How far does our responsibility for quality go?

[Alistair]

Very well said Chris.

On the roaster-retailer side, much of this was discussed in this other thread.

Within retail: Its quite insulting for a chef to see their dish salted before tasting. Its the same for us. If you present condiments, people are highly likely to use them. "Get the god damn S&P off the table, I know how to season my food." A chef may scream.

A great cup of coffee that can be fully enjoyed in the raw is quite hard to find. Cream and sugar tone down complexity and lower the risk. Its a habit, much like salt and pepper at the dinner table, and stems from the experience and belief that coffee is always bitter, just as a soup always needs salt.

We often "encourage" customers to try their coffee first, and they very often finish it black, replying with total surprise how much they enjoyed it. "I can't drink other coffee black". Great coffee in its natural raw state is a magical experience - one that is wonderful to share. The suggestion of 'taste first' is a positive. People want to do the right thing, and want the most of the experience they have paid for.

I personally love when professionals respectfully suggest with enthusiasm how a product best be enjoyed. That is what I call full service.

[Sean Starke]

Aleco, sorry if I overinterpreted or misinterpreted what you were trying to say but your points on how the work a proprietor puts in allows them

...a say in how you drink it..........well fuckin'-A right I say let 'em.

You don't need to go back if you need heavy doses of sugar to tolerate a cup of coffee. Clearly, this type of mentality understands that there are potential repercussions to their style of service.

sure sounds like you're not opposed telling the customer what to like.

I said nothing about education having done all it can do; in fact I said

By all means expose them to different coffees, roast levels and stories of origin; some may become as excited as you are and want to delve in more. Hurrah!

Look, I've conducted many cupping sessions and shown people many different varieties of coffees, and I always include robustas so they get the full spectrum. And I always tell them that I don't care what they drink or how they drink it as long as they drink a lot of it.

[Marshall]

Any restaurant or coffee bar that tried to force me to eat or drink something a certain way would never have to worry about me darkening the doorway of their establishment again.

There are many food "shrines" where customers willingly let the proprietor take command, because they respect him/her and expect to learn from the experience. You refuse to eat at Valentino because Mr. Selvaggio won't put a side of spaghetti on your "secundo" plate? You won't have omakase at Urusawa because there is no California roll and they won't give you a fork? Fine. There are plenty who will be glad for your spot at the table.

I fully appreciate that, at the present stage of things, nearly any coffee shop would be committing business suicide by removing the syrups or [insert your least favorite additive here]. But, I think in some of the larger markets we will soon see the beginnings of "coffee shrines" where owners can dictate how the coffee will be served. I understand from Ken Nye's podcast interview that he is willing to be the NYC pioneer.

There is no 'right' way to drink coffee; there's only the way you like.

This is a mantra people often repeat. But, I don't think most of them mean it. There may not be one perfect way. But, there are better and worse ways. I'm pretty sure nearly everyone who posts on this board has spent a lot of time nudging people toward the better ways.

[Jimmy Oneschuk]

Strange, how in the barista code of etiquette, we abstain from telling others how to do their job, but things are not so black and white when it comes to customers and how they handle their coffee.

I wonder why this is?

[nick]

Strange, how in the barista code of etiquette, we abstain from telling others how to do their job, but things are not so black and white when it comes to customers and how they handle their coffee.

I wonder why this is?

Strange that you seem to be referring to something without having read it, or having remembered what it says, or for that matter, remembering what it's called.

I wonder why THIS is?

[Sean Starke]

Sure, Marshall, there are food 'shrines' where I'll go and let the chef do his 'art' and pay dearly for it (and frankly quite often not be terribly impressed by the cost/experience ratio...sigh). But I don't go to such places any more than a couple of times a year given my budget. Most restaurants quite cheerfully let you massage the dish to your preference if you are so inclined, it seems to me, and the customers appreciate day in and day out having things 'their' way. In fact, when my bride and I had dinner at Emeril's in NOLA many years ago we happened to score seats at the Chef's bar, and Emeril himself was manning the kitchen that night. And he kept a close eye on what we ate, asking us how we liked this or that and swapping dishes for us if he thought we weren't thrilled with any particular one; now that was a shrine meal I'd willingly pay for again and again.

You're right on the suicide angle. And from my vantage point I have a hard time seeing a 'shrine' operation making a go of it. I just don't know if there are sufficient Shriners out there to pay the bills.

