Thursday, May 27, 2004


this space for you, robert nelson!

recently i ran across a white paper on the world-price depression known as the coffee crisis from liberal economist and consultant james s. henry, perhaps best known as a friend of sen. bill bradley.

despite its obvious perspective, i found it unusually interesting, so i shipped the link off to scaa chief ted lingle to see what he thought. regular bccy readers have been downloading lingle's coffee whitepaper for a while now.

ted wrote me some interesting emails that just have to be reprinted in full. no amount of comment or explanation could reduplicate ted's unique tone and point of view. the notes and links i've added are mine, to help readers newer to the issue:

"Dear Fortune:

Thanks - I had not seen this particular white paper. Henry's got it about right! The only points he missed are: 1) Starbucks is not purchasing [note: robusta] coffee from Vietnam, so it is a bit unfair to link them with Nestle, Kraft, Sara Lee, P&G [note: the so-called "big four" multi-national coffee roasters responsible for the stuff in the supermarket cans] and Tchibo who are; and 2) Vietnamese quality is so bad that the Europeans actually steam clean it before roasting ~ the American firms probably consider their customers' taste buds as dead, so this step is unnecessary for them.

I do agree with his conclusions that World Bank interference in the coffee market through large loans was the real source of the coffee crisis. If Vietnam had been required to expand its coffee production through its coffee earnings (the free market model), we would have a much different supply/demand balance in coffee today.

Thanks,

Ted"

naturally that "probably consider their taste buds as dead" comment had me laughing my casadei mules off. when i wrote ted to ask if i could quote this, he replied:

"Dear Fortune:

Yes, you can use my comments. Perhaps you can also get a quote from Robert Nelson [note: chief of the nca, the trade group for the "big four"] on why the Europeans feel a need to steam clean the Vietnamese Robustas while the U.S. trade does not.

Good luck,

Ted"

and i'm taking ted's advice: robert nelson, this space is yours. please explain why your members do not clean the robusta they are using in their mass-market blends, household brand names known to people everywhere, famous marques americans rely on for what they believe should be quality and purity.

please rest assured i will print your reply in full without comment. coffee lovers everywhere await your reply!

but before we leave the wonderful world of lingle, he also commented on the recent action of the u.s.a. to re-join the i.c.o. since ted was actually at that meeting himself, his perspective is helpful:

"Dear Fortune:

While the ICO Resolution on Coffee Purity remained 'in play,' the original implementing language (but not standards) was modified to accommodate US interests [note: think "big four"]. Here is the photo that depicts the difference between specialty, ICO and US coffee standards. The message for consumers: 'Buy [note: whole] beans.'

Thanks,

Ted"

we couldn't say it better ourselves. . .

if i were the type who believed in re-incarnation, last night's results with my chef (the starter for the pain au levain) i began on monday would have cheered my heart.

i returned home from corporate bowling to discover my bubbling chef completely covered in graceful, delicate, long-haired mold, as if a silvery-white persian cat had poked its nose under the plastic wrap.

uh-oh. someone's karma got worked out here. . .

the yeasties had lost their darwinian struggle to the beasties. the truly brave would have scraped off the mold and gone on with the starter, convinced that in the next go-round the yeasties would in fact create enough alcohol and lactic acid to fend off such predators.

and actually this assumption is often correct. metabolizing the starch in the flour is difficult to do and not many critters can manage it successfully for long. (note to dougie: wait! are we talking about your atkins thing again here?)

i don't generally plunge bravely on, however; i just began again. obviously i hadn't caught enough yeasties. or perhaps conditions were too damp, too favorable to the beasties.

thus i tossed that batch and started again -- but with a difference. i made 2 chefs this morning, of slightly different compositions. one was more like pancake batter:

  • 1 oz. organic rye flour
  • 1 oz. white whole-wheat flour
  • 4 oz. volvic water

beat this well, cover with plastic wrap and begin the experience. the second was stiff and rather dry:

  • 1 oz. organic rye flour
  • 1.75 oz. white whole wheat flour
  • 1.5 oz. volvic water

the idea here is that if conditions were too damp for the yeasties, they might thrive in the drier chef. on the other hand, if the chef is quite wet, the mold sometimes has trouble settling in, while the yeasties can still do well in this type of situation.

results will be probably not be available until friday. please stay tuned.

posted by fortune | 6:26 AM | top | link to this | email this: | | | 0 comments