Connect with us

Business

More retailers are opening coffee shops to appeal to customers who may not want to spend the big bucks—but still want a cup of joe

Published

on



Café Dior in Chengdu. Carhartt Coffee in London. Santander Work Café in Brooklyn.

Around the world, brands ranging from luxury fashion houses to workwear to banks are opening up coffee shops.

The phenomenon of retailers hosting coffee shops isn’t exactly new, as anyone who’s ever been to a Starbucks inside of a Target can tell you. But the number of brand-owned and -operated coffee shops seems to be creeping up. Ralph’s Coffee, owned by Ralph Lauren, opened in Manhattan in 2014, and is now neighbored by the Blue Box Café at Tiffany & Co., a Capital One Café, and a Uniqlo Coffee around its Fifth Avenue location. (And that’s not even including the brand restaurants.)

Post-Covid, there’s been a resurgence of interest in preserving or even establishing “third places,” which refers to places to spend time outside of home and work at the same time that brands are seeking to broaden their customer bases on- and offline by investing in customer experiences. Coffee shops, it seems, are working to satisfy both sides.

Sip, sip, pass

Earlier this year, Japanese-owned clothing retailer Uniqlo opened a coffee shop—its first in North America—at its store on Fifth Avenue to “enhance the shopping experience” for customers and project a welcoming brand persona, Nicolas Cessot, head of marketing for Uniqlo North America, told us.

“It’s a great branding proposition for us,” Cessot said. “It is a global flagship, so for us, it’s a global opportunity to continue to spread our brand [awareness] to customers from all over the world.”

Uniqlo has existing coffee shops in Tokyo, where Cessot said customer experience and hospitality is a cultural priority, and Manila. Other retailers, like French fashion brand Maison Kitsuné, also started their journey into coffee in Asia, with the first Café Kitsuné opening in 2013 in Okayama, Japan. Earlier this year, Japanese lifestyle brand Muji opened a food market in Manhattan, its first in the States.

It’s not just brands from overseas expanding their hospitality offerings. American brands Kate Spade and Coach have been experimenting in the hospitality space in Dubai and Jakarta, Indonesia, respectively, while Coach has also opened up coffee shops in Texas and New Jersey.

Beyond reaching new customers around the world, brand coffee shops allow retailers to reach customers across different interests—including those who might not want new clothes, but do want a cup of joe, Cessot said. That seems to be a key reason why higher-end brands like Dior and Ralph Lauren are opening cafés: to reach customers outside of their usual demo, specifically those who may not be able to or may not want to spend big bucks on a purse, but can justify a $7 iced latte.

“It’s giving people this opportunity to engage with the brand from a lifestyle standpoint, even if they can’t purchase a product,” Michelle Baumann, chief strategy officer, commerce at VML, told us.

That being said, a small purchase like a coffee can increase customer “dwell time,” which could mean more time to consider a larger buy. “The longer you’re in [store], the more likely you are to browse, the more likely you are to purchase,” Baumann said.

And, it seems, more likely to post. Canadian clothing brand Aritzia has been operating its in-store A-OK Cafes since 2018, and customers often share videos and images of drink tokens online, Baumann noted. Daniel Boulud, chef at Tiffany & Co.’s Blue Box Café, told Food & Wine earlier this year that “with social media today, [the café] has even more appeal” with its colorful interior.

“[Cafés are] doing a lot in terms of the amplification and being able to create that earned equity,” Baumann said. “You’ve got Instagrammable spaces and a lot of social media exposure.”

After opening its Fifth Avenue coffee shop, Cessot said Uniqlo saw plenty of user-generated content about the location on TikTok and Instagram.

“We’re…encouraging people to create and generate more content so we can continue to spread the news and spread our brand awareness across the country,” he said.

“How do you personify a brand?

Whether it’s a YSL Café in Paris or an Ikea cafeteria, a unifying purpose among them all seems to be a desire to enhance the customer experience, Baumann said.

At Capital One, which opened its first Capital One Café in 2014, that is certainly the case, said Jennifer Windbeck, SVP of retail bank channels and operations, who told us the move was inspired, in part, by the insight that customers value in-person interactions around customer service and money management needs.

“There’s a major purpose of the café that’s not just basic banking,” Windbeck said.. “It is, ‘How do you personify a brand, and what is that in-person experience?’”

Capital One now operates more than 60 cafés in metropolitan areas across the country, the latest of which opened in New York’s SoHo neighborhood earlier this month. Inside the cafés, the brand hosts events ranging from coding classes to financial literacy workshops, which Windbeck said has helped build Capital One’s brand image as more than a credit-card company. Capital One Cafés also run promos that aim to encourage repeat foot traffic, including one where visitors get free drinks every Monday of the MLB season.

