Dumb Starbucks Analysis

1196 Words3 Pages

In 2014 comedian, Nathan Fielder opened a coffee shop in Los Angeles that he called Dumb Starbucks. Both Starbucks and Dumb Starbucks are not affiliated however, Fielder used Starbucks' famous trademark and placed "Dumb" in front of it. He also mimicked their menu but placed the word "dumb" in front of every product. The shop caused something of a media stir when the News media reported on the opening of Dumb Starbucks and it gain recognition and publicity. Dumb Starbucks and the baristas gave away free coffee until they ran out. Some individuals reportedly waited an hour, if not three hours for a free cup of coffee from Dumb Starbucks. "There were also "dumb" versions of the CDs sold at [Dumb] Starbucks" (Lee). Dumb Starbucks was only open …show more content…

Dumb Starbucks said, that "the 'coffee' you're buying is considered the art, but that's for our lawyers to worry about. All you need to do is enjoy our delicious coffee," according to Lee. In other words, Dumb Starbucks it was not intended to be a successful coffee shop but more so to try to get publicity for Fielder's show on Comedy Central, according to Jones. The creation of Dumb Starbucks was the problem Fielder faced for using Starbucks trademark name and logo and supposedly not having the appropriate permits to use …show more content…

After Dumb Starbucks was closed down by the Los Angeles County Health Department. Fielder has said that he plans to open another Dumb Starbucks but not Los Angeles. Before he does so, I do agree with Jones when she stated, that it would be salutary to determine if opening the first store was successful. There are other methods in which he can get publicity rather than opening another coffee shop similar to Starbucks. For example, he can get publicity by looking into different forms of social media and following blogs, Facebook and Twitter to visually perceive if members of his target market were talking about Dumb Starbucks, Nathan Fielder, and/or Nathan for You. This method can help Fielder by getting an understanding of what his members want or what they like about him as a comedian or his show. He can do other adverting on social media as well such as YouTube or maybe even billboard ads but if Fielder wants supplemental footage of customers for his exhibition, it would not be wise to establish another Dumb Starbucks. Starbucks seems unlikely to sue the parody coffee shop however, Starbucks will be more liable to sue if Fielder threatens to open another one. If Starbucks were to sue, Fielder would get the supplemental publicity for Dumb Starbucks and probably for Nathan for You like he would. Nonetheless, it would cost him for creating another one and this would be deplorable

Open Document