Blog Post: Poll: What is your favorite coffee type? http://bit.ly/4sfsfl

i guess i don’t understand how “it’s all about taste” can be limited to a professional declaration. the way i hear people saying it, it’s a credo, a philosophy of life almost.

Well, declarations of this kind are always going to be more about aspiration than explication, and I didn’t mean that it’s limited to anyone.

I guess my point was that as professionals will declare it as sort of a mission statement as a purveyor or crafts-person of coffee. The corresponding consumer may declare it, but that’s as a consumer, attempting to articulate their consumption patterns. Related, perhaps separated by a fine line, but I think they’re very different.

how does that not translate across your business model? though i understand the distinction you’re talking about, nick …

My business model? Frankly, my ideal would be to try to make few declarations of any kind, instead building on our core values, constantly challenging ourselves to do better. Too many folks seem preoccupied with making declarations while their actual skills or product don’t live up. If you’re truly “all about taste,” then there should be no need to make such a declaration if your product actually tastes awesome!

I just find that much of the “discussion” about higher prices is lip service. While our 3W industry talks about higher prices, do we really push for them? Instead of $2.25/lb, why not just pay them $5.50/lb – or whatever rate that would allow them to pull themselves out of their current socio-economic class?

Then the problem becomes similar to what we see in America today – an exodus away from agriculture through education for a better life elsewhere. Fewer farmers means greater cost and increased prices. Without a doubt, these thoughts are too simplistic in terms but I can’t help but find the discussion about “higher prices” to be ridiculous.

jay: i’m not calling “naked emperor” on the credo, but i HAVE wondered if higher and higher prices really benefit the farmers. at the coffee conference last fall, economists were arguing the trend actually hurts most of them.

and the uber-windy blog post on THAT subject is here:
http://www.chemicallyimbalanced.org/2008/11/06/seed-to-cup-does-specialty-coffee-help-or-hurt-farmers/

“in (post)modern commerce, it seems that there’s this wild card that sometimes disrupts the neat circles you describe above. it’s “buzz,” or cachet, or status, or whatever you want to call it. it tends to cloud judgment, obscure objective values, feed on itself and also maybe not last very long.”

I disagree. “buzz, cachet, or status” is part of the circle. It’s something that inevitably accompanies the ‘specialty-ness’ of specialty coffee. Not for every consumer, but a good portion of the Bobo populace out there will bite at the mere hint of cachet. We all do it, don’t we?

“i’m not saying it bad thing. i’m just saying it doesn’t bear much relation to taste. and we claim to be all about taste!”

A distinction needs to be made: “it’s all about taste,” at least in my opinion, is a professional declaration. The value-proposition to consumers will always be more than just ‘taste.’

I think there’s a lot of deception going on in our industry today. Many people like to tell the story that we “want” to pay higher prices for coffee – what kind of ridiculousness is that??? Perhaps we’re willing to pay prices commensurate with the quality but I just don’t believe that people really want to pay more than necessary.

Which brings me to the whole per pound cost thing. As an industry, we laud ourselves for paying higher than the C-Market or Fair Trade, but does that really impact the peasant farmer in a truly meaningful way? Many will argue that yes, we impact them greatly through the improvement of their coffee mills (to improve our quality) and the establishment of schools, but I have to wonder if this really propels their future?

Maybe it’s too early to determine but do all of these “improvements” translate into their children being able to rise out of their socio-economic class towards a brighter future of higher education and greater wealth? Or do these prices mean that a landowner is making the money while the workers are still getting it in the neck?

Further, as an industry, do we really want prices to rise to the level of CoE, let alone Esmeralda? How do you make our business work when the cost of a cup of drip necessarily rises to nine dollars?

I think we like to give a lot of fuzzy and warm-feeling talk in this business just to make ourselves feel better.

you say:

The demand, in this case on the part of the coffee buyers, will correspond to whatever value they perceive.

or maybe it’s whatever value they can create — using the price they’ve paid as a marketing value, no?

in (post)modern commerce, it seems that there’s this wild card that sometimes disrupts the neat circles you describe above. it’s “buzz,” or cachet, or status, or whatever you want to call it. it tends to cloud judgment, obscure objective values, feed on itself and also maybe not last very long.

i’m not saying it bad thing. i’m just saying it doesn’t bear much relation to taste. and we claim to be all about taste!

but i’m definitely not worried. just, um. *wondering.*

A separate circle will be the price paid by the consumers for that coffee. If they perceive that whatever price of admission they pay gives them an appropriate R.O.I., then they’re happy. Many will be happy. Many will be dissatisfied. Everyone’s been in both of those camps at some point, with a multitude of different products and/or experiences.

Such is pricing, auctions, and consumerism.

I’ve had folks on both sides of the Harley-Davidson argument try to win me over (I hope to be in the market for a nice motorcycle some time in the near future). Many consider Harleys to be the only motorcycle that matters. Others consider Harleys to be completely overpriced compared to the quality of product. H-D has been around for over a hundred years, and they’re not going anywhere. Neither is the associated debate, though.

I wouldn’t worry so much, bz.