logo
At Starbucks, the chairs are coming back. Can it become a 'third place' again?

At Starbucks, the chairs are coming back. Can it become a 'third place' again?

Yahoo21-04-2025

Starbucks has meant many things to many people: A convenient caffeine pit stop on the way to work, a place to gather with friends, a cozy nook for writers and creatives. But in recent years, the stores have seemed rather void — of meaning, perhaps, but definitely of furniture. And customers took note. In January, one TikTok user posted that her local Starbucks in San Francisco had been renovated and had half as much seating as it used to. 'Another third place gone to the wind of maximizing the ability to get out as many mobile pick-up orders as possible,' the user wrote.
They're not wrong. It's all part of Starbucks's evolution from lone coffee bean seller to beloved cafe to global convenience chain. Now the brand is trying to adapt after complaints from customers — and even its own founder — that it had abandoned its homey vibe. Here's how the coffee giant's look has changed over the years, and what it says about our shifting social landscape.
The first-ever Starbucks wasn't a cafe at all. Its initial Seattle location, opened in 1971, sold whole coffee beans before moving to its storefront in the city's iconic Pike Place Market. Starbucks's identity as a cafe began with the return of its marketing director, Howard Schultz. He left the company to launch his own coffee shop, but returned with a new mythos for Starbucks — one allegedly inspired by a trip to Italy, where much of social and civic life centered around cafes. Long conversations took place over cortados and cappuccinos, making cafes 'third places,' or somewhere to socialize outside of life's main locations for connection: home and the workplace. In 1987, Schultz bought out Starbucks, merged it with his former Il Giornale cafe, and the coffee giant was born.
Though the term 'third place' became synonymous with the coffee house — and, more specifically, Starbucks — Schultz didn't coin it. The third place was a central concept to sociologist Ray Oldenburg's 1989 book, The Great Good Place. 'Schultz claims to have had this epiphany when he went to Milan,' Bryant Simon, a professor of history at Temple University and author of the book Everything but the Coffee: Learning about America from Starbucks, tells Yahoo Life. 'Whatever Schultz really thought, he perceived something really smart: People were suburbanizing [and] there was a fear and mistrust of people, but people also missed connection.'
Starbucks, Schultz decided, would be the locus for a sense of community that Americans were missing. 'He laid out the stores in a way that at least invited people to sit down and slow down,' says Simon. At least, it would look like such a place. Starbucks initially added chairs, stools and tables, covering the basics of furnishing a hang-out space. But Schultz wanted the stores to look welcoming and more upscale than, say, McDonald's. Starbucks stores were intended to 'look like spaces for anyone to go, but they weren't for just anyone: They were elevated places to go,' Simon says.
Schultz's vision of Starbucks made it not just a place to buy a product, but an experience worth paying for, B. Joseph Pine II, a management adviser and author who coined the term 'experience economy,' tells Yahoo Life. That sense of doing something special makes us more willing to pay a higher price for something as simple as a cup of coffee, say both Pine and Simon.
If you want to make a space look like a place where you could sit down, add some chairs. If you want to make it look like you could stay awhile, add comfortable chairs. That was more or less the approach that Starbucks took, beginning in 1996. According to the company, that's when it swapped out some of its hard seating options in favor of furnishings that felt more homey, as symbolized by the big, plush, purple velvet armchairs it placed in many of its stores. Simon remembers one in downtown Philadelphia, near where he lives, that featured the purple chair prominently displayed in its front window. 'It was a staged promise that you could stop there,' he says. But Simon also believes that "Starbucks was never actually interested in community.' He points out that during the same era when the purple chairs graced the stores, they also featured large round tables he considers 'designed deliberately to be hard to sit at.'
Simon doesn't think that design choices like those tables were an attempt to keep people apart, though. Instead, he believes that Starbucks recognized that most Americans wanted the store to look like a place to meet new people, but, in reality, they mostly wanted to be 'alone at a table in public,' he says. Americans weren't happy being spread out and disconnected from one another in suburbia, 'but they didn't necessarily want to talk to strangers and be involved in the hard conversations with strangers that third spaces are really about,' Simon adds.
