Regarding Moonbeans

*Pace *Daniel, and to a lesser extent Paul, I can’t say I’m terribly disappointed about the closure of Moonbeans.

Mind you, I have no qualm with it. I’ve patronized it occasionally in the past, and, of course, it has the advantage of not being the execrable Axe Or Palm.

But what better criterion is there for allocating the Green-Meyer concession than expected revenue (i.e. volume of customer patronage)? Surely the store that can sell the most coffee to the most people ought to operate the location. And, in turn, what better way is there to compare candidates along this dimension than competitive bidding? It’s not like Moonbeans is being bilked in any way; Coupa Cafe simply offered more.

As for petitions protesting the shop’s closure, forgive my glibness in pointing out that there already is an extant petition–the dollar-votes of customers. In the end, as far as businesses are concerned, that’s the fairest and most democratic referendum of all.

I certainly sympathize with the plight of Moonbeans fans. We all have our favorite spots. (I, for one, would like to come back in 30 years and rediscover my initials carved into a booth at The Oasis on El Camino.)  We all become sentimentalists when our ox is being gored. But our currently beleaguered University needs to be objective in financial matters. One can hardly fault them for that.

Previous article

"Like Kindergarten, minus the swing set"

This morning, the Stanford Daily posted an update [] on the Wellness Room in Old Union. The confusing and

Next article

CA 2010

Speaking of beleaguered entities, our state of California is due to get a new Chief Executive in the coming 2010 election cycle. It’s shaping

UA-140492650-2 UA-140492650-1