When a Starbucks (SBUX) opened across the street from our offices in downtown Missoula, Mont., a few years ago, a lot of people in this liberal college town were not too pleased. The national behemoth would squeeze the local coffee shops, critics said, and contribute to the homogenization of Missoula.

"In addition to supporting local cultural, social, and athletic events, local shops add a degree of color and flavor to areas that no Starbucks ever can—unless you like the contrived, calculated flavor that every other Starbucks in the country has," wrote one commenter on NewWest.Net.

"Additionally, profits from local coffee shops tends to stay close to home, allowing for further local investment in the community. Starbucks profits get shipped off in giant suitcases to the company HQ three states away. Further, local shops are also more likely to hire local contractors, keeping even more money close to the source."

As an independent local businessman whose largest competitor is a multibillion-dollar national chain, I've always been more than sympathetic to this argument. As a company, and as individuals, we're all about supporting locally owned businesses and the eclectic downtown commercial culture that goes with them.

But last week, we learned the Starbucks would be closing—it couldn't compete with the excellent alternatives. And I don't see that as a good thing.

For starters, the idea that Starbucks would drive out independents was obviously incorrect. Break Espresso, barely 100 feet down the street, is busier than ever, thanks to a great physical space, good coffee, and free Wi-Fi. Starbucks has always said that its arrival actually increases business for all coffee purveyors in the area—and at the very least it didn't hurt the neighbors here in Missoula.