I do mean the mantra. I want to increase the number of people drinking coffee. And I want to let them taste all different types and I ccould care less which they decide they like. The big problem with Specialty is that it cannabalizes consumption. When you get people who go from drinking the free pot of office coffee to nursing their expensive cup of ShrineCafe at their desk you get a net loss in green consumption, and that hurts the farmers more than anything. I believe we need to encourage all forms of coffee consumption to attract new drinkers. The pep beverage market is incredibly competitive at this point, what with all the people you see drinking Diet Pepsi for breakfast and all these kids drinking Red Bull. Quite simply we need to attract new addicts, and if they happen to like a robusta blend in the morning with their greasey eggs and corned beef hash at the diner (and I certainly do if I happen to have a hangover) than I say god bless 'em.

[Marshall]

I do mean the mantra. I want to increase the number of people drinking coffee. And I want to let them taste all different types and I ccould care less which they decide they like. The big problem with Specialty is that it cannabalizes consumption. When you get people who go from drinking the free pot of office coffee to nursing their expensive cup of ShrineCafe at their desk you get a net loss in green consumption, and that hurts the farmers more than anything. I believe we need to encourage all forms of coffee consumption to attract new drinkers. The pep beverage market is incredibly competitive at this point, what with all the people you see drinking Diet Pepsi for breakfast and all these kids drinking Red Bull. Quite simply we need to attract new addicts, and if they happen to like a robusta blend in the morning with their greasey eggs and corned beef hash at the diner (and I certainly do if I happen to have a hangover) than I say god bless 'em.

I take your point, Sean. But, it might also be that, if retailers had spent more time teaching their customers about good coffee, the kids wouldn't consider Red Bull and a caramel latte fungible caffeine delivery systems.

[Aleco]

Spoken like true New York greenie.

Sure, consumption is and always will be the staple that binds the industry but, do you honestly believe that paying negative differentials to farmers for their commercial quality cherry or pergamino is sustainable? Do you believe that this encourages coffee production? I don't, not even a little bit.

I believe that encouraging producers, rather providing incentive to producers, towards producing better quality is the only sustainable avenue for the industry. By educating the customer to what they are actually drinking we are able to charge more money for excellent quality and therefore able to pay producers a higher price for their goods.

More and more across coffee territory throughout Latin America we are seeing urban development. It's sad to see some farms go but encouraging to hear that most are finding it easier to survive after selling off some land. One sees this urban sprawl coupled with dramatically inconsistent weather patterns and wonders how production will not continue to plummet. My hope is that investing time, experience and $ at origin will lead to more sustainable climates (including market levels)for producers.

Sooo, that shrinecafe on the desk next you not only tastes better than that free coffee pot swill you're sippin', I believe it's making more of a positive impact on the global supply chain.

[Tim Dominick]

There are a few mature markets that will support the "coffee shrine" as coined. Most of us are not in those markets, so vanilla lattes and sugar will be part of our offerings during the foreseeable future if we want to stay in business. I'll agree there are better ways to drink a cup, but there is no universal right way to do anything. Encouraging someone to try something new has a far different impact on your relationship than discouraging their additions of sugar and cream. You catch more flies with honey (just don't put that bee vomit in your damn coffee!!)

Aleco mentions incentives and rewards for quality, I agree 100%. I also see the flipside, offering incentives and alternatives for the millions of coffee farmers who's biggest challenge can't be overcome: Bad topography. We need to help them get the hell out of the coffee production business and into someting more suitable for their land. No one should be encouraging planting at 700 meters, let alone wasting time and money consulting with the farmers on the subject, yet it happens. Eliminate the over-production and the price will rise, spend the NGO money on farmers who have good land and quality will rise.

Encouraging consumption of low grade coffee isn't helping anyone except the guys who trade in the futures market. If coffee is looked upon as simply a caffeine delivery system for addicts we're bound to loose because coke, red bull and their ilk satisfy caffeine AND the far less discussed, but very real, corn syrup addiction that plauges our country. The ol' speed ball keeps on rollin'.

[Sean Starke]

"fungible" Gawd, I love that word, and I agree with your point, Marshall, but I would add to it that the message needs to also be that 'good' coffee is not 'ruined' by adding cream and sugar; 'changed' sure, nowhere near as interesting and subtle, of course, but it's still ok dammit. Until people get over that frankly elistest attitude than you can forget much interest from the teen and pre-teen crowd. They'll take their caramel sweet lattes and chais and red bulls, thank you very much.