While the ultimate goal is to drive customer sign-ups, Windbeck said the cafés (and deals) are for everyone, not just Capital One customers. Offering amenities like free wi-fi allows Capital One to market to the masses “in a very intentionally non-sales” and “organic way,” she said.

Light roast ahead?

While there are plenty of benefits, opening a coffee shop can be a costly endeavor when considering the labor and materials, not to mention the potential for stains from coffee spills. (Neither Uniqlo nor Capital One would disclose operating costs or whether the cafés are revenue generators, although Windbeck said the continued expansion of Capital One Cafés could be seen as a sign of Capital One’s satisfaction with its results.))

There can also be reputational risks. Besides possibly getting roasted like the beans it’s serving, Baumann noted that a brand coffee shop could be a threat to a brand’s image if the location doesn’t provide an adequate level of service. That’s especially true if the coffee isn’t free she said.

“If you have poor service, if people are waiting for a long time, all of a sudden that’s actually going to detract from the overall shopping experience,” she said.

For help on those fronts, some retailers choose to work with existing coffee brands like Verve Coffee, Capital One’s coffee partner of choice; La Colombe, which is served at Ralph’s; and Allpress, which has worked with Carhartt and Patagonia to help ensure product quality. But as with any business, there can also be risks for partners, Baumann said, citing Ralph’s growing reputation as a tourist destination.

Still, she said, she expects more brands to get in on the trend, especially since it can serve as a way to introduce novelty and surprise customers with additional offerings. If nothing else, visitors to these stores can know one thing for certain: No one’s going to ask them to leave their coffee cups at the door.

This report was originally published by Marketing Brew.





Source link

Continue Reading

Business

MacKenzie Scott tries to close the higher ed DEI gap, giving away $155 million this week alone

Published

on



MacKenzie Scott has arguably been the biggest name in philanthropy this year—and has nonstop been making major gifts to organizations focused on education, DEI, disaster recovery, and many other causes.

This week alone, several higher education institutions announced major gifts from the billionaire philanthropist and ex-wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—donations totaling well over $100 million. In true Scott fashion, many of these donations are the largest single donations these schools have ever received.

The donations announced this week include: 

  • $50 million to California State University-East Bay
  • $50 million to Lehman College (part of the City University of New York system)
  • $38 million to Texas A&M University-Kingsville
  • $17 million to Seminole State College

All four institutions are public, access-oriented colleges that enroll large shares of low‑income, first‑generation, and racially diverse students and function as minority‑serving institutions or similar engines of social mobility. They fit MacKenzie Scott’s broader pattern of directing large, unrestricted gifts to colleges that serve “chronically underserved” communities rather than already wealthy, highly selective universities.

Scott, who is worth about $40 billion and has donated over $20 billion in the past five years, has doubled down this year on causes that the Trump administration has cut deeply, such as education, DEI, and disaster recovery.

“As higher education, in general, works to find its way in an uncertain environment, this gift is a major source of encouragement that we are on the right path,” Lehman College President Fernando Delgado said in a statement. 

Scott also made one of the largest donations in HBCU Howard University’s 158-year history with an $80 million gift earlier this fall, and a $60 million donation to the Center for Disaster Philanthropy after Trump administration’s cuts to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—an organization Americans rely on for help during and after hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and floods.

“All sectors of society—public, private, and social—share responsibility for helping communities thrive after a disaster,” CDP president and CEO Patricia McIlreavy previously told Fortune. “Philanthropy plays a critical role in providing communities with resources to rebuild stronger, but it cannot—and should not—replace government and its essential responsibilities.”

Trust-based philanthropy

Scott accumulated the vast majority of her wealth from her 2019 divorce from Bezos, but is dedicated to giving away most of her fortune. She’s considered a unique philanthropist in today’s environment because her gifts are typically unrestricted, meaning the organizations can use the funding however they choose. 

“She practices trust-based philanthropy,” Anne Marie Dougherty, CEO of the Bob Woodruff Foundation previously told Fortune. Scott has donated $15 million to the veteran-focused nonprofit organization in 2022, and made a subsequent $20 million donation this fall.

Scott is also considered one of the most generous philanthropists, and credits acts of kindness for inspiring her to give back.

