New Tet
29th July 2009, 22:25
Starbucks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbucks) is trying to change its name.
Aside from banking on a potentially short term cash influx on the part of potential buyers, Starbucks here may be aiming to divest itself of direct legal responsibility for its employees cares while continuing to exploit and derive profit from them via a franchise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchising) structure.
But isn't that what they already did anyway? Someone, please educate me on this topic!
Check out the Huffpost article that inspired this little rant:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/piers-fawkes/inside-starbucks-new-stea_b_246918.html
Aside from banking on a potentially short term cash influx on the part of potential buyers, Starbucks here may be aiming to divest itself of direct legal responsibility for its employees cares while continuing to exploit and derive profit from them via a franchise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchising) structure.
But isn't that what they already did anyway? Someone, please educate me on this topic!
Check out the Huffpost article that inspired this little rant:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/piers-fawkes/inside-starbucks-new-stea_b_246918.html