While an otherwise decent analysis, this is the Internet and I reserve the right to nitpick:

"In Seattle, where coffee is something of an obsession, Starbucks has long had a reputation of moving into neighborhoods and pushing out small, independent coffee shops."

David Haskin may want to re-check his notes here, as the independent cafe owners in Seattle -- especially shops like Victrola and Online Coffee Co -- would strenuously disagree with this assertion.

Not sure if this is a repost, my comments seem to just evaporate into the ether. But I was saying this would definitely make me more likely to use Starbucks while traveling..

The lack of my posts appearing makes me less likely to use these comment boxes, though.

I don't think this move will imperil small independent coffee shops. All the independents have to do is install their own wireless router and give out their local password to customers. It would mean access to everyone, not just AT&T users.

Starbucks has built its brand by creating aesthetic places to gather over a cup of java; warm and friendly places it's nice to be at. People need these local places for connection to others in a non-alcoholic setting. Local coffee shops, as long as they pay attention to the ideas of comfortable and aesthetic surroundings (and good coffee), can develop their own clientele the same way. Wireless access just adds to the experience.

I wonder if Starbucks has considered adding local unsigned artists to it's line up of songs that people can get for free or purchased through them. This would be a great way for local artists to get exposure when they otherwise couldn't/wouldn't.