Comments on: Designing the “Me Too” Message http://strawdogdesign.com/2009/05/27/designing-the-me-too-message/ Straw Dog Design is a hub for designer and blue sky day-dreamer Josiah DePaoli. It contains a blog, and a link to a portfolio and resume (you can find those above under "My Stuff"). It will change your life. Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:13:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: schroeder http://strawdogdesign.com/2009/05/27/designing-the-me-too-message/comment-page-1/#comment-1735 schroeder Wed, 27 May 2009 21:37:26 +0000 http://strawdogdesign.com/?p=1013#comment-1735 Ok, first off...wheres the proof that the Starbucks branding came first? Or even how long either product has been using that look? Yes it is lame that they look the same, but lets not forget the whole ridiculousness of the SaveJon incident. PSB needs some facts to back up the argument. All I know is I'd probably still rather have the Nescafe because of: 1. The price, I'm cheap. However I will pay for GOOD coffee. That being said, anything instant is generally crap. It is used (by me) only in a situation that doesn't allow for fresh brewed. In Portland I don't see how that could ever be possible, but there you go. 2. Starbucks coffee just isn't that good. I like the convenience of Starbucks, and that alone is what I like about them. Their barristas generally all make equally crappy coffee that inherently tastes burnt. Starbucks ground coffee you can buy in the store just isn't worth it when you can get better (i.e. Tully's, Stumptown, etc.) for damn near the same price. This leads me to believe that unless their instant brand is actually BETTER than their fresh brewed, I would rather just save the money and have something that will still be disappointing. So, in the end, Nescafe > Starbucks. Ok, first off…wheres the proof that the Starbucks branding came first? Or even how long either product has been using that look? Yes it is lame that they look the same, but lets not forget the whole ridiculousness of the SaveJon incident. PSB needs some facts to back up the argument.

All I know is I’d probably still rather have the Nescafe because of:
1. The price, I’m cheap. However I will pay for GOOD coffee. That being said, anything instant is generally crap. It is used (by me) only in a situation that doesn’t allow for fresh brewed. In Portland I don’t see how that could ever be possible, but there you go.

2. Starbucks coffee just isn’t that good. I like the convenience of Starbucks, and that alone is what I like about them. Their barristas generally all make equally crappy coffee that inherently tastes burnt. Starbucks ground coffee you can buy in the store just isn’t worth it when you can get better (i.e. Tully’s, Stumptown, etc.) for damn near the same price. This leads me to believe that unless their instant brand is actually BETTER than their fresh brewed, I would rather just save the money and have something that will still be disappointing.

So, in the end, Nescafe > Starbucks.

]]>