“I spend too much at Starbucks” is a legendary meme.
It's also not an accident: the coffee retailer -- worth $120B -- uses many psychological hacks in its store and menu designs to get you to drop more cash.
Here are 11 of them 🧵
1/ Starbucks is all about positioning
The chain has higher prices vs competitors. But that's the point.
People typically assign higher value/quality to higher prices. Known as "irrational value assessment", this makes Starbucks an everyday luxury that people will pay for.
2/ Premium brand = premium customer base
By setting its prices higher, Starbucks attracts clientele that are relatively price insensitive.
Starbucks frequently raises its prices with little negative effect to its bottom line.
3/ "More than coffee"
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz created the premium feel by emphasizing experience:
◻️Positioned SBUX as a "third place" (b/t home, work)
◻️Brought bean grinding in-store (for aroma)
◻️Banned auto espresso machines (it took away from the barista craft)
4/ Lighting and visual cues
The Starbucks operations is about "flow", efficiently moving people around the store+ getting them to spend.
To form lines, it directs people to well-lit areas (usually the merchandise, which provides the added benefit of nudging products for sale).
5/ Shop layout
Across its 32k+ locations, Starbucks places its cashiers in the middle or back of the cafes. As customers work through the line, they're watching other patrons enjoy their beverages and bites.
This is all priming them for their eventual orders.
6/ Mobile app
There's a psychological effect known as "peak-end rule": people remember experiences by the most intense part and the end.
The pre-order app takes away 2 of the most unpleasant parts (paying + waiting), improving the *whole* experience.
7/ Starbucks card
Customers have $1.6B+ on Starbuck's apps/cards (hence the joke "SBUX is a bank").
In a concept called "mental accounting", people irrationally classify money in different buckets and treat them differently. That SBUX money is way more *spendable* than cash.
8/ Loyalty program
Starbuck's Loyalty Program has 20m members and they contribute ~50% of the company's revenue.
The retailer takes all customer data and is able to provide individualized offers at scale. The freebies are habit forming and keep people coming back.
9/ Personalized orders
We all know the joke: "Starbucks mispelt my name". However, the very fact that the baristas write it down increases your affinity for the brand.
This is known as the "cocktail party effect": people focus (and assign more value) to info about themselves.
10/ Menu structure
Through the 90s, the 3 sizes that Starbucks listed were Short, Tall and Grande. It has since bumped Short (you can still order it but its not on menu) and added Venti.
Now, the most popular size is the Grande (the new middle option and larger than SHORT).
10/ Pricing
In addition to upping default sizes, Starbucks also uses pricing to steer you.
In what is known as the "attraction effect", your choice-set gravitates to the items that are "closer together". Here, the price b/t Grande and Venti is *closer* than Tall and Grande.
11/ No dollar signs on menu
Why? psychologically, a dollar sign triggers the idea of "price" and "spending...instead of "experience" and "what you're receiving".
Here IS a dollar sign: ~$29B, which is Starbucks projected sales this year.
12/ If you enjoyed that, I write threads breaking down tech and business 1-2x a week.
Def follow @TrungTPhan to catch them in your feed.
McKinsey built an AI chatbot (Lilli) trained on 100 years of its work 100k documents and interviews.
70% of 45k employees use the tool, making 500k prompts a month.
A research firm hacked into it with “full read and write access to production database” including “47m chat messages about strategy, M&A, client engagement, all in plain text along with 728k containing confidential client data, 57k user accounts, and 95 system prompts controlling AI’s behaviour.”
Mcksinsey said it has patched up the vulnerability, which was made possible by “publicly exposed API documentation, including 22 endpoints that didn't require authentication…one of these wrote user search queries, and the agent found that the JSON keys (these are the field names) were concatenated into SQL and vulnerable to SQL injection.”
Need to know how Lilli uses that time Mckinsey told AT&T in 1980 that mobile market by 2000 would be “niche” and only have 900k users (900k users added a day). Ended up costing $12 B to acquire cellular play.
This timelapse of Alex Honnold’s 1 hour 35 minute free solo climb of Taipei 101 is unreal.
He said the main challenge was “not getting complacent up the bamboo boxes, because it’s 64 of the same sequence over and over.”
His music playlist (mostly Tool) helped because each bamboo box took about the length of a song and he could keep pace.
Honnold wants to climb other mega skyscrapers if allowed.
Thinks Taipei 101 was the ideal challenge, though: “This one is so perfect for climbing. There are some buildings that are almost too easy for climbing. Like, ones that have a window washing track on the outside, where you’re just hand over handing on some track the whole way. You can climb it, but it’s not a challenge. The thing about Taipei 101 is it’s perfectly in the sweet spot for me, where it’s possible, and it’s not too insanely hard.”
“The dragons, they’re also probably the scariest thing to actually do. I mean, they’re really fun, they’re really cool. It’s an incredible sequence, cool position. But every time I set up on the dragon, I’d be like, “this is kind of crazy.” You’re like, out over the abyss. It’s cool.”
Matt Damon and Ben Affleck on Rogan taking about how Netflix has changed filmmaking.
