Tuesday, July 20, 2004


the q in plain english

long-time readers may recall that i've written here before about scaa chief ted lingle's newish so-called "q" (for quality!) contract.

this is an effort to help sell and market higher-quality coffee, make the market more efficient, level the playing field for all sizes of roasters, deliver better coffee to consumers, and help create an economic setup that does more to reward coffee farmers who deliver quality.

whether the proposed contract does this is something only time and the roasters will tell us!

this month's roast magazine finds a great article by long-time bccy coffee pal and pro scaa member, spencer turer, on the q. i think spence does a great job of simplifying the concept.

however, i find the title of the article somewhat misleading: the coffee auctioned under the q isn't necessarily specialty-grade coffee! it's not, as spence says, the gran cru.

this slightly-less-than-specialty "premium grade" coffee, however, is definitely much better than the vast majority of the coffee out there. i think coffee sold under the "q" allows consumers some baseline assurance of what the actual quality of the coffee is.

right now, the quality level of the java we drink is still basically a mystery to most coffee lovers, unless you work to learn some cupping skill yourself, or deal with a roaster/retailer you can really trust.

many of us cafénatics have roasters who we really know well. but when, say, buying coffee over the internet from a place for the first time, it would be great to see a "q" certification.

that way we know we're not paying US$12 a pound plus US$6 shipping for less-than-stellar stuff. we'd have the assurance that these coffees cupped at least 80, and were cupped by certified people trained in specialty cupping.

ken davids has already addressed this situation somewhat over at his site great coffee, where he sells only very highly cupping beans. and it's wonderful that the rest of the industry is with this trend.

(however, i have to note that the great coffee site does worry me a bit; i'm not the biggest fan of pod/capsule coffee, as steady readers know. and i think great coffee's page layout makes it seem like the pod/capsule coffee sold there cups 90 like the whole bean coffee, which i'd seriously doubt.)

i don't know if the q is going to work out; maybe it shouldn't -- i've certainly heard some arguments against it. but it seems like an idea heading in the right direction, and a plus for those who appreciate coffee as a fine beverage.

this won't keep me from saying that i think the 80 level is too low. that specialty-grade coffee should cup 90; this "premium grade" should cup at least 85.

and 80 defects -- the amount of sticks, stones, moldy, black or bug-chewed beans -- per sample is too high. maybe 25?

posted by fortune | 6:46 AM | top | link to this | email this: | | | 0 comments