Barista Competitions; Who Gives a Sh** - Page 7

#61: Post by HB » September 29th, 2006, 2:52 pm

Nick wrote:In my future volunteer work with the SCAA, I hope to help kill the C-Member program and create something that actually provides value to those consumer-enthusiasts, as well as the coffee community at large.

Reminds me of Monty Python. "He says he's not dead!" ... "Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."

September 29th, 2006, 3:09 pm

Nick wrote:On a side-note, I hate the SCAA C-Member program. Not because I think that consumer-enthusiasts are irrelevant, but because I don't think that the C-Member program does anything to serve them. In my future volunteer work with the SCAA, I hope to help kill the C-Member program and create something that actually provides value to those consumer-enthusiasts, as well as the coffee community at large.

Fortune Elkins will have your head. She'll take inspiration from the competitions and create her own version of the Nick Cho specialty drink, cupping it and serving it to her husband in an Eva Solo, perhaps infusing the drink with Cho balls.

September 29th, 2006, 4:10 pm

HB wrote:Reminds me of Monty Python. "He says he's not dead!" ... "Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."

The C member program is not useless but at this point has not come close to realizing its potential. At the moment it basically offers a way for people who are not in the industry to attend the annual SCAA convention, and to attend the "homecoming" program in LA that Marshall is kind enough to set up every summer. When the membership was free, or at least when they forgot to bill anyone for dues, it was "worth it" in the sense that if you weren't paying anything you really had no right to demand anything in return.

Now that they are billing dues annually, the worth of the program is very questionable in relation to its cost. For those who attend Marshall's program (which I think maybe you don't even have to be a C member to attend), or if you attend the annual meeting, then it is "worth" it. If you don't do these things the money is more or less wasted.

Attempts have been made over the years to provide value, such as with a (now extinct?) online newsletter, a green bean buying program, and some discounts from merchants. To my knowledge these programs have not been that accessible, and I for one have never used them. The financial problems of the SCAA have presumably reduced the ability and interest of the SCAA at developing new programs. I am intentionally not counting any of the programs that various professionals have offered to this community, such as espresso labs etc., because to my knowledge those things have either been self supporting or provided by the professional member themself, and not paid for or supported by the SCAA.

As it has been told to us, there is a continual tug of war at the SCAA between those professional members who support a C Membership category and those who are adamently opposed to it, if for no other reason that they resent paying big bucks to belong and to attend the meeting when consumers can belong and attend the meeting for a relative pittance, or simply because they consider us a distraction.

As C Member #003, I certainly hope the membership category can succeed, but we are in a different time and place than we were when this program was started by Ted and Mike. Now, years later, there is a much bigger committed online community and more good venues for communication such as this one. As a result, the C Membership category is perhaps less important, and if there is a need for a consumer coffee association of some sort, such a thing could probably be set up outside of the SCAA if necessary.

Unless the SCAA actively promotes the program, it will flounder as it has done, and will remain basically a way for the public to attend annual meetings, and the odd other event.

ken

#64: Post by HB » September 29th, 2006, 9:19 pm

Ken Fox wrote:Unless the SCAA actively promotes the program, it will flounder as it has done, and will remain basically a way for the public to attend annual meetings, and the odd other event.

I wasn't aware the Homecoming event required a membership (Marshall announced it in several forums and never mentioned a restriction). The conference already allows for non-members. For those who are unfamiliar with the program, below are the paltry benefits:

cMember - $45.00/year
Includes:

* SCAA Credential Card
* Access to SCAA Website "Member's Only" resources - SCAA Chronicle & Online Library
* SCAA Resource Center Member Discounts
* SCAA Annual Conference Member Discount
* Discounts from participating SCAA Member Retailers

I allowed my membership to lapse. At this point, I believe Nick's determination to kill the program qualifies as merciful euthanasia ("I'm getting better!"... "No, you're not. You'll be stone dead in a moment.").

#65: Post by **Marshall** » September 29th, 2006, 10:08 pm

HB wrote:I wasn't aware the Homecoming event required a membership (Marshall announced it in several forums and never mentioned a restriction). The conference already allows for non-members.

SCAA uses the Homecoming as a consumer outreach tool, and it always attracts prospective shop owners (who are, therefore, prospective SCAA members) looking for a cheap way to learn more about the business. I was going to say a "free way," but some travel a considerable distance.

Conference, on the other hand, did require C-membership (which you could purchase at the door), for the gone, but not forgotten, "C-track." For some of us who attended the Boston C-track, it was a major, almost life-changing event. Atlanta's was also great. Then it essentially disappeared. For an enthusiast consumer, especially a newbie, there is no comparing the current floor pass access to those two Conferences with C-tracks.

HB wrote: For those who are unfamiliar with the program, below are the paltry benefits: <snip>
I allowed my membership to lapse. At this point, I believe Nick's determination to kill the program qualifies as merciful euthanasia.

The discount benefits were not well planned. Relatively few businesses participated, and some of them required you to purchase commercial quantities. There were no regional events, a shortcoming that regular members also complain about. But, as SCAA will tell you, everything they do depends on volunteer efforts. The C-track required enormous effort from Fortune, Cindy Chang and other people. Fortune finally wore out from lack of help from others (and from the now-defunct Consumer Marketing Committee). She's doing her own thing now in NYC.