A major considerations is dealing with distracted viewers. To keep them tuned in, “you re-iterate the plot 3-4x in the dialogue because people are on their phones.”
Then, in action films, you change the ordering of climatic fights.
In traditional action films, you’d have “three set pieces” in every act (I, II, III) and each would “ramp up” (spend the big money on third set piece).
But streaming has to hook viewers within 5 minute, so the incentive is to put a major battle or action sequence much earlier.
Also, the directors have less incentive to make a film look great because so many people watch on laptops and phones.
They do say that streaming allows for more bets on risky projects since the theatre economics are geared towards IP, sequels and super-heroes.
Example: an independent film with a $25m budget would spend $25m on marketing (1:1 ratio). But since it splits box office with the theatre, the film needs to make $100m (1/2 of which is $50m) just to break even.
They’re realistic about the state of film and call it a supply-demand issue. If the demand is for at-home viewing (eg. Netflix 300m+ subs), then filmmaking approach will change to feed the algo.
When there’s demand for theatre, Damon will go team up with Christopher Nolan to make “The Odyssey”.
A similar dynamic is happening to streaming TV shows. The incentives for story arc, dialogue and character types warped thr medium.
The Economist has a great piece on strategy sportsbetting apps use to throttle smart bettors:
▫️Skilled players are “sharps” and given “stake restrictions” if they play too well (bets are capped).
▫️Rest of players called “Square”.
▫️In 2025, 4.3% of active UK accounts had a “stake factor” below the maximum bet allowance of 100%.
▫️Sportsbook will take bets with a profit margin as low as 4.5%.
▫️If they are able to do good “player-profiling” and keep the “sharps” from playing, the profit margin can reach 10-20%.
▫️As important as keeping out “sharps” is hooking “whales”, the deep-pocketed players that are willing to keep playing (and losing) large sums.
▫️Some “whales” are actually “sharps” in disguise, though. They’ll lose a bunch of bets to lull the sportsbook then put down a massive bet when they have an edge.
▫️While there is a risk of a “whale” being a “sharp”, the value of a real “whale” is so high that sportsbook will take the risk
▫️“In March 2024 PointsBet, raised its share of online sports-gambling revenue in New Jersey from 11% to 24% after wooing a single cash-spouting customer away from DraftKings.” (I can confirm that this wasn’t me).
▫️How sportsbook profile players:
> Playing on Mobile is a good sign (where majority of people play)
> Playing on PCs is a bad sign (it’s easier to compare odds and run models)
> E-wallets are a red flag (sportsbooks prefer debit direct deposit that can attach a player to a single account; e-wallet is more anonymized and players can move cash between sportsbook more quickly to shop for the best odds)
> Women bettors are a red flag (most bettors are men and “sharps” often use women to place bets)
▫️First wagers are a major tells (typical bettors go after top leagues — NFL, NBA, EPL — and do so near the start of the game).
▫️Popular bets for “squares”: who will win, scoring margins and how star player will perform (also, they love multi-leg parlays).
▫️“Sharps” go after less popular leagues and place bets as soon as odds are published, when they are most mispriced. They also go after less popular bets such as “pts in Q3” or stats from a random player (“Sharps” rarely do parlays and don’t withdrawal winnings often).
▫️One gambling consultant tells The Economist that “By the time a customer places his first bet, [sportsbooks] are 80-90% certain they know the lifetime value of the account.”
▫️”Sportsbooks look at a player’s ‘closing-line value’ — a measure that compares the odds at which he bets with those available right before a match begins. If it is consistently ahead of the market over his first ten wagers, he is highly likely to beat the book in the long run.”
▫️Sportsbook mathematically monitor players and creates a new risk score every 6-8 hours (risk score = estimate of probability that customers will wind up unprofitable).
▫️E-wallet users, women and bets over $100 are flagged. These suspicious bettors are given 30% of maximum bet (and proven sharps only allowed 1%).
▫️High-skilled players will often get a “beard” to bet on their behalf. Most sportsbooks ban this practice but it is widespread.
▫️Safest “beards” are close friends and relatives because you can mostly rely on them to pay out any winnings. The “beards” try to look like degens (playing at 3am, bet non-stop and doing ridiculous parlays) before placing a winning bet.
▫️The most effective strategy for “sharps” is “whale-flipping”. Find a losing gambler, then ask to put a (likely) large winning bet amongst their pool of guaranteed losers.
▫️Once “sharps” max out the people they can use as “beards”, they tap professional networks called “movers”. These “movers” employ a bunch of “mules” who can put down bets on the behalf of the network. Low-end movers charge 10-20% while high-end movers charge 50% of winnings.
On a related note, I wrote on how slot machines make $10B+ a year in Las Vegas (~70% of all casino gaming revenue).
The history, psychology and design of the device…which went from a throwaway game to the industry’s “cash cow” and “gambling’s crack cocaine.”readtrung.com/p/the-ludicrou…
Satya Nadella on why Microsoft Excel has been so durable after 40 years:
> the power of lists and tables
> the malleability of the software (“a blinking canvas”)
> spreadsheet software is Turing complete (“I can make it do everything”)
> it’s the world’s most approachable programming environment (“you get into it without even thinking your programming”)