Main > Everything Else
i have a new understanding of the mcdonalds coffee case now
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: Singapura on August 23, 2007, 10:20:52 pm ---DrewKaree, before you berate someone get your own facts straight. McDonalds main products are hamburgers, not coffee. If you really want to compare you should count the number of cups of premium coffee they sell, leaving out the drip coffee since Star Bucks doesn't sell that. Starbucks has 42% of the US premium coffeemarket with no close competitor (http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Starbucks_(SBUX)). McDonald's is gaining but does not sell close to the number of cups that Starbucks does. Dunkin' Donuts is a good competitor too.
--- End quote ---
I'll help you out, since you're clearly thinking about something else. The conversation was about the PROFITS of McD's on coffee alone. Show me - point me to the spot - where you saw "the judgement awarded her $X based on McD's profit of PREMIUM coffee per day". Then point me to where shmokes OR myself were delving into the intricacies of the different "levels" of coffee.
If you really want to compare, you compare the product. If YOU want to separate levels of the products, fine, but before you "berate someone, get your own facts straight" ::) The conversation that you can clearly go back and read had no such delineation, and was comparing product to product.
If you're going to be pedantic to win an argument, fine. Just spare us when trying to interject it in the middle of the conversation. The point that is still hovering over your head hoping to be noticed is that it's entirely possible (and probable) that McD's sells more coffee than Starbucks.
Per your own daft logic, I'll also parse the argument further, as you seem to want to do. I claim the victory that McD's sells more NON-"premium" coffee than Starbucks. That work for you? ::) Based on that "fact" that you've made darn near indisputable, McD's then makes more PROFIT on that "non-premium coffee" than Starbucks. I win again. Point, set, match.
If you're going to fly your pretentiousness flag, try to deal with what's currently going on in the conversation, not some pedantic "win" you see a chance to snag. Lastly, before you try to feign surprise at this, spare me the notion that you weren't able to follow the conversation and thought it should be comparing "premium" coffee. Still brown? Still hot? Still scalding when poured on someone's lap? Still talking about comparing profit per day on the brown hot scalding liquid that comes in cups and is called "coffee", and not "premium coffee"? ::)
:lame:
boykster:
With all that hot air, why is it you're not a lawyer or some ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- instead of wasting your time flipping burgers ;)
Singapura:
Shall we go back to topic? No use debating with someone who doesn't have a clue. :dunno
mccoy178:
--- Quote from: Singapura on August 24, 2007, 02:18:15 am ---Shall we go back to topic? No use debating with someone who doesn't have a clue. :dunno
--- End quote ---
Bah, you'll get used to it. Drew berates everyone at some point. Typing is his drug of choice, but he has bad trips a lot. :blah:
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: Singapura on August 24, 2007, 02:18:15 am ---Shall we go back to topic? No use debating with someone who doesn't have a clue. :dunno
--- End quote ---
I felt the same way, yet you were compelled to post your initial nonsense. Perhaps you were confused by the dazzling usage of your own rationale against your argument to hammer the point home.
At least you got McCoy to dust you off and get you back on your feet.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version