The velvet chairs of the late '90s and early aughts were meant to look lived-in, and they got lived in. The plush fabric didn't hold up very well against the heavy traffic; by the early 2000s, Starbucks cafes and their furniture looked a bit tired, and customers had begun 'rejecting the sameness' of the global chain, says Simon. 'This is probably inevitable when you sell culture, because culture is ephemeral and it's hard to hold onto that forever.'
And then 2008 happened. Amid the global economic recession, coffee sales plummeted as people looked to cut back on their spending. Starbucks was forced to close 600 of its stores and Schultz stepped in to refocus on customers. Starbucks polled its coffee drinkers and integrated their critiques into its strategy, but the real driver of its rebound was technology. Mobile apps allowed customers to order their favorite frappuccinos with ease and made Starbucks a stronger competitor against cheaper options like McDonald's.
More than a decade later, mobile ordering helped Starbucks survive and thrive during the pandemic. Social-media-friendly drinks like purple lavender lattes, bright green matcha iced beverages and, of course, holiday favorites like the pumpkin spice latte earned Starbucks additional loyalty.
Sugary, sometimes neon-colored refreshers made Starbucks a popular hangout for teenagers who continue to flock to the cafes, while adult customers have been less enthused. But the company also did things that made its cafes exceedingly popular places to go. (And go: Starbucks's single-stall, free-to-use bathrooms had been such a welcome amenity in the early 2000s that Michael Bloomberg, then mayor of New York City, said the metropolis didn't need public restrooms because 'there's enough Starbucks that'll let you use the bathroom.')
Amid a rise in homelessness in the 2020s, many customers noticed that chairs were disappearing or being replaced by hard, uncomfortable seating. Pine and Simon believe this was intended to discourage people from hanging out in the cafes and using their bathrooms without buying anything, and Starbucks itself cited safety concerns. In Simon's hometown of Philadelphia, the purple chair in the downtown Starbucks window was replaced 'by a bunch of boxes,' he says. And this year, the company announced the end of its open-door bathroom policy, instead requiring that people make a purchase in order to receive bathroom access or water.
Some customers have been puzzled and disappointed by the changes. Even its founder and former CEO, Schultz, was unhappy, posting an open letter to Starbucks on LinkedIn and calling for it to return to form. In Pine's opinion, Starbucks had sacrificed its most valuable asset: experience. He even penned an op-ed in the Harvard Business Review, titled 'How Starbucks devalued its own brand.' He blames not only the lack of seating, but the abandonment of personal touches, such as ditching handwritten names on cups in favor of printed labels. During the pandemic and after, 'you could still buy all the Starbucks goods with mobile ordering and contactless delivery, but it was the experience of anyplace where you got together with people that we really missed,' Pine says.
In January, within weeks of Pine's HBR article being published (and less than a month after the bathroom policy change), Starbucks announced an about-face: The chairs and condiment bars are coming back, and the brand is introducing ceramic mugs and glasses for free refills of some drinks. 'I'm happy to say the third place is alive and well. It's as needed as it ever was,' CEO Brian Niccol said at the Starbucks shareholder meeting in March. 'We're working hard to ensure our coffeehouses have the right vibe. We want to invite customers in, showcase our great coffee, provide a comfortable place to stay and make them feel like their visit was time well spent.'
To create the right 'vibe,' Starbucks is revamping its cafe interiors. The company told Yahoo Life that it's testing its new look in a few locations. In lieu of photos of those cafes, Starbucks shared renderings it says are indicative of the future of its locations, which feature cushioned seating, wood-paneled service areas and a lounge-y feel. Pine says that the new look is 'very much in line' with what he hoped to see.
But it's not just about the furniture. If Starbucks is to be the 'third place' it claims to be, its focus needs to be on how people connect within its stores, not simply where they sit. Pine is happy that the company is bringing back handwriting on some coffee cups because that 'makes things more personal. That's where the rubber meets the road," he says. "It's the interaction that people have in the place, not just with their friends or strangers, but with the baristas, that can make or break that visit.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Musk Vs. Trump: Poll Says This Is The Person To Support In Feud, While Near Majority Say They Would Publicly Support Neither
Musk Vs. Trump: Poll Says This Is The Person To Support In Feud, While Near Majority Say They Would Publicly Support Neither