“It was the local dentist who offered me free dental work when he saw me securing a broken tooth with denture glue in college,” Scott wrote of her inspiration for philanthropy in an Oct. 15 essay published to her Yield Giving site. “It was the college roommate who found me crying, and acted on her urge to loan me a thousand dollars to keep me from having to drop out in my sophomore year.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix’s bombshell deal to buy Warner Bros. brings Batman and Harry Potter to the streamer, infuriates theater owners and the Ellisons

Published

on


Netflix’s agreement to buy Warner Bros. in a $72 billion deal marks a seismic shift in Hollywood, handing the streaming giant control of iconic franchises such as Batman and Harry Potter and triggering an immediate backlash from theater owners and the jilted Ellison family behind Paramount. The bombshell transaction, struck after a bidding war that ensued after David Ellison’sunsolicited bids several months ago, positions Netflix ever more at the center of the Southern California entertainment business that the Northern California company disrupted so famously decades ago.

The deal will see Netflix acquire Warner Bros. Discovery’s film and TV studios and its streaming operations, including HBO Max, in a deal with an equity value of roughly $72 billion, or about $27.75 per share in cash and stock, valuing Warner Bros. at $82.7 billion. The agreement followed a heated auction in which Netflix’s bid edged out offers from Paramount Skydance and Comcast, both of which had pushed to keep the storied Warner assets in more traditional hands.

Two days before Netflix won the bidding, Paramount hinted at its fury with a strongly worded letter to WBD CEO David Zaslav, arguing the process was “tainted” and Warner Bros. was favoring a single bidder: Netflix. Paramount called it a “myopic process with a predetermined outcome that favors a single bidder,” Bloomberg reported, although Netflix’s bid is understood to be the highest of the three.

Another angry group is theater owners, who have famously warred with Netflix for years over the big red streamer’s reluctance, even refusal to follow traditional theatrical-release practices. Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos has adamantly defended Netflix’s streaming-forward distribution, saying it’s what consumers really want. At the Time 100 event in April of this year, Sarandos called theatrical release “an outmoded idea for most people” and said Netflix was “saving Hollywood” by giving people what they want: streaming at home.

Cinema United, the trade association which represents over 30,000 movie screens in the U.S. and 26,000 internationally, immediately announced its opposition to Netflix acquiring a legacy Hollywood studio. The organization’s chief, Michael O’Leary, said it “poses an unprecedented threat to the global exhibition business” as Netflix’s states business model simply does not support theatrical exhibition. He urged regulators to look closely at the acquisition.

Deadline reported that other producers are warning of “the death of Hollywood” as a result of this deal. Several days earlier, Bank of America Research’s analysts had surveyed the landscape and concluded that as a defensive move, Netflix would be “killing three birds with one stone,” as its ownership of Warner Bros’ would be a daunting blow to Paramount and Comcast, while taking the Warner legacy studio out of the running. The bank calculated that a combined Netflix and Warner Bros. would comprise roughly 21% of total streaming time—still shy of YouTube’s 28% hold on the market, but far greater than Paramount’s 5% and Comcast’s 4%.

What’s known and what’s still at play

As part of the deal, Netflix will retain the studio that controls the superheroes of DC, the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, and HBO’s prestige brands. Other details on what will happen to the standalone streaming service HBO Max were scant, with the companies saying only that Netflix will “maintain” Warner Bros. current operations. The companies expect the transaction to close after regulatory review, with Netflix projecting billions in annual cost savings by the third year after completion.

​The deal will not include all of Warner Bros. Discovery, according to the press release announcing the acquisition, which said the previously announced plans to separate WBD’s cable operations will be completed before the Netflix deal, in the third quarter of 2026. The newly separated publicly traded company holding the Global Networks division will be called Discovery Global, and will include CNN, TNT Sports in the U.S., as well as Discovery, free-to-air channels across Europe, plus digital products such as Discovery+ and Bleacher Report.  

On a conference call with reporters Friday morning, Sarandos said Netflix is “highly confident in the regulatory process,” calling the deal pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-creator and pro-growth. He said Netflix planned to work closely with regulators and was running “full speed” ahead toward getting all regulatory approvals. He added that Netflix executives were “tired” after “an incredibly rigorous and competitive process.” Alluding to Netflix’s traditional resistance to big M&A, Sarandos added that “we don’t do many of these, but we were deep in this one.”

