Why doesn’t Starbucks make low-fat ice cream?

> Read Other News

In the great scheme of things, this doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. Coffee beans, that is. But since life is made up of little things, here’s my gripe of the day. I just received an e-mail coupon good for $1 off a pint of Starbucks’ new “coffee-house-inspired” ice cream. The line features four new flavors – caramel macchiato, mocha frappuccino, java chip frappuccino, and plain-old coffee (my favorite all-time flavor, hands down), based on several of the most popular drinks sold by the chain. But you can’t order the ice cream, made by Unilever, from your neighborhood barista. It’s sold mostly through grocery and drug stores. Since I enjoy cup of Starbucks’ Sumatra every once in a while, I was intrigued by the new flavors, but when I checked out the nutritional information on the label – hats off to Starbucks for making the information readily accessibly on its Web site – I got sticker shock. Regular coffee, for instance, packs 210 calories and 13 grams of fat in a meager half-cup serving. So why doesn’t Starbucks offer a low- or reduced-fat version for guilt-ridden ice cream lovers like me? I contacted the chain for an explanation, and got a quick – on hopeful -- answer. “You may be pleased to know that other consumers have asked for the same product as well,” a customer-service representative said in a written response. “Consumer comments are taken into consideration when planning changes to existing products, as well as introduction of new products. We will share your comments with the Brand Manager.” That’s encouraging. Consider this the beginning of my grassroots campaign. Until a reformulation is available, I’ll continue to consult our taste experts here at Consumer Reports for the lowdown on the best low-fat ice cream. Subscribers can access the full Ratings. If you’re not a subscriber, here’s how to sign up.

Submitted @ 2009-05-29