Spoken like true New York greenie.

I'll take that as a compliment. My concern is for the health of the market as a whole, not any one segment of it.

From my experience most of the loss in coffee producing lands in Central America has been in the lower-lying areas where the crappier coffee is produced. Try to buy good old Prime Washed Guats these days or Central Standard Sals in volume. You can't. They simply are not produced in the quantities anymore that they used to be, because the lower prices forced the lower quality producers out of the market. Production has shifted to the higher areas and better qualities that are in higher demand from Central America.

Here are the USDA world production numbers for the past 10 years:

97/98 97,650,000
98/99 108,450,000
99/00 113,820,000
00/01 118,170,000
01/02 111,350,000
02/03 126,450,000
03/04 109,048,000
04/05 120,178,000
05/06 113,661,000
06/07 128,561,000 (est)

Are there variations in production? Of course, but clearly the production trend is higher, not 'continuing to plummet'.

[Rich Westerfield]

We often "encourage" customers to try their coffee first, and they very often finish it black, replying with total surprise how much they enjoyed it. "I can't drink other coffee black". Great coffee in its natural raw state is a magical experience - one that is wonderful to share. The suggestion of 'taste first' is a positive. People want to do the right thing, and want the most of the experience they have paid for.

This approach has worked for us on occassion as well, with certain people. We first tried this last summer when we had the Esmeralda. Everybody who tried it (save one) tried it black first, I think in part because we ourselves are only selective "black" drinkers (and Nick, I can't drink my decaf black):lol:

Anyway, I think our enthusiasm (and that of our baristas) over being able to really enjoy drinking top coffees black is apparent to the customer and is a markedly different way of presenting that prospect than "instructing" someone how to drink whatever we're brewing. It's more like we're presenting ourselves as "fans" of the coffees than "experts". Don't know if that's the best way to do this but it seems to work OK.

[Sean Starke]

I think that's a great way to do it.

[Aleco]

OK. Total production will be up and down with Brasil and Vietnam being the perennial winners in crop size. If you take those countries out of the equation you see a consistent downward trend in production. Vietnam plays no role in this particular segment of the industry other than as a market factor and Brasil is not so strong either. And how often are November/December estimates an accurate reflection of the crop by year's end?

So yes, production has shifted to higher growing regions but production in those areas has declined and I see it continuing to do so. Yes, there will always be acceptions to the decline like many are forecasting in Guatemala this year but I believe the general trend will be down.

[Richard Hartnell]

the message needs to also be that 'good' coffee is not 'ruined' by adding cream and sugar; 'changed' sure, nowhere near as interesting and subtle, of course, but it's still ok dammit.

Yeah, and I can make a pretty "OK" jug of sangria with a $100 Bordeaux. Should I?

We've really gotta consider here that the level of quality for most non-coffee ingredients in coffee drinks is tragically low. I've had sugared lattes that are as "holy crap" good as the raw Hines that lay beneath, but it was made with raw milk and organic cane juice, not corn syrup and pasteurized 2%.

So yes, I am willing to come out and say that flavored drinks have a poorer quality than the coffees used by members of this community. Straight up. It doesn't have to be that way, of course, but those shops that take their milk and sugar seriously have been few and far between, in my experience.

[Sean Starke]

Actually, you still don't see any such trend, at least not when looking at the Central American production. Costa Rica has gone down by roughly 15%, it seems, but others have made up for that so overall CA production is fairly stable.

Costa Rica: 2002/03 2,207,000
2003/04 2,106,000
2004/05 1,907,000
2005/06 1,776,000
2006/07 1,950,000

El Salvador: 2002/03 1,351,000
2003/04 1,343,000
2004/05 1,329,000
2005/06 1,359,000
2006/07 1,400,000

Guatemala: 2002/03 3,802,000
2003/04 3,671,000
2004/05 3,817,000
2005/06 3,589,000
2006/07 3,817,000

Honduras: 2002/03 2,661,000
2003/04 2,972,000
2004/05 2,635,000
2005/06 3,100,000
2006/07 2,700,000

Nicaragua: 2002/03 997,000
2003/04 1,405,000
2004/05 1,127,000
2005/06 1,600,000
2006/07 1,400,000


Further south, Peru has steadily increased production over the past 10 years, and Colombia, while being fairly steady at around 11.5 million every year, has announced that they hope to increase production to nearly 15 million over the next 5-10 years. There is no downward trend.

