On 2010-08-18, dsi1 > wrote:

> you'd smack your lips at a $5 cup of Starbucks and proclaim it to be
> "tasty."

At gunpoint, perhaps.

nb

On 8/17/2010 2:29 PM, notbob wrote:
> On 2010-08-18, > wrote:
>
>> you'd smack your lips at a $5 cup of Starbucks and proclaim it to be
>> "tasty."
>
> At gunpoint, perhaps.
>
> nb

You obviously have no aspirations to be a coffee-achiever or hang out
with cool and hip drinkers of Seattle's famous bitter cup. What's wrong
with you?!

On Aug 17, 7:29*pm, notbob > wrote:
> On 2010-08-18, dsi1 > wrote:
>
> > you'd smack your lips at a $5 cup of Starbucks and proclaim it to be
> > "tasty."
>
> At gunpoint, perhaps. *

It's not the Starbucks' coffee. It's the $5 pricetag. Yes, Starbucks
tends to roast coffee more than I prefer, but they're not deserving of
the kind of disdain they get.
>
> nb

--Bryan

On Aug 17, 6:11*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> On Aug 17, 7:29*pm, notbob > wrote:
>
> > On 2010-08-18, dsi1 > wrote:
>
> > > you'd smack your lips at a $5 cup of Starbucks and proclaim it to be
> > > "tasty."
>
> > At gunpoint, perhaps. *
>
> It's not the Starbucks' coffee. *It's the $5 pricetag. *Yes, Starbucks
> tends to roast coffee more than I prefer, but they're not deserving of
> the kind of disdain they get.
>

I've never seen even a $5 espresso-based drink at *$.

Their 16 oz drip costs just pennies more than the same size McCoffee.