Starbucks takes a step in the wrong direction.
It's a good article pointing out the high risk in pursuing short term sales at the expense of long term equity. Sound familiar? Stella Artois, for example? The sirens' song is apparently live and well, luring great marketers who have built up amazing brands to shallow waters. Why do they do it?
Temptation comes in the form of global recession and an obvious desire to release some of the equity in their powerful brand and launch a product more suited to these cash-strapped times. But, as Mark Ritson points out, what is Starbucks without the full sensory experience? I doubt that first curious purchase of a premium instant coffee will convey enough of the same sensory experience as the "proper job" to make the purchase a habit.
The real risk is not the potential failure of another NPD idea (that alone would not be a huge problem), but rather the bursting of a bigger bubble that could have floated on up when times get better.
Starbucks are boasting today that they've received an award for this (reported here http://bit.ly/qJgGv).
It's an interesting argument. I think they should be fine as there's a big enough point of difference between the two experiences.