Because minor boycotts poorly organized and scarcely advertised through amateur efforts on the web by obscure organizations always fail to have any impact whatsoever.
I'm sure EVERYONE (/s) is going to make special trips to their banks just to get two-dollar bills...if the bank even has them.
Then, too, Starbuck's clientele is mostly liberal skulls full of caffeine and crappy, overpriced pastries. These nerdy lounge-lizards who hang at Starbucks playing with their lap-tops won't be paying with two-dollar bills even if they knew or cared about any "boycott".
So, I don't think the company is too worried about losing some huge portion of their customer base....customers who don't hang in their stores, anyhow.
When all is said and done, and Starbucks counts up the number of two-dollar bills tendered that day, they'll laugh and say "so much for conservative 'boycotts' "....which is NOT the hoped-for result.
When something has "epic fail" written all over it, I call it dumb to get excited about. It brings to mind the cardinal rule for attorneys in a trial.... "if you don't know the answer, don't ask the question".
This all being said, if it makes anyone feel better to waste a lot of time going to the bank and then sitting in Starbucks on Valentine's Day sipping burned-brown water paid for with two-dollar bills, I say "go for it". No harm....and why NOT swell the store's crowd as part of the 'boycott'.
That'll show 'em.....
Leni
I still think it's dumb, will never create a tsunami, and a waste of time one way or another.
In fact, I'm going to spend my Saturday afternoon not going to JCPenney's at my neighborhood mall.
Leni
I'm sorry...I thought that we were supporting Starbuck's stance. I must have misread the article. I do like their frappuccinos and was glad to have the excuse to buy a couple. ;-)