JAW ON THE FLOOR: Starbucks to Release Sonic Youth Celebrity Compilation (WTF)

yxpost your former roommate is hiiiiiiiiiii

It's like SY recording a record for Depends.

Huh^^^^^^^^

= getting old

Bob, SY has been my favorite band for like half my life and even I can't fathom the idea of them as some kind of "timeless, all-weather coolness bastion" that stands in opposition of everything bad in the world. Put down the pipe.

Maybe it's just me, but that's always seemed like the marketing angle. And I'm kind of attached to the pipe. It goes with my hand.

By "always", I mean since Daydream or thereabouts. And they were my favorite band for a good quarter of my life (20-30). So, I think we're in conjoined ballparks.

So the marketing angle for a rock band is understood to be completely true to life and unimpeachable, but the marketing angle for a coffee shop chain is something horrible and insidious that kills everything it touches.

loosely translated: I HATE YOU MOM

hey guys let's hate on awesome bands for stupid reasons

Can you guys imagine if you were at a garage sale and you stumbled over a Rolling Stones comp that had been sponsored by STP oil treatment?? It would be like "oh my god, coolest thing ever"

SNAP

Alex: I just mean that to the indie rock market segment (certain college kids, ilxors, etc), SY are an attractive brand. To the same market segment, Starbucks are a crap brand - associated with dumbness, bad money and shitty condominiums. I'm sure that other groups see things differently. That's why we need to have so many different commercials.

STP oil treatment is okay with me.

BAD MONEY

doo doo dooo

BAD MONEY
for me and you

Bad Money
check it and see

i don't got
any moneeee

as Thurston said about buying CD in Starbucks vs online,

"FUCK ONLINE"

"To the same market segment, Starbucks are a crap brand - associated with dumbness, bad money and shitty condominiums."

This is because certain college kids, ilxors, etc, are dumbasses.

"Hi, We're the Shitty Condominiums. We have T-shirts and seven inches for sale in the back."

I HATE YOU MOM

sonic youth have one 'commodity': being sonic youth. if a large coffee retailing concern wants to pay them to do that, fine. pretty sure it's what they would be doing otherwise. they're also old. with kids. i don't begrudge them cutting any kind of deal.

i hate to find myself with a daily mail style "lol socialists grow up" kind of opinion, but there it is.

Alex in SF & Matt H are otm

however, Starbucks coffee is not very good

Anyone who doesn't get the association of Starbucks with shitty condominiums is blind, therefore forgiven, but no less blind for that. Whether and/or how you perceive the other associations I mentioned is up to you, but I don't understand the claim that SY's only cultural commodity value is "being Sonic Youth". Nothing known can be demographically meaning-neutral in that sense. How would that even be possible?

I HATE YOU MOM

-- sexyDancer, Thursday, December 6, 2007 1:00 PM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

If I'm off-base in tagging Starbucks and SY the way I did, what are the correct tags? Not in terms of your own opinions, I mean, but with regard to this or that demographic (specifically the SY-record-buying one). I know it's weird nigh impossible to clinically discuss how groups seem to view things, but it's something I often think about, so why not?

"however, Starbucks coffee is not very good"

Sadly this is true (although at least it's consistent in it's average-ness), but as a company I think they are actually probably better than most.

"but as a company I think they are actually probably better than most."

Why/how? Not taking shots, I'm genuinely curious.

P.S. Drop the "mom" taunt. It's more insulting than constructive.

"sonic youth are cool, and starbucks are not cook. but someone less cool than me may go into a starbucks and see a sonic youth cd and think that starbucks is in fact cool, and that is not right."

"some other person may get the idea that sonic youth are enthusiastic supporters of all aspects of the starbucks business, worldwide. but not me, i would never have that idea. but someone might."

"starbucks make their money doing things that are probably bad or at least 'lame' and for sonic youth to have a part of their income derived from that isn't right."

honestly, what is the nub of the objection here. i understand how this 'looks bad' but if you try to explain what is actually wrong none of it convinces.

xp baristas get a health plan.

starbucks are not cook, indeed

Alex in case you've forgotten, Starbuck's is a lowest-common-denominator, homogenized, blandly corporate take on what was once an independent, locally-owned, lively phenomenon: the coffee shop.

The fact that they charge double or triple what that independent, locally-owned coffee shop did just adds insult to injury. It's as if McDonald's started charging eight dollars for their fucking "hamburgers".

I mean, I hate to find myself with a Guardian style "lol open your eyes, sheeple" kind of opinion, but there it is.

None of this touches on Sonic Youth, whose marketing decisions I could not care less about.

I don't think Starbuck's is cool and avoid it as much as possible. Which is fairly easy since I don't drink coffee. Sonic Youth can do whatever they want - what do I care - but I'm not gonna buy some Starbuck's comp CD.

(iow Tracer OTM)

Bob, you sure are obsessed with stuff like "marketing" and "demographics" for someone up on such a high horse about a corporate coffee chain. Are you disappointed in Sonic Youth's association with Starbucks because of the cognitive dissonance with their public image as lefty indie deities, or do you actually see doing a one-off Starbucks-sponsored compilation as some huge ethical departure for a band that's been signed to a major label for nearly 2 decades?

FWIW I have never detected an iota of leftism in Sonic Youth's music, I don't know where people get that.

Alex in case you've forgotten, Starbuck's is a lowest-common-denominator, homogenized, blandly corporate take on what was once an independent, locally-owned, lively phenomenon: the coffee shop.

considering how much business they've got out of places that had never seen nor heard of a coffee shop, how true is this? and their prices are no different round my way

FWIW I have never detected an iota of leftism in Sonic Youth's music, I don't know where people get that.

Most of Dirty (Youth Against Fascism etc)

to the indie rock market segment (certain college kids, ilxors, etc), SY are an attractive brand. To the same market segment, Starbucks are a crap brand

This seems unimpeachably kinda-true, and yet I get absolutely ZERO sense that Starbucks is looking to nice up its hip brand image with SY product; mostly I get the sense that I am freaking old and SY have been institutionalized enough as a revered middle-to-highbrow music staple that they have "ascended" to coffeeshop placement.

The trick, and the problem with the quote above, is that SY are already FINE with the actual "indie audience," especially the segment that's gonna go around sneering about Starbucks and shit: hence the perfectly sensible move of selling a COMPILATION to people who stop in for a quick coffee without feeling like it has some giant bearing on their coolness, cred, or ethics, and are like "oh yeah, Sonic Youth, I like them okay," and whose mental brand notion of SY (revered arty clever important band) might actually be perfectly in line with their feelings about going to coffee shops

considering how much business they've got out of places that had never seen nor heard of a coffee shop, how true is this? and their prices are no different round my way

having worked in coffee shops when Starbuck's was in its initial ascendancy I can verify that this is absolutely true, and that Starbucks crushed/put out of business several local coffee shops in my college town.

also SY's feminist-themed stuff (esp. early on) has obvious ties to trad lefty identity politics

"Use the word... FUCK"

I.e., the indie-rock market segment does not consist of "certain college kids and ILXors," it consists in good part of people who enjoyed Garden State and whatnot

xpost but Starbucks also injected the whole notion of coffeeshops into places that didn't have them; part of their early spread really did have to do with the whole notion of foamy espresso concoctions being rare and alluring to people, and then being converted into like daily purchases

'crushed'?? cmon this isn't the mafia, more people bought starbucks. what are you going to do??

^^^ not necessarily true, dude

"survived competition" /= "sold more"

"I believe Anita Hill" said with the most bratty, sarcastic sneer imaginable and then saying "It's the song I hate" immediately afterwards never really did it for me.

Neither did the rest of their words and images, to be honest. They made some great noise once, though.

its just a figure of speech. there was a competitive market in the local economy, and Starbucks won. I could go into a host of reasons why locally owned and locally operated businesses are preferable to international corporate conglomerate operations, but I'm pretty sure everyone here already a) knows those arguments and b) doesn't care

x-post

"foamy espresso concoctions" = coffee

You will find that most places calling themselves coffee shops sold this. Even little Southern towns had these. Poetry readings, alt-weeklies from the nearest burg, etc.

Is Starbucks really more expensive than most local coffee shops? The crushing local business thing is indisputable though and they aren't a nice company, no doubt. But Universal isn't a nice company either. Walmart isn't a nice company. Borders isn't a nice company. Multinationals suck, no doubt, but anyway who is going to base by a Sonic Youth CD on whether it comes out on DGC or Starbucks is just being silly.

exactly

Re Alex's defense of Starbucks: I've heard they're a good employer at both the corporate and the retail levels. Then again, I've also heard they're brutally anticompetitive bastards in the Wal-Mart mold. So my wildly inexpert take on Starbucks is that they're neither good nor bad but partially both, like so many other things. Also that their coffee is okayish, better than what you get in a lot of other places, but nothing great. And I kinda hate 'em cuz they feel like malls and malls make me terribly, terribly depressed. Always have, even when I was a kid. Plus the mushroom propagation of Starbucks always seems to go hand in hand with the mushroom propagation of really shitty condos, but I think I covered that.

Re gff's post before last: I'm not sure any realistic answer would convince anyone. My suspicion is that the only problem here, the reason for the hooting and hollering, is the basic incompatibility of Starbucks of SY (in terms of their cultural labeling) in some people's minds. I haven't got far with that line of argument, so you might wanna take it with a grain of salt.

Agree w/ Nabisco about the broadness of the contemporary indie-rock market. So I guess I oughtta differentiate between Indie Rock Classic (80s "corporate rock still sucks" die-hards) and New Indie Rock (nice people who like nice music made by nice people). IRC folks are the ones with their nuts in a bunch. NIRs are cool with Starbucks in the first place.

Starbucks also injected the whole notion of coffeeshops into places that didn't have them; part of their early spread really did have to do with the whole notion of foamy espresso concoctions being rare and alluring to people, and then being converted into like daily purchases

they weren't that rare. even big rapids had an independent coffee shop with lattes and espresso. I saw a few shows there!

I've heard they're a good employer at both the corporate and the retail levels.

they're anti-union, if I'm not mistaken

What has always amazed me about Starbucks is that they will charge double for a cup of coffee and then EXPECT YOU TO PUT YOUR OWN MILK AND SUGAR IN IT.

FUCK

YOU

yeah, even my piece-of-shit homogenized, nowhere-near-anything-interesting soCal suburb had a couple

x-post