it but the
> > > pullback I was waiting for never came.  People don't tend to break
> > > their routines to save a marginal amount of money.

> > > On Aug 6, 5:35 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > By the way, in my area there is a line in SBUX all day long... and the
> > > > new drive-thru located before office complex is mobbed until noon.
> > > > If recovery does in fact occur, SBUX will be fine... no one's going to
> > > > stop drinking this sh1t. People don't change just like that, and
> > > > everybody's addicted to caffeine.
> > > > I totally disagree with the naive view that SBUX doesn't fit in to the
> > > > new emerging consumer-saving economy... But I'll also admit that I
> > > > have no idea what I may be talking about. That's just how it appears
> > > > to me.

> > > > On Aug 6, 8:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > > > > demented approach.
> > > > > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > > > > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > > > > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > > > > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > > > > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > > > > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > > > > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > > > > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > > > > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > > > > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > > > > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > > > > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > > > > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > > > > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > > > > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > > > > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > > > > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > > > > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > > > > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > > > > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > > > > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > > > > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > > > > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > > > > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > > > > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > > > > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > > > > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > > > > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > > > > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > > > > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > > > > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > > > > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > > > > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > > > > expense etc.
> > > > > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > > > > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > > > > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > > > > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > > > > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > > > > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > > > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > > > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > > > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > > > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > > > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > > > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > > > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > > > > simply want convenience.

> > > > > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > > > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > > > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > > > > Peabody?

> > > > > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > > > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > > > > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > > > > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > > > > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > > > > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > > > > > because of international sales)

> > > > > > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock...

> Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.

> Starbucks is a good company but I am sure that in next 90 days it will
> go down to 15 before going to 20.

> On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.

> No Timbo, I like the stock because it got beaten down like everything
> else, but fundamentally SBUX is a great company and worth more. And
> no... I do not think they should get side-tracked trying to sell a
> bunch of other things... sticking to drinks and such will prove to be
> the best strategy going forward... just watch... Oh, and did you
> forget to take your medication this morning, Timmy?

> On Aug 7, 2:56 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Umm...so you like Starbucks, as a stock, because people go there and
> > drink coffee and it is crowded. Ha

> > I agree Starbucks is a good company, overall good strategy, food,
> > coffee, etc. And ya I like going to starbucks every once in a while,
> > that is NOT what I'm trying to argue. I was saying that their stock
> > price is way overrated. It has nothing really to do with Starbucks as
> > it does with the idiots who are buying and selling in New York.
> > Starbucks doesn't make more money because their coffee is better, or
> > their store is cleaner. A dollar is a dollar. And right now not nearly
> > enough are coming in to justify a 55+ times earnings price tag.

> > Not to mention when their competitors (MCD etc.) are trading around 12
> > times.

> > And CP, once again, you're wrong about what Starbucks should do. They
> > shouldn't just sell coffee. Why you ask? Because people will pay them
> > to provide other things, and as a publicly traded corporation they are
> > by law required to maximize stock holder value by increasing profits.
> > They will be able to make more (although I don't see it being alot) if
> > they sell other things. Just because something "made you" doesn't mean
> > it is the only thing you can ever do.

> > On Aug 7, 1:03 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > I know... WF had a juicy pullback at the end of that 6-week broad
> > > market pullback we had before the July rally. I think it was down
> > > around 17, and I knew I should've bought back... though I did get in
> > > late around mid-20s.
> > > Also, regarding SBUX, I think the Via instant may do really well. If I
> > > could make instant coffee without having to ingest some sort of crap
> > > like Maxwell House...
> > > One thing I am having a problem with is that SBUX, in my opinion, does
> > > not need to shift its business or change... on the contrary, I think
> > > what SBUX needs to do is just to stick to selling coffee, and perhaps
> > > adjustment prices a tad to appeal universally. I personally do not
> > > like all this food, music, book, alcohol, and whatever else nonsense.
> > > I think Shultz should stick to what made Starbucks... its coffee. No?
> > > I agree completely with immediate shut down of stores taking any sort
> > > of loss... we'll see.
> > > Touched 19 today...

> > > On Aug 7, 12:30 pm, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > That wasn't so hard, was it?  I just wanted to make sure you weren't a
> > > > 12 year old...