[Sean Starke]

Velveteen, I'm not talking about lattes and various flavored crap. I'm talking about adding a little sugar and schmaybe some half and half to a nice cup of coffee.

[Aleco]

We'll see what happens this year in CA. If the crop is down, then there is a downward trend. Judging by conversations with friends in Costa Rica, that estimate you have posted for this crop is way off. They are all expecting another down crop.

[Ric Rhinehart]

Seems like this thread got a little off course, but please let me jump in on the production decline issue. Surely the production numbers are meaningless when the consumption numbers are left out. While worldwide consumption has been increasing lately, there were a lot of years where relative consumption (worldwide per capita basis) was down.

Much more important is something both Aleco and Sean alluded to. Production of prime wash and Hard Bean centrals is down, practically dead in places. Production of Brasil and Viet robusta is up (Viet down this year, but up by any measure of the longer term). The net result is a widening gap between specialty and commercial coffees. The playing field is starting to look like third world society, with a few very wealthy (quality focused producers) and a mass of very poor (commodity focused producers).

Sean, if you really are concerned about the market in its totality, you should get to work on your big commercial guys....all the cans and most of the open bin and valve bag folks in grocery. They continue to produce swill that is so bad that it has become undrinkable even with the addition of cream and sugar...35+ per cent robusta will do that to a coffee. This results in a punishing loss of new consumers to marginally fungible caffeine delivery systems like Red Crap and Mountain Spew. (thanks Marshall)

I don't advocate taking away the cream and sugar...but I do advocate the kind of one on one interaction that allows the retailer to suggest better coffee needs no help. Note, we suggest, not command.

It can be done, you know. We don't do all that much right at our retail stores, but two weeks ago we shot the 20 ounce cup forever, and aside from a few complaints from truck drivers and a few larger physical specimens,all regular large drip consumers, we have almost no negative feedback.

[Edwin Martinez]

ric, congrats on killing the 20 oz-er.

So, addressing this thread in broad strokes. Can I propose something - although completely relevant it maybe should be a new thread altogether.

"BACK TO BLACK CAMPAIGN"

I'm consulting in a new venture where this has been an exciting topic of conversation. There's alot of money in coffee and many of us have choices on how we do business and who we do business with. The concept is simply to concider (should it make sense for you) promoting exactly what many of you have eluded to. Good coffee doesn't need any help. I understand many have profit centers built around clients who's businesses are built on "doctoring up the coffee". Fine. But if you look at statistics for both consumers as well as players in the specialty market, we are still not at a saturation point in NA. For those truly concerned about exceptional quality over the long haul, we must consider and be prepared to eventually compete with quality in a saturated market. Also many producing countries including Colombia and Brazil are dumping a fortune into promoting domestic consumption of quality. I'm sure there are exceptions, but in all of the history of trade the trend is "export the best, consume the rest". It makes sense - literally. However this is changing in coffee. In Guatemala next month we're doing the 1st International Barista Jam and Anacafe is getting behind it in a big way because it meets one of their top goals of promoting consumption of quality locally. This means growers are paying for baristas to be trained!!!!! Wrap your head around that!

All this to say - "regardless of supply, the demand for PERCEIVED quality is on the rise"

How many of you are frustrated when you put out a coffee your proud of and the bulk of those who consume it drench it in cream sugar or flavors?

I don't think it will take too many (big and small) players to draw the line in the sand and promote the difference. There is nothing wrong with any of these market segments.. but lets call them what they are.

Every coffee finds a home.

THERE IS NO BAD COFFEE, JUST A BAD MATCH.

LETS MAKE GOOD MATCHES.

What I think hurts the market is when folks intentionally and unintentionally promote their specialty coffee - when in fact it is not. Just as bad are cases that are doing a great job but don't give themself enough credit. These things won't ever change.

This is why EDUCATION is so important, so the end consumers know the diff themselves. A great coffee will be most appreciated in its purest form.

With EDUCATION a product is valued for what it is. Not what a company that adds value says it is.

You simply cannot force all the people to like or want or desire the right things in the right ways

Who is to say what is right????

The truth is I think many of us are afraid to go too far out on this limb because we know it will put us to the test and keep us on our toes. What if we're wrong about something? What if our coffee isn't as good as we thought? What if one day we have a customer that gave up the extras and now enjoys black coffee and they tell us "I used to love your coffee until I started drinking it just black."!