Starbucks Corp. (NASDAQ: SBUX) may soon find itself in a media swarm at the same time that its shares have pulled back handily from recent highs. Howard Schultz and his team are likely will have to at least consider or calculate the costs of a move that could be a risk to Starbucks’ profit margins or which may raise prices ahead for its customers. A movement is currently underway to try to get Starbucks to switch to using organic milk in its coffee beverages, and this coming weekend there is a planned social media swarm with calls for Starbucks to make this switch.

A press release from Thursday noted that some 150,000+ consumers were urging Starbucks’ CEO to switch to organic milk with a major social media push this coming Sunday. The release also said that tens of thousands more are expected to participate on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

What has not really been addressed and what will remain at least somewhat unknown and up for debate is what the price impact would be for Starbucks and consumers here. If a company the size of Starbucks made the switch to organic milk, it almost has to impact prices at Starbucks itself and also at the retail level outside of Starbucks. It is the “by how much?” where the devil may be in the details. Look at the “Anatomy of a Starbucks Beverage” image on page 2 at the end of this article and you will understand why this matters so much.

Another issue to consider is that Starbucks has dealt with soaring coffee prices already in 2014, with arabica futures up roughly 90% or so this year. Dow Jones data recently showed arabica coffee prices at $2.1375 per pound, the highest levels since late in April — with Brazil supply woes expected to continue ahead. To complicate matters further in determining what this would do to costs, Starbucks already raised its prices at the register by five cents to 20 cents per drink in the middle of 2014. Many other major coffee destination chains have raised coffee prices as well in 2014.

ALSO READ: What Express and Premium Store Launches Can Mean for Starbucks

24/7 Wall St. has decided to review this from a cost basis view. The answer is one that is likely “higher” under the proposed efforts, but finding the “by how much?” answer is one that will be up for debate for some time.

The core groups behind the October 5th “national day of action” are said to consist of GMO Inside, Organic Consumers Association, Friends of the Earth, Mamavation and FoodBabe. These groups are also said to be arming their members with coordinated content and postings for Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. They will be jointly using the hashtag #OrganicMilkNext.

The press release from the groups pressuring Starbucks on organic milk said:

In the seven months since GMO Inside launched its campaign pressuring Starbucks to ditch conventional milk from cows fed GMOs in favor of organic milk, more than 150,000 consumers have formally petitioned Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz to do just that. On Sunday, America’s largest coffee chain will feel even more heat, as eight national groups spearhead a social media day of action on the issue.

Green America’s GMO Inside campaign director Nicole McCann was quoted saying:

When 150,000 Starbucks consumers send a message to the CEO’s office, you would expect a company of Starbucks’ caliber and reputation to sit up and pay attention. We are hoping that the combination of the overwhelming message from our petition and upcoming social media day will get Starbucks off the dime in dumping milk from cows fed GMOs.

Green America president Alisa Gravitz said in the release:

Starbucks made the right move in removing growth hormones from its milk. However, Starbucks has sent confusing messages to its customers by stopping short of addressing long-term environmental as well as human and animal health concerns. In contrast, Pret A Manger, a growing and thriving quick service chain, already serves only organic dairy and soy at comparable prices.

The end of the latter quote is where the big issue comes into play regarding the “by how much?” prices would have to rise. Getting organic milk around the nation is becoming more and more prevalent, but it is hard to know if there would be ample supply at all times to accommodate the total demand from the economy for organic milk. The first financial consideration is how it would affect coffee and drink prices at the register in Starbucks. Then there is the broader question: How would this impact organic milk prices at destinations outside of Starbucks?

ALSO READ: America’s Fastest-Growing Retailers

For those of you who have been Starbucks loyalists for a decade or more, perhaps you will remember that one of the larger price hikes from Starbucks last decade on all of its coffee prices was specifically cited as being due to higher milk prices. For those of us who do not use milk with our coffee, the problem with a broad price hike for goods not being consumed feels like a bit of a subsidy. After all, if milk prices are higher, why not just charge more for those frappuccinos and lattes?

The reasons behind the moves to pressure Starbucks to go organic on milk are numerous. They don’t just revolve around the milk-drinking consumer either. This goes to farmland issues, herbicides and insecticides, the use of weed-killers, ground and water pollution, and more.

24/7 Wall St. has inquired with both Starbucks and with the groups who are involved in the go-organic movement. We have yet to get an accurate and verified count of how many millions of gallons of milk are used in Starbucks each year, but two websites used a figure of more than 93 million gallons of milk — using 2011 data, and with a source website that has a broken link.

We received a quote from the Hastings Group quoting Todd Larson from Green America. It said:

If Starbucks phases in organic milk over time, and creates a market for it over time, it can move to organic milk without creating price increases for consumers or creating shortages in the organic milk market. In fact, Starbucks’ growing demand would make it easier for more farmers to go organic and lower prices overall over the next few years. In addition, Pret a Manger is currently serving organic milk (along with organic coffee) at a lower cost than Starbucks.

Hastings also sent us a note that GMO Inside has repeatedly attempted to open discussions with Starbucks on this issue, including before the start of the campaign. Their experience was represented as: Starbucks’ management has been wholly and qualitatively unresponsive. Well, Starbucks did not respond to our inquiry on what the potential costs might be either. If Starbucks responds on our inquiry regarding what the costs would be, we will update this story and/or publish a new story, based on how detailed and direct the response is.

ALSO READ: Retailers Hiring the Most Employees for the Holidays

This cost issue is a serious one to consider. We have seen some outside claims that Starbucks uses 2% of U.S. milk production, but unfortunately that figure has not been confirmed, and the most recent formal data has yet to be made available. There are downstream issues to consider as well in the food supply chain, such as cheese and other products. The total annual production of milk for the United States during 2013 was 201 billion pounds, according to the USDA’s Agricultural Statistics Board.

The Starbucks “Anatomy of a Starbucks Beverage” image (see below) should signal why we have decided to spend so much time on this issue. Starbucks and its customers are major consumers of milk each day. A move to organic would be welcomed in theory, but what that net cost is to consumers remains up for debate — as does whether enough of Starbucks’ customer base is willing to pay up for it.

Thank you for reading! Have some feedback for us?
Contact the 24/7 Wall St. editorial team.