> > > > You make some good points.  I go to starbucks around 5 days a week.
> > > > My local bux is also always full, but my location is a high traffic
> > > > area that caters to locals and also beach traffic.  If I drive inland,
> > > > to some of the newer locations in big box retail centers that are half
> > > > vacant, there is generally nobody there after the morning.  They need
> > > > to close those stores QUICK.

> > > > The whole foods argument is a good one.  I wanted to buy it but the
> > > > pullback I was waiting for never came.  People don't tend to break
> > > > their routines to save a marginal amount of money.

> > > > On Aug 6, 5:35 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > By the way, in my area there is a line in SBUX all day long... and the
> > > > > new drive-thru located before office complex is mobbed until noon.
> > > > > If recovery does in fact occur, SBUX will be fine... no one's going to
> > > > > stop drinking this sh1t. People don't change just like that, and
> > > > > everybody's addicted to caffeine.
> > > > > I totally disagree with the naive view that SBUX doesn't fit in to the
> > > > > new emerging consumer-savingeconomy... But I'll also admit that I
> > > > > have no idea what I may be talking about. That's just how it appears
> > > > > to me.

> > > > > On Aug 6, 8:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > > > > > demented approach.
> > > > > > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > > > > > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > > > > > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > > > > > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > > > > > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > > > > > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > > > > > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > > > > > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > > > > > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > > > > > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > > > > > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > > > > > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > > > > > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > > > > > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > > > > > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > > > > > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > > > > > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > > > > > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > > > > > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > > > > > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > > > > > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > > > > > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > > > > > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > > > > > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > > > > > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > > > > > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > > > > > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > > > > > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > > > > > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > > > > > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > > > > > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > > > > > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > > > > > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > > > > > expense etc.
> > > > > > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > > > > > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > > > > > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > > > > > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > > > > > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > > > > > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > > > > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > > > > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > > > > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > > > > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > > > > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > > > > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > > > > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > > > > > simply want convenience.

> > > > > > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > > > > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > > > > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > > > > > Peabody?

> > > > > > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > > > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > > > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > > > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > > > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > > > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > > > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > > > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > > > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > > > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > > > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > > > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > > > > > So we have a

> What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> demented approach.
> I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> expense etc.
> I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> stock, based on forward-looking view.
> And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > simply want convenience.

> > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > Peabody?

> > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > because of international sales)

> > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > chiming in.

> > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> Please elaborate on how coffee is a health food? Caffeine is one of
> the most addictive substances consumed. Starbucks knows this. That's
> how they make money. It reminds me of how advertisers used to make
> cigarette smokers look cool and part of the "in crowd". Starbucks
> plans to sell alcohol in some locations.  These two addictive
> substances are not health foods.

> On Aug 6, 5:26 pm, cp <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > What's up, Ian... didn't mean to upset anyone with my dry and somewhat
> > demented approach.
> > I'm not worried about McD or DD... your right in that it's a
> > completely different demographic... Personally, I have not interest in
> > smelling french fries when I walk in to get a coffee at 7 am.
> > SBUX made a huge mistake by breaking out internationally and going
> > ballistic in US right at the beginning of the recession... I think
> > they planned to open some 23 drive-thrus in Naples, FL alone.... so I
> > get it, all the arguments that is. What I like is 1) the immediate
> > response to over-expansion by cutting US non-performing stores and
> > others around the world. At the same time, SBUX is actually opening
> > other stores by expanding into new international markets (look at
> > google article just today about Netherlands) and I therefore see
> > growth potential internationally. When people start drinking good
> > coffee, they don't turn around and start drinking sh1t just to save 13
> > cents... at least I don't. With the marco trend of health food
> > popularity, recession economics aside, SBUX will become more
> > mainstream and less perceived as expensive, snob coffee. In fact,
> > besides the $4= frappchinos etc., the regular coffee prices are about
> > level with DD... and the coffee is 10x better. Look at Whole Foods,
> > for instance, and what the analysts said (they're toast etc. - whole
> > paycheck, blah, blah, blah). While they have lost some customer base,
> > most people aren't willing to substitute real food for chee-tos,
> > snickers, and Mountain Dew...
> > To be honest, I know little about TA etc. I prefer to look at macro
> > social-economic trends... I see people continuing to drink SBUX... and
> > I see them converting new customers at that. The over expansion was a
> > terrible mistake, and normalized earnings will take a while to re-
> > set... but I just see SBUX as the new DD, but international. No?
> > p.s. They have also tweaked their menu and pricing a bit so as to
> > alter the "whole paycheck" perception. For coffee seller, they still
> > make a sh1tload of money, and once non-performing stores are shut down
> > and those costs absorbed, while at the same time expanding
> > internationally in consumer-friendly countries in which growth had
> > already begun (for some), SBUX will become profitable relative to
> > expense etc.
> > I wouldn't buy the Co. for 12 billion also... but I'm not sure about
> > what it's worth, given future earnings. My contention is we have a $20
> > stock, based on forward-looking view.
> > And again, please excuse my cynicism and arrogance... I must have some
> > kind of personality disorder... like the rest of the world.

