For the assignment this week, please consider the topic, problem, and purpose of the chosen signature assignment which is “the highs and lows of the coffee business. This paper should exemplify failures of start up coffee business, what makes the business successful, new technology and design involved, how to retain consumers, how a multi faceted business will drive success for a coffee bar that includes live entertainment, a music studio, and a coffee bar. You can use and revise problems, purposes, and questions from past assignments in this course with the goal of continuing to improve and refine them. Please addresses the following:

Restatement of your problem, purpose, and research question(s).
Last week you examined multiple ways to collect data to answer your research questions. Based on your analysis and feedback, choose one quantitative data collection method, describe how it would be used in your hypothetical study, and justify why this method of data collection is the best choice.
Discussion and justification of your sample and population.
Potential limitations with the chosen data collection and/or sample to consider and steps that can be taken ahead of time to help avoid these limitations.
Analysis of any strengths and weaknesses you see with your design, data collection, and/or sample.
Discuss ethical issues to consider with quantitative data collection methods.

Be sure to use 5 scholarly sources to support all assertions and research decisions.

Such as:
Banerjee, A., & Chaudhury, S. (2010). Statistics without tears: Populations and samples.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105563/

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer.
https://proxy1.ncu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pdh&AN=1992-37683-001&site=eds-live

Fricker Jr., R. D., & Schonlau, M. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of internet research surveys: Evidence from the literature.
https://schonlau.net/publication/02fieldmethods.pdf

https://www.bcps.org/offices/lis/researchcourse/develop_quantitative.html

https://www.economist.com/node/2281736