Influential entertainment journalist Matt Belloni of Puck previewed the likely deal on Bill Simmons’ podcast on Spotify’s Ringer network (which recently struck a deal to bring some video podcasts to Netflix), and they speculated about potential problems inside Netflix that brought the deal to a head. In conversation about how defensive the move is, Belloni said Netflix is “doing this for a reason” and may have reached a “stress point” because it hasn’t been getting traction with its own moviemaking efforts after 10 years of trying. (Netflix has also been agonizingly close to an elusive Best Picture Oscar, with close calls on Roma and Emilia Perez, the latter of which was derailed in a bizarre social-media controversy.) Belloni also acknowledged the criticism that Netflix has struggled to create its own franchises, also after years of trying.

Sarandos highlighted Netflix’s homegrown franchises while announcing the deal, arguing that Netflix’s ” culture-defining titles like Stranger Things, KPop Demon Hunters and Squid Game” will now combine with Warner’s deep library including classics Casablanca and Citizen Kane, even Friends.

The biggest losers in the bidding war may be David Ellison and his father, Oracle co‑founder (and long-time Republican donor)Larry Ellison, whose Paramount‑Skydance empire had been widely seen as a front‑runner to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery. David Ellison, has since reportedly been pleading his case around Washington, meeting Trump administration officials as allies float antitrust and national‑interest concerns about giving Netflix control of such a critical studio.

While Netflix has tried to calm regulators by arguing that a combined Netflix–HBO Max bundle would increase competition with Disney and others, the Ellisons and their supporters are signaling they will continue to press for tougher scrutiny or even intervention. Large M&A has made a big comeback in 2025 as the Trump administration has been notably friendlier to big deals than the deep freeze of the Biden administration, making this deal an acid test for just how true that is when a company with deep ties to the White House gets jilted.​

[Disclosure: The author worked internally at Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.]



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk and Bill Gates are wrong about AI imminently replacing all jobs. ‘That’s not what we’re seeing,’ LinkedIn exec slams

Published

on



The future of work as we know it is hanging by a thread—at least, that’s what many tech leaders consistently say. Elon Musk predicts AI will replace all jobs in less than 20 years. Bill Gates says even those who train to use AI tools may not be safe from its claws. And then there’s Klarna’s CEO, Sebastian Siemiatkowski, who is even warning workers that “tech bros” are sugarcoating just how badly it’s about to impact jobs.

But according to one LinkedIn exec, that’s simply not what the data is showing. 

With hundreds of millions of workers hunting for jobs and employers posting open roles in real time, LinkedIn acts as one of the clearest barometers of what’s actually happening on the ground—and its managing director for EMEA, Sue Duke, is not buying the AI apocalypse narrative.

“That’s not what we’re seeing,” Duke revealed at the Fortune CEO Forum in The Shard in London. When asked about an AI-induced hiring slowdown she insisted that the opposite is actually true. 

“What we’re seeing is that organizations who are adopting and integrating this technology, they’re actually going out and hiring more people to really take advantage of this technology,” Duke explained. 

“They’re going out and looking for more business development people, more technologically savvy people, and more sales people as they realize the business opportunities, the innovation possibilities, and ultimately the growth possibilities of this technology.”

For the millions of job seeking Gen Zers—who keep being told that entry-level jobs are about the get swallowed by AI and that a youth unemployment crisis is well underway—the news will be a welcome surprise.

LinkedIn exec breaks down exactly what employers are looking for from new hires in 2026

For those looking to make the most of the job market’s shift, Duke says there are two key areas to upskill in.

The first, no surprise one, is AI skills. Whether that’s literacy, tooling, prompt-writing, or more technical capabilities, “we continue to see those AI skills being red, red hot in the labor market,” she said. 

With companies racing to integrate automation into products and workflows, that demand isn’t cooling anytime soon—no matter what industry you’re looking to work in. “We see a huge demand for those skills across the board, economy-wide, across all sectors, and tons of companies looking for those,” Duke added.

As AI takes over many administrative tasks, it’s putting the spotlight on job functions that bots can’t do. “Those unique human skills,” Duke said, is the second area of focus for employers. “They remain rock solid, constant at the heart of hiring desires and demands out there. They’re not going away either.”

She called out communication, team building, and problem solving, as some of those human skills that will stand the test of time: “They’re the ones to invest in.”

And ultimately, the skill employers are zeroing in on most isn’t technical at all—it’s adaptability. Bosses know the tools will change faster than job titles. What they want is someone who can change with them.

“The most important thing for job seekers to think about is the mindset that you’re also bringing to the table,” Duke concluded. 

“What employers are really looking for is that growth mindset and understanding that this technology is moving very, very quickly, and we need adaptability. Adaptability is right at the top of those most in-demand skills, so making sure you’re bringing that mindset, bringing that agility with you, that’s going to be hugely important.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.