This afternoon I was chatting with some friends about Toronto real estate (which is something that happens a lot in this city), and we started talking about “The Starbucks Effect.”
Basically, we were talking about how this neighborhood just got a Starbucks and how that neighborhood already has one. We were, like a lot of people, using Starbucks as a proxy for neighborhoods that are emerging and neighborhoods that have already arrived.
There’s been a lot of discussion about the correlation between home prices and the presence of a Starbucks. But the big question is what comes first: the home prices or the Starbucks?
Earlier this year, the CEO, Spencer Rascoff, and Chief Economist, Stan Humphries, of Zillow.com argued that the mere presence of a Starbucks can cause gentrification.
They argued that Starbucks knows the next hot neighborhood before anyone else does and that they are “the fuel, not the follower.” And through their data they demonstrated that homes (in the US) near a Starbucks appreciated significantly faster than homes not near a Starbucks, or even homes near other coffee shops such as Dunkin’ Donuts.
But I – as well as others – wonder if this isn’t an oversimplification.
I certainly believe that Starbucks could help fuel home prices in a neighborhood. I think it gives people a comfort level that the neighborhood has arrived and that there are people in the area who are willing and able to spend money on discretionary items.
But I suspect that for Starbucks it’s a balancing act. They would never want to be late to an emerging neighborhood (and miss that prime corner property), but they also don’t want to be in the business of placing bets on neighborhoods with very few vital signs.
So I think it’s both. I think Starbucks is analyzing the data and watching home prices like a hawk (the follow) and when it reaches a certain point, they move. And that likely causes a further acceleration of neighborhood change (the fuel).
What do you think? I would love to learn more about their site selection process.
Toronto - St Lawrence Market by Chris Dufresne on 500px
This past Saturday night I was out with a few friends in my neighborhood (St. Lawrence Market area). And I was delighted to see how busy it was. Virtually every bar or club we walked by had a line down the street.
Being the city geek that I am, I started thinking about two things: (1) how often I get localized to my neighborhood (I have data to back this up) and (2) what makes a “complete neighborhood”, such that you’re even able to be localized?
In some ways the idea of a “complete neighborhood” is universal. Everybody needs a grocery store and access to food, for example. But in other ways, a “complete neighborhood” is very much a personal thing – you want goods and services that are important to you.
So today I thought I would do a quick breakdown of the goods, services, and amenities that I really value in my neighborhood and that I think make it more or less “complete.” This list is a combination of universal and personal choices in no particular order. At the end, I summarize some of the things I wish I had.
What I have:
A 5-10 minute walk to subway and streetcar
A 24/7 grocery store
A world famous food market (St. Lawrence Market)
Staple coffee shops (Starbucks and Balzacs)
Lots of restaurant and food choices (including decent Mexican, one of my favorite foods, and Pho, for when I feel a cold coming on)
2 drugstores (Shopper’s Drug Mart and a new Rexall)
A great gym that’s less than a 10 minute walk away
An outdoor/athletic store that also fixes bikes
Cool local bar (AAA) where I can watch the Raptors (because I don’t own a TV)
After work bar with a good Happy Hour (Pravda)
Patios for the summer (all along the Esplanade)
All the major banks
Nearby recreational amenities (bike trails, waterfront, etc.)
Great architecture (from Daniel Libeskind to the classics)
High walkability
What I wish I had:
Less chains and a few more independent businesses
A hip indie coffee shop where the (male) staff have waxed moustaches
A good takeout sushi place
A pool that I could walk to (I ride my bike to Regent Park)
A liquor store with longer hours (but alas this is Ontario)
Those are my working lists. What would create a complete neighborhood for you? And how does your current neighborhood hold up?
Last night before bed I decided to buy a book on my Kindle (iPad app) that I’ve been meaning to read for awhile. It’s called Poke the Box and it’s by Seth Godin. It’s a short read and it’s meant to be that way. You could easily read it in one sitting.
The book is about taking initiative. Taking action. And drawing your own map. It’s about not being scared of failure and realizing that failures are how you learn. It’s about poking the box, which is a computer programming reference. Programmers learn by poking the box (computer) and seeing what works and what doesn’t work.
As I read through the book I’m reminded of something that venture capitalist Ben Horowitz wrote a few months ago on his blog:
"Every employee in a company depends on the CEO to make fast, high quality decisions. Often any decision, even the wrong decision, is better than no decision."
Both Godin and Horowitz are, in a way, talking about the same thing: You have to keep moving. Make decisions. Start stuff. And stop worrying so much about being wrong, because it’s virtually impossible to know how things will eventually play out in the future.
A perfect example of this is Starbucks.
The first Starbucks in Seattle didn’t sell brewed coffee. It sold beans. And had it continued along this path, it certainly wouldn’t have become the brand that it is today. In fact, it may have failed completely. It wasn’t until Howard Schultz saw what they had started and combined it with what he had learned in Italy, that the Starbucks experience of today was born.
The important thing is that somebody (Jerry Baldwin, Zev Siegl and Gordon Bowker) took the initiative to start and build a Starbucks. It didn’t matter that they got the recipe wrong, they poked the box and it ultimately lead to something magical.
The same reluctance to poke the box can also be found in city building.
Here in Toronto we spend a significant amount of time debating and vacillating around transit decisions (as well as many other things). Should we build LRT? Or should we build subway? What should we replace the Scarborough Rapid Transit line with?
But we’ve fallen into analysis paralysis.
The original Transit City Plan was announced on March 16th, 2007. It’s now 2014. And transit still sucks. Imagine if we started and finished, say, 2 kilometers of rapid transit each and every year. Forget worrying if it’s LRT, subway or a horse drawn space ship. We just kept moving.
Something tells me that we’d be better off, even if we did make a few mistakes along the way.