Group 5: McStarbucks Proposal

McDonald’s and Starbucks are in conversation about a potential collaboration regarding

their coffee businesses. Andrew J. McKenna, chairman of McDonald’s and Howard Schultz,

CEO of Starbucks, proposed the idea of selling Starbucks’ drinks in McDonald’s’ stores. On the

executive level, McDonald’s is striving to focus on driving coffee sales as a major company

initiative for 2014-2016 (Class Document). Throughout this document, we analyze the potential

advantages, disadvantages, and long-term effects of this collaborative effort between

McDonald’s and Starbucks. In essence, this collaboration would result in Starbucks producing

coffee and selling it at McDonald’s establishments under a new brand—Delight. This subsidiary

would be based off of a model like Seattle’s Best, which is one of Starbucks’ current subsidiary

brands that are sold in Burger King. Despite the potential collaboration we propose later in this

paper, we do not believe that it would make sense for McDonald’s and Starbucks to work

together in this capacity for many reasons.

Overview of Reasons to Not Collaborate

If these companies were no longer entirely distinct entities, they would lose a great deal

of their appeal to their target markets and would hurt themselves financially. The disadvantages

to a collaborative plan such as the one proposed in this situation overpower the potential

advantages that Starbucks and McDonald’s could receive. The expanded markets for Starbucks

from additional locations of sales and the cost-saving opportunities for McDonald’s from not

having to produce its own coffee would not counteract the drawbacks of this plan. The

disadvantages are discussed more fully in the section below, but two of the major reasons

McDonald’s and Starbucks should not collaborate are: 1) a loss of positioning and a decreased

interest of their target market in the stores’ atmospheres and 2) a decrease in number and loyalty

of customers based on necessary price adjustments.

A major reason for discouraging these companies from engaging in any collaborative

coffee effort is due to their differing target markets and the drastically varying atmospheres of

both businesses. The business plan McDonald’s has hinges on the affordability of its products

and the openness to its customer base. McDonald’s is able to operate successful stores in all

types of areas throughout the country, from urban to rural areas, because of its expansive target

market. Starbucks, on the other hand, has a more exclusive target market, gaining some of its

prestige from its image and the atmosphere of its coffee shops (Strom, 2014). Therefore, by

collaborating, the two businesses would lose some of their distinction achieved through

differentiation. Collaborating with each other would alter both companies’ brand image and

change the target market’s perceptions of the brands. Starbucks would lose some prestige and

McDonald’s customers might be off put by the “snobby” attitude of the Starbucks’ brand

trickling into a McDonald’s establishment.

Those who prioritize Starbucks over McDonald’s might do so for the quality of the

coffee, yet many make this decision partially because of the atmosphere Starbucks offers. A

study conducted by Mintel Oxygen found that “going to a coffee house is seen as a treat by

many, and consumers would rather use coupons and discount programs than give up the coffee

house experience altogether” (“LSR,” 2014). This indicates that, despite the customers who need

to be careful with their discretionary income, some will still prioritize the coffee house

atmosphere over the cheaper price of coffee at establishments like McDonald’s.

Additionally, the price difference between these companies poses a threat to their

collaboration. According to the study conducted by Mintel Oxygen, consumers in the current

market have a high concern for the prices they pay for coffee while dining out. The study found

that 71% of people wish coffee shops offered more drinks at a reduced price (“LSR,” 2014). This

suggests that some people who purchase coffee at McDonald’s do so with a preference for its

reduced princes. Starbucks’ prices are consistently significantly higher than coffee prices are at

McDonald’s, as shown below in the drink price comparison based on medium size drinks.

Type of Drink McDonald’s Starbucks

Regular Hot Coffee $1.30 $2.10

Iced Coffee $1.70 $2.65

Latte $3.00 $3.65

Mocha $3.00 $4.15

Caramel Frappe/ Frappuccino $3.00 $4.45

Prices in Burlington, NC Stores as of 4/28/2015

As the comparative charts above demonstrate, if McDonald’s were to sell Starbucks coffee, both

companies would be weakened from a financial stance. McDonald’s would have to raise prices

slightly to compete with Starbucks’ prices. If prices were not raised when McDonald’s sold a

version of Starbucks’ coffee, Starbucks might lose customers from its stores to McDonald’s for

affordability reasons. In contrast, if McDonald’s’ raised its prices on coffee, it would isolate

some of its customer base who could not afford the increased price.  