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Musk Vs. Trump: Poll Says This Is The Person To Support In Feud, While Near Majority Say They Would Publicly Support Neither

A highly public feud between Tesla Inc (NASDAQ:TSLA) CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump took the world by storm last week and sent shares of the electric vehicle company lower. As the feud continues on, here's a look at where Benzinga readers stand. What Happened: A back-and-forth between Musk and Trump across social media platforms saw the two well-known individuals escalate a feud related to differences on the "Big Beautiful Bill." Trending: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — The feud comes after Musk left his White House position working for the Department of Government Efficiency to spend more time working on his other companies, such as Tesla. Benzinga recently asked readers who they side with in the battle, which includes Musk criticizing the new debt the country will take on if the bill that Trump supports is passed by Congress. "In the feud between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who are you more likely to publicly support?" Benzinga asked. Here are the results: Neither: 44% Elon Musk: 25% Donald Trump: 17% Both: 14% The poll found that a near majority said they would publicly support neither Trump or Musk in the feud between former friends. Of the two well-known candidates, Musk received the largest support with 25% of the poll, ranking ahead of Trump at 17%.Why It's Important: Over the weekend, the battle between Musk and Trump minimized some with the Tesla CEO deleting some of his tweets that brought some claims against the current president. Tweets about ending the SpaceX Dragon program were also deleted. A battle between Trump and Musk over the long run could see many losers, including the country's space program and the launch of robotaxis, with Musk a leader in both sectors and Trump able to slow down progress made by the billionaire. Tesla stock saw its largest one-day market capitalization drop last week on the heels of the feud. Tesla stock trades up 1.61% at $299.72 at publication on Monday versus a 52-week trading range of $167.42 to $488.54. The stock has fallen 15% over the last five days and is down 22% year-to-date in 2025. Read Next: Are you rich? Here's what Americans think you need to be considered wealthy. If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a 7-9% target yield with monthly dividends would you invest in it? The study was conducted by Benzinga from June 5, 2025, through June 9, 2025. It included the responses of a diverse population of adults 18 or older. Opting into the survey was completely voluntary, with no incentives offered to potential respondents. The study reflects results from 259 adults. Photo: Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Musk Vs. Trump: Poll Says This Is The Person To Support In Feud, While Near Majority Say They Would Publicly Support Neither originally appeared on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

Senators propose $15-per-hour federal minimum wage
Senators propose $15-per-hour federal minimum wage

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Senators propose $15-per-hour federal minimum wage

June 10 (UPI) -- The federal minimum wage would rise to $15 per hour, with annual cost-of-living increases based on inflation, in a proposed bipartisan measure. Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Peter Welch, D-Vt., co-sponsored the bill that they have named the "Higher Wages for American Workers Act" and would increase the federal minimum wage from its current $7.25 per hour for non-exempt workers. "For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline," Hawley said on Tuesday in a joint press release with Welch. "One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hardworking Americans every day," Hawley added. Welch said inflation and rising costs are making it too hard for families to afford basic necessities. "We're in the midst of a severe affordability crisis, with families in red and blue states alike struggling to afford necessities like housing and groceries," Welch said. "A stagnant federal minimum wage only adds fuel to the fire," he continued. "Every hardworking American deserves a living wage that helps put a roof over their head and food on the table -- $7.25 an hour doesn't even come close." "Times have changed, and working families deserve a wage that reflects today's financial reality," Welch added. Hawley said the current federal minimum wage is less than what a worker earned in 1940 when adjusted for inflation. If the proposed federal minimum wage increase is passed into law, it would take effect on Jan. 1 and allow cost-of-living increases that match inflation in subsequent years. Many states have respective minimum wage laws that exceed the current and proposed federal minimum wage, but a dozen still were at the federal minimum wage in 2024. Many large employers also have higher minimum wages, including Walmart, which has paid its workers at least $14 an hour and often more since 2023. President Joe Biden in 2021 ordered the federal government to pay contract workers at least $15 an hour. California lawmakers in 2022 raised the state's minimum wage for many fast-food workers to up to $22 an hour.

U.S. Airline Passengers Get 'Warning' About Personal Information
U.S. Airline Passengers Get 'Warning' About Personal Information

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

U.S. Airline Passengers Get 'Warning' About Personal Information

If you fly with a major U.S. airline this year, the Department of Homeland Security might just have your personal information. Airlines Reporting Corporation, a company that focuses on ticket transaction settlements, has reportedly sold access to customer records information to the Department of Homeland Security and its Customs and Border Protection division. This deal was first reported by Wired. According to Wired, the information that ARC sold includes passengers' names, full itineraries and financial details. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) division wants this data to "support federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to identify persons of interest's US domestic air travel ticketing information." "CBP is committed to protecting individuals' privacy during the execution of its mission to protect the American people, safeguard our borders, and enhance the nation's economic prosperity," a CBP spokesperson told Wired. "CBP follows a robust privacy policy as we protect the homeland through the air, land and maritime environments against illegal entry, illicit activity or other threats to national sovereignty and economic security." For what it's worth, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines are all shareholders for ARC. "The big airlines—through a shady data broker that they own called ARC—are selling the government bulk access to Americans' sensitive information, revealing where they fly and the credit card they used," U.S. senator Ron Wyden said. "ARC has refused to answer oversight questions from Congress, so I have already contacted the major airlines that own ARC—like Delta, American Airlines, and United—to find out why they gave the green light to sell their customers' data to the government." CBP hasn't released a follow-up statement on this matter. U.S. Airline Passengers Get 'Warning' About Personal Information first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 10, 2025

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store