I know a lot of people have helped put together several interesting consumer events around the country outside the SCAA umbrella. If they had contacted SCAA to make them C-Member events, I'm reasonably sure they would have received support in some fashion (sponsorships, mailings, etc.), and they would have created good will for the program and may have created even better events for themselves. When you call an SCAA company and say you're "putting together an SCAA event," it really does get your call answered.

Ultimately SCAA events are do it yourself, or it doesn't get done. At this point, I agree, the C-program is on life support, and many SCAA members would like to pull the plug. I switched to regular membership two years ago, but still think the C-memberships could work and do a lot of good, if some persuasive and energetic volunteers got behind the program.

#66: Post by **Nick** » September 29th, 2006, 10:38 pm

I'm certainly guilty of thread-jacking.

Just to be clear: I think that a C-Member type program to engage enthusiasts and passionate coffee non-professionals is a great idea... but the current program fails. I think that with the passionate, creative, and intelligent people who have already shown their interest and commitment to such a program, we could develop a better program.

Marshall, you're right... the SCAA requires a good dose of rolling up your sleeves and getting dirty for anything substantive to happen. There are ideas that could work, and ideas that realistically can't. Let's start brainstorming something new and/or revamped based on the lessons learned thus far, and let's make it happen. (but not in this thread please... not with this title

)

September 29th, 2006, 11:00 pm

(I've been "cupping" wines, no spitting -- lot tougher finding a good red on a $15 or so budget than a good coffee on an open one -- so this post may not be all that coherent)

Seems that with c-members this thread has come full circle, circumnavigating the pro-am divide. My insight is that there really isn't all that much of a meeting of minds; and that it only takes place at the very top:

-- The amateurs who are very active at events and who go out of their way to engage with the professional specialty coffee world (as opposed to just participating on the boards) are looking for the absolutely extraordinary -- the best coffees and espresso available at that time. Our interest in the barista comps is not so much as to who wins or loses, or the good it does for raising the profile of working baristas, but what is the best blend, grinder, machine dosing technique, etc etc. Our interest in the winners and losers is mostly about adding "must visit" cafes to our list.

-- The pros who engage the amateurs are similar; it's the roasters who regularly bid on COE and auction coffees, the cafes that buy these coffees along with bleeding edge espresso equipment. That is, also those ambitious to be putting out the best coffee on the planet, and looking for an appreciative public for it.

Pros who just want to build their business aren't interested in amateurs who'll diss their "it was ok last year" grinder; and amateurs who just want a shot that has crema and isn't too bitter won't be interested in the latest levelling technique used by the latest Nordic world champ barista.

I have to admit I'm a huge junkie for the hunt of the "best shot/coffee on the planet;" for one thing, it's a hell of lot more affordable than hunting the best wine on the planet. But my "in vino veritas" take: the current pro-am meetup involves a very thin sector of either community, and with its current emphasis will not go very far beyond that. I do not know on what basis there can be a meeting of minds between the wider reaches of specialty coffee pros, and the regular, two lattes a day at starbies, specialty coffee consumers.

#68: Post by HB » September 29th, 2006, 11:01 pm

Marshall wrote:I know a lot of people have helped put together several interesting consumer events around the country outside the SCAA umbrella. If they had contacted SCAA to make them C-Member events, I'm reasonably sure they would have received support in some fashion (sponsorships, mailings, etc.), and they would have created good will for the program and may have created even better events for themselves. When you call an SCAA company and say you're "putting together an SCAA event," it really does get your call answered.

I attended the Atlanta c-member events and you're right, they were great. Fortune managed a couple limited events in Seattle and they were interesting too. With those gone, the attraction of the SCAA conference, for me, is reduced to meeting the people I know online in person, and participating in the competition / judges' workshop.

I've thought about approaching the SCAA leadership about sponsoring an event at conference similar to EspressoFest 2006. It was a lot of work and required the contributions of a long list of sponsors and volunteers. I tried to recognize them all in this thank you. There were almost as many contributors as attendees, which demonstrates just how much effort goes into putting together a good program.

Hmm-m, EspressoFest 2007 in Long Beach. Oh boy, that'd be a lot of work...

#69: Post by **Dasein** » October 3rd, 2006, 8:04 pm

Nick wrote:Jim et al.,...
My issue with the original post has always been that to indict the competitions at this point is like yelling at a young sapling for being too small and/or being a failure....

A real good point to be made and to remember.

#70: Post by HB » October 3rd, 2006, 8:38 pm

I agree that Ken's word choice was indelicate, but he asked good questions.

Ken Fox wrote:...what is the evidence that barista competitions have had any impact, whatsoever, on the quality of espresso beverages being offered for sale across the country, the continent, or the world?

Without rehashing the whole discussion, my conclusion is simple: Those who compete move the bar up. Ken's right that in the global impact is small, but that's like saying doubling the number of fantastic wines is insignificant given the sea of average ones on today's market. Even in the espresso desert that I live in, there's been an uptick in good cafes (we may break the one digit barrier someday, woohoo!). I credit the influence of establishments like local roaster Counter Culture Coffee and the annual SERBC for this move in the right direction.