Overall, it is important for these businesses to consider innovative ways to remain

relevant in the competitive coffee market, as the coffee industry currently is worth $8.7 billion

and has grown 4.3% since February 2014 (Horovitz, 2014). However, by collaborating, these

companies will not become more relevant; instead, they will both lose their positioning in their

markets.

 Advantages/Disadvantages to Starbucks of Collaboration

If Starbucks were to sell its coffee drinks in McDonald’s establishment the United States,

it would experience a variety of advantages and disadvantages in relation to the type of

customers it would serve and the locations in which the coffee could be sold.

Advantages

The greatest advantages of this collaboration would be in relation to the expanding

customer base and the wider range of locations in which Starbucks’ coffee could be successfully

sold. Some of the most significant advantages to Starbucks of collaborating include:

Broadening its customer-base

Increasing profitability

Expanding coffee and food pairings

Increasing geographical reach

Expanding its reputation

Increasing its promotion

As indicated above, customers of Starbucks and McDonald’s differ greatly in terms of

demographics and coffee preferences. Starbucks customers are shown to prioritize coffee quality

and the atmosphere of the coffee shop, indicating their willingness to pay increased prices for

these components. Therefore, in catering to this target market, Starbucks fails to gain traffic from

a customer-base that is more focused on quality, accessibility, and affordability. Starbucks will

expand its customer-base by gaining both of these markets as their target markets. This will have

the potential to increase Starbucks’ profit margin.

Additionally, McDonald’s has the added appeal of being a food service industry. This

allows Starbucks to expand its customer base in ways beyond gaining customers who prioritize

affordability. The Starbucks coffee that would be sold in McDonald’s stores would therefore be

going to customers who want a one-stop-shop—that is, customers who prioritize food and decide

to get a coffee as well. The McDonald’s customer base is targeted for reasons of accessibility.

McDonald’s stores exist in wider geographical and socioeconomic areas than Starbucks and

draw more customers because of its appeal as a food industry as well (“Starbucks’ Top-line,”

2014). Therefore, this decision would allow Starbucks coffee to be sold in areas in which it

would not normally otherwise.

Starbucks would expand its reputation as well through this collaboration, allowing a

greater target audience to emerge. By offering coffee in McDonald’s stores, Starbucks would

receive two main benefits. The first is that Starbucks would be able to sell to customers who

would never enter one of their establishments for reasons around the Starbucks’ atmosphere or

pricing, thus gaining additional profit in this manner. Second, Starbucks might gain a better

overarching customer perception and brand positioning by showing that they are willing to sell

their product in McDonald’s stores. Some McDonald’s customers who would not have

considered actually going to Starbucks might be more willing to after seeing that Starbucks

“made the first move” in a way and reached out to McDonald’s. After these customers’

perceptions of Starbucks’ “elite nature” change and they experience the taste of Starbucks coffee,

McDonald’s-only customers might decide to actually buy Starbucks coffee at Starbucks

establishments.

This is a plausible option because CEO Howard Shultz claimed in December 2014 that

Starbucks is “prepared to enter and unlock new markets and channels through different store

formats” (“Starbucks’ Earnings Preview,” 2015). This could be one of those different formats

that Starbucks could take advantage of to expand. Additionally, as the Trefis Team discusses, a

great deal of Starbucks’ success stems from innovation. Starbucks, “being one of the elite brands

in the industry, relies on its innovative menu items and loyal customer base for its continued

growth […] the company is well positioned [and] promises to make organized effort to increase

its customer base through numerous initiatives” (“Starbucks’ Top-line,” 2014). The expansion

into McDonald’s market is the type of innovative effort Starbucks needs to continue this growth.

Starbucks is in a current financial position in which it can afford to expand on a large

scale as well. The company recently announced an ambitious a five-year plan for expansion,

suggestion that it is confident and stable (“Starbucks’ Earning Preview,” 2015). In fact,

Starbucks has seen large-scale success recently and expects it to continue in the future. During

2013, Starbucks generated over $15 billion in net revenues, and the prediction is that it will

double this to over $30 billion by the end of 2019 (“Starbucks’ Earning Preview,” 2015).

Starbucks’ focus on driving top-line growth matches well with this type of collaborative effort

with McDonald’s.

