[image from abc. For those new to the Ethiopia coffee trademark issue, start here]
So Starbucks has come out vehemenently against Ethiopia’s efforts to trademark its coffees. The mermaid sez that it prefers certification — and that certification will be better for the Ethiopian coffee farmers.
Really? How?
Well, Starbucks CEO Jim Donald has no idea. After telling the Times UK that he told Meles Zenawi, the Ethiopian Prime Minister, that Starbucks prefers certification over trademarking, Jim was unable to say what the difference between certification and trademarking is. Times UK reports:
Mr Donald shifts slightly in his Starbucks-regulation armchair. “I can’t talk about the details because I don’t understand them,†he says. “I’m not a trademark lawyer.â€
It’s quite an admission for the chief executive of one of the world’s most successful trademarked brands, especially since it’s a distinction that customers seem to care about.
I had given the mainstream media some crap for not explaining the differences more fully, but I guess Starbucks didn’t think too hard about it before taking an anti-Ethiopian position either.
The entire Times UK article’s a fascinating read. It ends thusly:
Starbucks is a slick business, but the PR machine goes only so far. The spin that Mr Donald puts on his talks in Ethiopia jars with Addis Ababa’s. He says the talks were “very productiveâ€. Oxfam says that they broke down.
Siel, as always - thanks for keeping us up to date on the twists and turns of stories like this.
By the way, there was one mistake in the Times article. Jim Donald’s 2005 compensation was actually nearly $11,000,000 when you include stock options. This is similar to the average annual pay of Orin Smith, which according to BusinessWeek also was typically about $10,000,000.
Funny how the million dollars that STBX spreads here or there gets a lot of ink, but these millions rarely do. And - as we see here - even when it IS mentioned, the man’s paycheck is actually understated by 75%.
Comment by Rodney North — December 11, 2006 @ 7:00 pm
Unfortunately business is business and until business law changes people will always intervene in what is right to safe guard their paychecks. Right now you buy the Starbucks brand, that is the trademark for quality that they want you to be concerned with. With a trademark, Ethiopia can set the price for their coffee at a premium and make it harder to get lumped in with commodity coffee prices. If it is a success other top quality coffee producers will do the same. Than the Starbucks brand may become diluted because the quality of the product may shift to the region you buy from regardless if it is Starbucks or not. Than you may have a snowball effect where prices rise on them and they cant pass it on to their customers. It’s all about profits, and for them it is probably billions in market cap at stake.
Comment by Adam — December 11, 2006 @ 9:31 pm
Rodney — Your comment makes me think I should do a post whenever Starbucks sends out a new press release about how much money they’ve given to this or that cause — with stats on how that compares to Jim Donald’s salary. :P
Adam — I’m just hoping that the US trademark office will not just succumb to biz interests. Clearly, corps are a big influence on the trademark office — but I’m still hopeful that that consumer and activist influence can counteract that effectively –
Comment by Siel — December 12, 2006 @ 4:06 pm
Remember “U.S.” is the operative word. The US trademark office will at the end of the day 9 times out of 10 do what is in the best interest of U.S. businesses and citizens. When you have to make as much money as you can for your shareholders alot of times people get trounced on. Until “money at all cost” changes citizens in countries like Ethiopia will be exploited. This country really got screwy when the government gave corporate business citizen status. All the tax breaks of a corporation and all the rights of a citizen. Not something our founding fathers intended.
Comment by Adam — December 12, 2006 @ 8:39 pm
Hey Adam — Wanna make it clear that I’m not disagreeing with you at all — Yes, big biz is king around here. What I’m wondering in terms of this situation is how we can make the Ethiopia trademark issue that 1 time out of 10. Think we have a chance?
Comment by Siel — December 13, 2006 @ 7:30 pm
I know you were not disagreeing, Siel. I really just dont see much of a chance unless they allow it and than proclaim that no other coffee names can be trademarked from here on out. When thousands upon thousands of American Shareholders can lose money, no one cares if an Ethiopian can eat. Its unfortunate that money has become a be all end all. Everybody just wants to be rich.
Comment by Adam — December 13, 2006 @ 9:11 pm