Curious what the community thinks about the Transparent Trade Coffee: is there a lack of transparency from our favorite direct trade roasters in the past? Are farms not getting compensated well enough? Anyway, here's the site with many acclaimed roasters self-reporting their economic treatment from how much they're paying for green beans and how much they're selling it for at the roaster.

http://transparenttradecoffee.org/home

my 2 cents. and I am sure nobody and I mean nobody will like what I am about to write, so I am willing to label myself as ignorant in the name of all ignorant people who are not brave enough to say they actually are.

As a consumer and a serious one when it comes to coffee, I don't care even a bit. Just like I do not care if the farmer makes money when I buy a corn product, or dairy or bread or a cotton jacket, I also do not care if the coffee farmer makes money, if the buyer was honest, if it is direct, indirect, fair, unfair, transparent, opaque etc. not my problem.

As a consumer the only thing I care about is how it tastes in the cup.
Economy wise, I only care about the amount I am paying for 2.2 lbs / taste, because I am the one who is compensating all those efforts already and I do not want to pay for a product which would not meet my expectations. When you charge my card, it is for the efforts of the farmer, buyer, roaster, vendor all combined. In the end it is the money out of my pocket turning the wheels and the amount I pay is the way I show my appreciation. I don't feel like going back and defending the rights of those who should be defending their own rights. And yes, I am perfectly aware it is though for farmers but I won't support a coffee or a company just because their coffee is purchased by xxx trade.

Again, as a consumer, I do not like a bit all these "trades" the marketers coming up with. In fact, it was annoying before, now it is becoming irritating for me. 5 years ago fair, last year direct, this year transparent, next year silicone, 5 years later Jack of all trades and so on. Do I see a change in price with all these trades? Definitely. It goes up an up every year, while the quality goes down and down. These "trades" it seems, are great for the opportunists, since I personally was not able to give out fair amount of "OMG!" reaction from the politically correct coffees I tried so far.

Also, how much the roasters paying for what they are buying is not and never was my concern and business to begin with. Lets go to Chanel or Gucci or Tom Ford and ask how much they are paying for the fabric, if they make sure the cotton or silk or cashmere producer gets paid fairly. Lets ask them if their trade is transparent and if they pay fairly to the producer and manufacturer. I have a feeling their response would be similar to "loving" our brains out.

Happy Xmas and may God save us from all kinds of hips and bless those who are politically incorrect. Amen!

I'm not going to criticize it too much. I think they mean well, but it does seem like oversharing. I can think of no other industry that does this. Yes, that makes us "pioneering", but I feel it's more of a marketing gimmick than it is genuine concern for fellow humans. This will be a way to attach a premium price to a bag of coffee because it helps assuage First-World guilt--especially useful during the Christmas season. Also, if I'm not mistaken, these numbers are entirely self-reported, which makes me distrustful of them.

I'd like something less controlled/contributed to/influenced by roasters in the destination country and more so by the people in the producing countries. As internet usage increases in rural areas in coffee-producing countries, it would be nice to see some sort of database developed, maintained, and contributed to by the coffee industry in those regions, where coffee producers can have a little bio about their operation and offer regular updates. It'll take a while, but it'll be more useful and genuine. But, doing it this way you'll also see less interest on the part of consumers for reasons kahvedelisi listed above.

kahvedelisi wrote:my 2 cents. and I am sure nobody and I mean nobody will like what I am about to write, so I am willing to label myself as ignorant in the name of all ignorant people who are not brave enough to say they actually are.

As a consumer and a serious one when it comes to coffee, I don't care even a bit. Just like I do not care if the farmer makes money when I buy a corn product, or dairy or bread or a cotton jacket, I also do not care if the coffee farmer makes money, if the buyer was honest, if it is direct, indirect, fair, unfair, transparent, opaque etc. not my problem......

While I applaud your willingness to stick you neck out and say something wildly unpopular, I think it's an inaccurate comparison to draw with other commodities like corn, soy, wheat, cotton, etc that enjoy a massive amount of taxpayer funded support in terms of subsidies. The conversation doesn't need to devolve into a political debate about farm-aid or the multi-national farming industry, but I don't think you're comparing apple to apple.

Coffee behaves just like cashmere, the cream of the crop goes to the action in coffee or to Brunelli Cucinelli in the textile industry and the prices paid for those are both quite high. On the other end, you have blender, junk commodity grade coffee used for instant coffee, and Gap cashmere.

What I'm saying is I don't think someone is going to walk into Gap and say, "wow, this cashmere is so great, I hope the shepherds and mills got a fair price".

Thank you for posting this link.

Just on the surface, consumers are starting to care about the people behind their products. Starting to... On top of that, when you buy a luxury product (like fancy coffee), how it tastes, where it is from, how it was made, and other things are more important. The workers themselves are also on the list. People care about this, and are willing to pay a premium.

I personally want to know that the farmers are being compensated fairly and not screwed by some middle men. I want to hear about community projects, the specific size of the farms, how many workers, etc. You cannot give me too much information. PERIOD.

I cringe at the thought of the fruit of mass produced coffee and modern day slavery being in my cup. I am comforted by the thought of fairly compensated environmentally friendly coffee farmers putting care into their craft, and me doing everything I can to get the most out of it.

Without transparency there is no information, and without information, you are a mindless consumer who doesn't care. Consumers are in the best place to change how business works - corporations respond to consumer demand. It all starts with empowering them to have the CHOICE to care or not. I firmly believe that people will make the right choice given well presented information (people are good). Throwing one's hands up, passing the buck, and saying "not my problem" is a sort of desperation move, that I do myself sometimes. It can be cured by information.