Additionally, this type of collaborative effort could benefit Starbucks because it would

allow the business to grow in its current focus on store expansion through the creation of sub-

brands. Starbucks recently introduced its “Starbucks Reserve” sub-brand. This coffee is a rare

and exquisite Arabica coffee, and it will be sold in about 100 reserve coffee stores that Starbucks

plans to open across the world (“Starbucks’ Earning Preview,” 2015). Although the proposed

Delight coffee that would be sold in McDonald’s stores would be a shift for Starbucks in the

other direction, away from the premium sub-brand, it could act as a counterpart “non-premium

sub-brand” to expand Starbucks’ market.

Disadvantages

Despite the numerous advantages stated above regarding why this collaboration would

benefit Starbucks, there are a significant number of disadvantages that cannot be overlooked.

Some of the major disadvantages include:

Altered quality perceptions of Starbucks’ coffee

Diminished “exclusivity” charm

Decreased customers at Starbucks’ establishments

Increased risk

Decreased brand merchandise sales

Decreased investor interest

If Starbucks were to sell its coffee in McDonald’s’ stores, it would experience a large shift in

public perception. This has the potential to hurt the perceptions of Starbucks’ as the “high

quality” commercial coffee seller. Those in Starbucks’ target market who choose Starbucks as

opposed to McDonald’s or other establishments selling coffee do so for a number of reasons, but

one of the primary reasons revolves around Starbucks’ “exclusivity” charm (Strom, 2014).

Additionally, if people can get Starbucks’ quality coffee in a cheaper location, then

people might begin to question Starbucks’ prices more than they had previously. Just by showing

that Starbucks coffee has the ability to be sold for a cheaper price, people who used to turn a

blind eye towards the prices at Starbucks might begin to consider them as higher than necessary.

Currently, the target market of Starbucks is so committed that they do not question any price

increases. As explained in Forbes, “Starbucks targets a more affluent demographic of coffee

drinkers that typically exhibit strong brand loyalty, making demand for its coffee more inelastic

with respect to price fluctuations” (“Starbucks’ Earnings Preview,” 2014). Starbucks’ customers

understand price increases to be a result of the high quality of Starbucks’ coffee and therefore do

not question the increases (“Starbucks’ Earnings Preview,” 2014). However, if a Starbucks’

brand coffee was sold for a lower price, which it would have to be when sold under the Delight

name at McDonald’s, customers might begin to question the decrease in prices and associate this

with a decrease in quality.

If the aforementioned disadvantages deter Starbucks’ customers or hurt their brand

image, then Starbucks may lose some of their loyal customers in the case that this collaboration

cannot last. If, after a number of years, Starbucks is not seeing an increase in their profit margin

and stops this partnership, then they might not have as many customers to return to. This

potential effect poses long-term negative change that can overpower the potential for success of

this collaborative effort. The risk is great to Starbucks of losing much of its target market.

In addition to actually selling coffee at its establishments, Starbucks also makes a profit

on non-coffee drinks, pastries and other food items, and brand merchandise. Starbucks would be

giving up some of its potential food profit by selling its coffee at McDonald’s, because

customers could then get their coffee but have the McDonald’s menu of food from which to

choose. Additionally, Starbucks’ brand merchandise, such as Starbucks mugs, coffee grounds,

and reusable water bottles, could experience a drop in sales. If customers are able to buy

Starbucks coffee at McDonald’s, they will not come face-to-face with these other food and brand

items.

Advantages/Disadvantages to McDonald’s

Currently, McDonald’s operates a successful business, combining food options with

beverages, ranging from McFlurries to soda products to coffee products. McDonald’s has sold

coffee since the early 1980’s, yet it premium-blend coffee was not integrated until 2006.

Noticing an expansion in the popularity of its coffee, McDonald’s established the McCafé brand

in May 2009 (Morrison, 2010). The decision to sell Starbucks-made products in McDonald’s

outlets has both advantages and disadvantages with regards to business expansions, brand equity,

and brand identity.

Advantages

The advantages to McDonald’s of selling Starbucks’ drinks in its locations have to do

with increased sales, a more extensive customer base, and an increase in perceived brand quality.

Some of the major advantages include:

A higher-end product to their new premium menu

An increase in customers

A diversification of customers

An increased profit

An increase in their food sales with an increased customer pool

Similar to the advantages to Starbucks, the selling of Starbucks’ drinks in McDonald’s stores

will lead to an expansion of McDonald’s customer base. The perceived value of McDonald’s

goods is lower than that of Starbucks’ products. Therefore, the sale of a “higher end” product in

McDonald’s establishments will lead to an overall increase in the brand perception. In the most

recent annual report, McDonald’s reported a decrease in net earnings and sales (“Financial

Highlights,” 2014). Using the association with Starbucks to draw in customers, both current and

new, McDonald’s could create an opportunity to increase its drink sales. Additionally, the

increase of customers also has the potential to increase sales in other McDonald’s products.