> > On Aug 6, 12:38 am, Ian <ian.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Thats my logic too.  Their earnings from last quarter were fine, but
> > > they cut expenses in ways that can't be sustained long term.  They're
> > > even slashing employee benefits which I think is a mistake.  They
> > > attract competent, friendly employees that add to the customer
> > > experience because they pay them well.  I don't want a person who
> > > can't form a sentence serving me coffee.

> > > Personally I think the McDonalds/DD crowd is a different demographic,
> > > but still, SBUX will lose some market share, especially customers who
> > > simply want convenience.

> > > Their growth potential just isn't what it was a few years ago, and the
> > > earnings multiple isn't justified.  Maybe SBUX will go to 20, but I
> > > don't know why anyone would pay that much.

> > > Peabody?

> > > On Aug 5, 1:22 pm, Tim Conley <tcon1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Actually it isn't. It's overpriced. Would you pay 12 billion to buy
> > > > the company, when it made only 100 some million last quarter?

> > > > If you've ever heard of payback period, and time value of money you
> > > > know that would be a HORRIBLE play. Not to mention the fact that there
> > > > should be no expectation that Starbuck's profits would grow
> > > > considerably in the future. They are actually closing stores in the
> > > > US. They have lost market share to competitors like McDonalds and
> > > > Dunkin' Donuts, and the only reason the had a profit at all in the
> > > > last quarter was because of one time cost saving measures (like
> > > > closing unprofitable stores). You can't save your way to prosperity,
> > > > as the saying goes. (not that I'm saying you shouldn't have cost
> > > > saving measures, bravo to starbucks for cutting the fat)

> > > > So we have a company trading at 55 times earnings. 55 times bloated
> > > > one time earnings (meaning if you bought Starbucks it would take 55
> > > > years to get your money back) I like SBUX, just not at 18 and change
> > > > when they have 14+ million shares outstanding. Honestly I wouldn't
> > > > give them much more than 10, (still 30 times earnings, and then only
> > > > because of international sales)

> > > > On Aug 1, 11:11 pm, "C. Peabody" <ca.peabod...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Actually, SBUX is about a twenty dollar stock... but thanks for
> > > > > chiming in.

> > > > > On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > > > > > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > > > > > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > > > > > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -

> Starbucks is a good company but I am sure that in next 90 days it will
> go down to 15 before going to 20.

> On Aug 1, 4:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.

> Lines all day long......

> Up we go!

> Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.

> I don't think you are making a strong bearish argument when your using
> a p/e as central to your point, when that p/e is based off of horrible
> numbers during a re-organizing of the business. .01, .09, .03 and then
> the good quarter .20 which kick started the recent rise in the stock.
> If you assume the poor three quarters are thus anomalies that occurred
> during the time when sbux was closing bad stores and cutting blotted
> corporate jobs and just take .20 times 4 the p/e at $20 a share is 25.

> I am not saying you can't make a bearish case, but yelling, oh man the
> p/e is 60, that is ridiculously high doesn't explore the whole story.
> Personally I sold half my stake at 18 for a nice gain and predicted
> then that it would trade flat till nov. earnings. Those earnings will
> be telling.

> On Aug 1, 1:51 pm, Hello Yall <sayhellotoy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Starbucks is no longer a growth story. Google Finance shows a PE ratio
> > of 55.3 for SBUX. Unemployment is still rising and lofty earnings
> > estimates alone cannot  counter today's economic reality. From a low
> > of $7 to $17.75 I view SBUX today as overpriced.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -