MonaVie vs. Starbucks |
3 Comments |
Quite often distributors will ask me, “Why don’t you have a blog denouncing Starbucks?” They suggest that Starbucks is the same $3-5 (sometimes more) cost and they don’t even close to being healthy. Though I have addressed them all in numerous comments, it’s worth just putting it all in one place so I can direct future questions to the answer.
I’m not a big fan in spending $3-5 at Starbucks. I’m not the only one. Well-known personal finance guru David Bach has written a lot about the latte factor. Specifically he points out that people spend a thousand dollars a year or more on this coffee habit. He makes a strong argument that it’s why Americans have under-funded emergency funds, credit problems, under-funded retirement accounts, etc. Bach has realized that a lot of small expenses over time really do add up.
When you pay for coffee at Starbucks, you are also paying for the overhead that Starbucks has in running many stores and employing many baristas. You also pay for the experience of Starbucks which is greater than just coffee – it’s a comfy chair and nice music.
MonaVie does not have the overhead of running a store. It does not provide an experience beyond drinking juice in your home.
The great thing about coffee is that it can be made at home relatively cheaply for just a few cents for a large mug. MonaVie does not provide this relatively cheap option. One can clearly see these are not comparable.
I would also like to point out that MonaVie does not provide a thirst quenching replacement for another beverage. Thus people drinking MonaVie are likely also going to be spending an additional $3-5 at Starbucks anyway. Thus buying MonaVie adds a “Latte Factor” to people’s lives, without providing nutrition or quenching one’s thirst.. That seems like lose-lose-lose to me.
As far as the health goes, other beverages that are more healthy such as Welch’s Grape Juice avoid the latte factor and quench thirst. I see that as a win-win-win for consumers.
The above article is intended to be accurate at the time of its original posting. MonaVie may change its pricing, product, or other policies at any time without notice.This post involves:
david bach, latte factor, starbucks
... and focuses on:MonaVie Value
Stumble
Reddit
Digg
Del.icio.usAt times comments might be disabled or moderated to a time more suiting with my schedule.
Next: MonaVie Admits AIBMR is the Only Source of Their Biased “Research”
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:38 am
When I buy a $3-5 coffee at Starbucks, it is because it tastes good, they offer more drinks than I could make myself at home, and I get some enjoyment out of drinking it. I have no expectation that my coffee is going to lower my blood pressure, help me sleep better, take away my pain, cure cancer, anthrax, diabetes, or anything else. Starbucks does not claim to solve all your health problems, they just want to sell you fancy cup of coffee.
October 3rd, 2010 at 5:41 pm
Aside from Megavie’s comment, which I agree with, it’s ridiculous to compare Monavie and SBUX. The latter is a service industry and the former is a product manufacturer/vendor.
If Monavie provided a nice clean place with chairs and tables and a patio, and friendly competent people to preapre and serve my drink, as well as music, nice lighting, utensils, a store on every corner, etc., then MAYBE they could get away with charging a bit more than what Welch’s or V8 provides (of course, ignoring the fact that Monavie is a grossly inferior more toxic product that nobody but its own distribitors wants to buy).
But Monavie provides none of those things. In fact, the tiny bit of customer service that they provide, through their representatives (armed with bloviated and misleading marketing materials) is so grossly inept and obnoxious that if I ever encountered it in a retail outlet I would have to restrain myself from throttling someone. At the very least, they would never get any repeat business.
October 4th, 2010 at 9:22 am
I’m not a big fan of Starbucks but as others have said, part of the Starbucks experience is the environment and the drink. Going after Starbucks for being expensive is mainstream, the people who want to go do go and those who think it is a rip-off don’t. I really don’t think there is a shortage of Starbucks criticism anywhere.
The comparison is moot anyway, because Starbucks doesn’t claim their coffee will cure your back pain, nor are the products 10x overpriced and crappier than Folger’s. They are overpriced indeed, but compared to other gourmet coffees they pretty much have a standard going rate. I have found gourmet coffees on the internet that are more expensive than Starbucks, and guess what? The quality shows, unlike MonaVie which thrives on the fancy bottle effect.