Overall, this option would be financially beneficial to McDonald’s.

In recent years there has been a convergence of the perceived values and expectations of

Starbucks and McDonald’s. Today, many customers do not see McDonald’s and Starbucks as

entirely different businesses; therefore, combining the two would not drastically alter the brand

identity of the companies (“Starbucks v McDonald’s,” 2008). Selling Starbucks’ products in

McDonald’s locations has many benefits, mainly through increasing the number of customers in

McDonald’s stores. An increase in customers and diversification of customers will lead to

increased sales and increased profit.

Disadvantages

The disadvantages of selling a Starbucks’ drink in a McDonald’s store mainly revolve

around the financial risks of releasing a new higher-end product in a store best known for its

cheap fast food and simple menu. The major disadvantages include:

Decrease in customers

Decrease in market share and profits

Increase in conflict among marketing channels

Altered perception of McDonald’s brand

Decrease in interest of McDonald’s other products

This collaboration with Starbucks puts the McDonald’s company at a high risk to keep up

with the new expectations of serving a different customer base. McDonald’s will need to retrain

employees on how to make a more complicated drink with the same efficiency. This will require

more capital from investors to pay for training. For those who like McDonald’s, the influence of

Starbucks or the influx of people who are “Starbucks drinkers” might not be appealing. Also, if it

is more expensive and more time-consuming to make these Starbucks’ drinks at McDonald’s,

then McDonald’s might lose customers and subsequently experience a decrease in profits.

Alternative Recommendation

            McDonald’s and Starbucks both have strong brand identities that people know and have

come to accept. This knowledge gives the companies brand equity as well. Selling Starbucks in

McDonald’s stores will disrupt the brand identities as well as the brand equity of both

companies. Therefore, if the two companies wish to go forth with their proposal, we suggest

using an alternative method. Instead of using the Starbucks name, it can use “Delight,” a new

subsidiary brand that Starbucks would create and fund. Starbucks would not have to use

additional resources, because it would be able to just rebrand Seattle’s Best coffee. This

subsidiary’s resources would still be maximized, since Starbucks is just rebranding the coffee

already being produced under the Seattle’s Best name. In Starbucks’ 2012 annual report, it

mentioned that “in the U.S., the ongoing focus by large competitors in the quick-service

restaurant sector on selling high-quality specialty coffee beverages could adversely affect our

sales and results of operations” (Bachman, 2013). Positioning Starbucks to take over operations

and control of quick-service restaurant coffee products will reduce risk of sale reduction and

allow for an increase in profit.

Both Starbucks and McDonald’s corporations have multiple brands under their

management. By using a brand most people don’t know is managed by Starbucks or are still able

to mentally separate from Starbucks, the risk of a reduction of brand identity and equity will be

lowered while still continuing the partnership and expectations of quality. In 2013, Starbucks

began selling Seattle’s Best coffee in Burger King Stores, and this effort has proven to be

effective (Bachman, 2014). Essentially, this proposed collaboration follows a similar plan for

Starbucks’ to implement with McDonald’s, just under a different subsidiary brand name.

McDonald’s and Starbucks are on a converging path; their consumers are looking for

similar options (“Starbucks v McDonald’s,” 2008). However, because of the innate differences

in positioning of these two companies, it is important for certain topics to be considered to make

this collaboration more successful, including altered pricing and branding, based on the shift in

the target customer market.

As discussed previously, it is important that Starbucks and McDonald’s both alter their

normal pricing in this collaboration. Using the chart from above comparing the prices, we have

proposed our suggested prices for the Seattle’s Best drinks in McDonald’s stores.

Type of Drink McDonald’s Starbucks Delight Brand

Regular Hot Coffee $1.30 $2.10 $1.70

Iced Coffee $1.70 $2.65 $2.15

Latte $3.00 $3.65 $3.30

Mocha $3.00 $4.15 $3.50

Caramel Frappe/ Frappuccino $3.00 $4.45 $3.70

This price breakdown reflects the need for Starbucks to be competitive by having higher prices,

since higher prices can signal higher quality. Even though the brand will be “Delight,” once

some Starbucks’ customers realize that Starbucks’ “quality” coffee is sold at McDonald’s, they

might shift to purchasing their coffee from McDonald’s more frequently than they had before. In

order to prevent a giant loss of customer base, Starbucks needs to indicate the continuation of its

high-quality products, even in their coffee sold at McDonald’s, by having slightly higher prices

than McDonald’s currently has (“Starbucks’ Earnings Preview,” 2014). At the same time,

McDonald’s cannot afford to lose the customer base that it maintains due to affordable products;

therefore, the prices cannot rise too high. The averaged prices above reflect the optimal benefit

for both companies.

This venture would dually benefit both companies. McDonald’s is currently in a state

where innovative growth is necessary. It is expected to grow at an annual rate of 3%, but in

recent years has not achieved this potential (“McDonald’s: 2014 Year,” 2014). McDonald’s

market shares are boosted by its value meal and coffee portfolio; therefore, its stunted growth

indicates a need to improve its coffee portfolio (“McDonald’s: 2014 Year,” 2014). A joint

venture with Starbucks would therefore increase McDonald’s’ selling possibilities and allow

McDonald’s to achieve this goal of growth. Currently, McDonald’s has 31% of the total fast

food market share in the United States (“McDonald’s: 2014 Year,” 2014). Therefore, if

McDonald’s can reach its growth potential, Starbucks’ drinks can also receive increased

exposure, dually benefitting both companies.

Marketing Strategies/Tactics to Promote

Currently, McDonald’s promotes itself through many different mediums. McDonald’s

generally performs regular market research in order to effectively appeal to its customers. For

instance, each member who works in the marketing side of the company is required to begin

working in a restaurant, wearing the staff uniform and learning everything from cooking and

preparing food to serving customers and cleaning, in order to get a grasp of the daily experience

of a customer. Through this, they have learned the exact type of market to whom their stores are

appealing (“The Route,” 1995). We propose a number of different promotional techniques

McDonald’s could take to spread awareness about their new product and encourage both

sustained and new customers.

The Delight brand carries with it a positive connotation, which follows McDonald’s

cheery disposition. McDonald’s current slogan is “I’m lovin’ it,” so in order to maintain that

light and happy feel, we propose that the Delight brand’s slogan is “Brighten Up Your Day.”

This will promote McDonald’s new coffee as a way for people to treat themselves, make them

happier, and enhance their day. It also maintains an image that promotes coffee at any time of the

day as a treat or a pick-me-up, instead of limiting coffee drinking to mornings that a “Rise and

Shine” slogan could suggest. The element of light is also carried through from the name Delight

to the concept of brightening one’s day with coffee. This matches the target audience of

Millennials who are making it on their own for possibly the first time and for young parents. It is

a cheaper, happy alternative that appeals to the target market. An example of the type of

advertising that McDonald’s could do with this brand can be seen in Appendix A.

McDonald’s cinema and television advertising have played a major part in their

marketing mix. McDonald's is now the biggest single brand advertiser on British television

(“The Route,” 1995). Considering they are most successful with their television mediums,

McDonald’s could take advantage of promotional opportunities in the United States such as

events like the Super Bowl, Stanley Cup, and the World Series. Other promotional mediums

include online streaming networks such as Hulu Plus or YouTube. Linking with other very

popular online watching sites to gain more customers is a common technique used by

McDonald’s, and one that fits well with the target customer base of this venture.

One way to promote this product is to have the target audience be mothers and fathers

of young children. The promotional line would be “When your kid hits the jungle gym, give

yourself that extra boost.” It is common for McDonald’s to aim their marketing towards kids,

considering the jungle gyms in a lot of their branch stores and their happy meals. However, the

market that McDonald’s has not focused on as much is the parents of young children. We plan to

target people in their 20’s who have recently graduated from college and are living on their own

for the first time. These people generally cannot afford expensive coffee, but still desire the

luxury coffee brand. We plan to target this market through a drink that is branded by Starbucks,

but is sold in McDonald’s with the new name “Delight.” Considering this age group generally

does not have a relatively large income at the early stages of living on one’s own or starting a

family, we hope that the low price of McDonald’s, but the high quality image that this new brand

will convey, will attract this market. This market has not been targeted directly by either of these

companies, leaving an opportunity to narrow in on this specific audience.

Our television advertising will be supported by in-store promotions and a loyalty

programs. For in-store promotional tactics, we plan to add Delight coffee to the “Monopoly

Current Chances” promotional game. When customers purchase a coffee, they will automatically

be entered to play in this game, at no extra cost. Prizes include McDonald’s food vouchers,

discount vouchers for participating businesses, and gifts from selected retailers. “Current

Chances” is scheduled to take place for one month at participating McDonald’s restaurants, so

population would be key to target.