SlowRain, thanks for putting it so eloquently. First World guilt summarizes the whole situation.

TomC, I do not believe I am comparing different things. In fact, I gave examples about 2 ends, including rare (cashmere) and more commonly known commodities (corn, milk, wheat, cotton). Each and every commodity has its own cream of the crop, corn, milk, wheat, cotton, marble, grapes. The community LOVES comparing coffee to wine right? There are those junk grapes goes into low end bottles and nobody knows who pays, how much they pay for those.

bostonbuzz, XXXX trade is not about the origin of coffee. Origins of coffee is dealt by Specialty Coffee Association. XXXX trade is all about how it is bought, by a broker or roaster or vendor, and how much they paid for it. And the whole idea derived from Cup of excellence auctions which were very very transparent in regards to grading and pricing once upon a time, not anymore.

All that is said, if the end consumer prefer deluding themselves by assuming the money goes to farmers' pocket, then so be it. Believing this story won't change the fact the money actually goes to the owner of the farm, and not to the farmers who does the actual labor.

There is this manufacturer we do business with. He has 40 employees working for him. When he started with us, his was just a small atelier. Now it is a huge factory and he is offering his services to several other companies. They are working non stop, he charges 5 to 6 digits $$ per container depending on the type & quality of the material you are buying from him. In the beginning he used to pay the minimum wage to his employees, the wage set by the government and paid monthly. Because of a recent audition, I got another chance to see how much he is paying now. Even though he tripled the amount he is charging for the same amount and quality of the goods, he is still paying the minimum wage, which is $349.97 net per month 2015 rates. All those years, me and my partner was like "his business grown so big, people must be making great money", because our own employees were getting paid better over the years you know, so we assumed

I apologize for being such a Debbie Downer, but if you really can't get enough transparency, then above is an example how ugly the truth is. If that was not the case, then Mark Prince or people like him would not have be putting themselves out through social media, doing their best to lure people in donating for a school for farmers' kids. In an ideal world, those kids would have the school plus all the luxuries our kids have, because their parents grow the best selling and most money bringing commodity next to oil. logic only says...

I think it's notable for the roasters involved to begin sharing fob green coffee costs.

Are they getting more money because the coffee tastes better or the farm details listed on the bag? Maybe a combination of both factors?

Didn't read anything about social impacts of the program; there's a big difference between a large estate grower and thousands of small plot holders. Is this a case where a rising tide lifts all boats?

kahvedelisi wrote: TomC, I do not believe I am comparing different things. In fact, I gave examples about 2 ends, including rare (cashmere) and more commonly known commodities (corn, milk, wheat, cotton). Each and every commodity has its own cream of the crop, corn, milk, wheat, cotton, marble, grapes. The community LOVES comparing coffee to wine right? There are those junk grapes goes into low end bottles and nobody knows who pays, how much they pay for those.

Don't get me wrong, I like your posts. They're thought provoking and honest. I didn't go on a long diatribe about comparing coffee to other crops, because they're usually superficial at best. My point is, there's crap quality cashmere (it's not as precious as you imply) and there's the stuff woven by Cucinelli and/or Hermes. I guess my point was, folks don't care about the livelihoods of those who supply goods to the bottom end of the market, whatever it is, coffee or cashmere. They may pretend to, but most people vote with the almighty dollar, not their conscious.

I think many (myself included, I'm not immune) are drawn like moths to the auction lot, or other premium coffees out of sheer marvel or wonder. Heck, even at the highest end of the market, it's cheaper than the best wines or scotches by the glass. Similarly, there's a majority of the coffee consuming world that when it comes right down to it don't care at all about the farmers at the lower half of this ladder.

I for one, admire the transparency. I'd like to see more people like Tim Wendelboe work with little known farms and strive to improve their product, and be there, year after year to work with and support them in order to improve their lot in life, not just to get the best deal on something that scores high. Most of the California farmers I knew growing up had to rush out and buy a brand new fully loaded top of the line pickup right before the end of their tax season, because it was use it or lose it. Coffee farmers are lucky to stave off malnutrition and lack basic needs.

I'm not even trying to make too strong an argument, I just think we've seen a few centuries of pale skinned people taking advantage of dark skinned people and their crops/livelihoods and despite my rather Libertarian leanings, wouldn't mind seeing the producers on average, end up better off than they are now. Even if it costs all of us an extra few cents per bag.

kahvedelisi wrote:I also do not care if the coffee farmer makes money, if the buyer was honest, if it is direct, indirect, fair, unfair, transparent, opaque etc. not my problem.

Even the most selfish consumer of specialty coffees should recognize that it is in his own interest to get enough money into the hands of producers to sustain their farms and give the next generation hope that they can make a decent livelihood in coffee off their family's land.

Current trends point in the opposite direction. Prices at the farm gate are in too many cases below the cost of production. Farmers who cannot generate enough cash will turn to other crops (legal or not), sell their land to developers (a major concern in Costa Rica), see their children leave for other opportunities or simply abandon the farm themselves.

The core concern of all the honest varieties of "direct" and "fair" is to provide the means for coffee farmers to lead decent lives and stay in production, selling excellent coffees. Some programs may be subject to criticism (and no one debates them more strongly than the coffee industry), but it is in the selfish interest of coffee connoisseurs for them to succeed.

It is the farmer's responsibility to look after his own well being, not mine. Just as in any other endeavor if an individual does not feel his endeavors are being properly and adequately rewarded there is someone out there quite willing to take his place.