Currently, McDonald’s uses the promotional tactic “Free Fruit Fridays” to promote their

attempted focus on nutrition and to get customers to enter the stores. “Free Fruit Fridays” is the

first Friday of every month. This is the same type of tactic that could be used to promote this new

brand. McDonald’s could do a free muffin with every small coffee on Thursdays. Another tactic

would be to donate 5% of the proceeds to a good cause. It could be cancer or the rainforest, prior

focuses of McDonald’s work. This is similar to McDonald’s Ronald McDonald house,

promoting the health and well-being of children. Starbucks also participates in charity work

through the Starbucks foundation, a program to promote literacy. Both companies are well

known for their charity work, and like to bolster their social conscious image, which can be taken

advantage of to promote this new product and both sustain and expand their market.

An additional tactic that McDonald’s could employ would be to include seasonal flavors.

Consumers of businesses like Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, and McDonald’s “like the excitement

seasonal flavor changes bring” (“LSR,” 2014). The Mintel Oxygen study cites the Starbucks

Pumpkin Spice Latte craze as an innovative approach that inspired a significant increase in the

number and loyalty of customers (“LSR,” 2014). McDonald’s could begin to implement more

seasonal flavor promotions as part of the increased focus on coffee that this collaboration would

provide.

Additionally, McDonald’s could implement a Delight-specific digital loyalty program to

reward customers in a fast and convenient manner. With the loyalty membership, customers will

receive special benefits like easy payment on a phone app, early access to new coffee flavors and

free drink or reward with points when they sign up for e-mail rewards. We hope that the reward

program will be attractive to current Starbucks and McDonald’s customers and help to draw

more customers from our millennial market. Loyalty programs can be expensive, yet they have

proven to be a potential influence in the consumer decision making process and customer

retention rate. Similar restaurants that already have similar programs include, Dunkin Donuts,

Panera Bread, Subway, and Starbucks. This mobile loyalty reward programs will enable

McDonald’s to deepen their connection with customers and create more separation between

competitors.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we do not suggest that McDonalds and Starbucks’ collaborate. The high

level of risk and the financial harm that could be caused through a loss of differentiation and

decrease in appeal to their respective target markets makes this type of collaborative effort a poor

decision for Starbucks and McDonald’s. Currently, these companies attract different people, and

it is in their attempts at positioning that they have found success and financial stability. Both

companies would lose customers through this collaboration and lose their distinct appeal.

However, if they were to engage in this collaboration, we suggest that Starbucks takes the same

approach that it did with Burger King and use a subsidiary brand to sell its coffee products

within McDonald’s establishments. The “Delight” brand that we proposed has the highest

potential for success if this collaboration were to occur. It establishes a new brand identity that

would not drastically alter that which McDonald’s and Starbucks have respectively established,

therefore allowing both businesses to remain differentiated somewhat. “Delight” poses a

compromise for each company in terms of price, and the millennial market being targeted

benefits both companies by allowing their customer base, and subsequently their profits, to

expand.

Works Cited

Bachman, J. (2013). You Love Coffee, and Burger King Knows This. Bloomberg Business.

Can Burger King Make An Impactful Start In India? (2014). In McDonald's: 2014 Year in

Review.

Financial Highlights. (2014, January 1). McDonald’s.

Horovitz, B. (2015, February 23). First ad for McCafé bagged coffee quality. USA Today.

LSR: Coffee Houses and Donut Shops. (2014). Mintel Academic. Retrieved March 1, 2015.

McDonald’s: 2014 Year in Review. (2014, December 29). Forbes.

Morrison, M. (2010, November 15). McCafé . Advertising Age.

Starbucks' Earnings Preview: High Coffee Prices Coupled with Lower Input Costs to Widen

Margins. (2014, July 23). Forbes.

Starbucks' Earnings Preview: Robust Expansion Plans & New Beverage Markets To Drive

Growth In 2015. (2015, January 21). Forbes.

Starbucks' Top-line Growth in FY2014 Driven By Higher Pricing & Accelerated Expansion In

New Beverage Segments. (2014, October 31). Forbes.

Starbucks v McDonald's: Coffee Wars. (2008, January 10). The Economist.

Strom, S. (2014, December 4). Starbucks, Facing a Saturated Market, Looks to the High End.

New York Times.

The Route to Fast Food Franchising. (1995). In Business Case Studies (p. 3). Business Case

Studies.

Appendix A