Dear Mark Inman & Organic Coffee Association,

We appreciate your frank criticisms of our campaign strategy and your efforts to promote organic coffee.  We obviously disagree as to whether or not Starbucks is a good target for grassroots efforts right now. I just returned from Mexico where I found tremendous enthusiasm for our Frankenbucks campaign among Fair Trade and organic coffee growers and sustainable agriculture activists. We believe Fair Trade (as a transition to organic) & organic are the way to go, but we do not believe that organic consumers, nor small coffee growers (such as those in the co-ops of Mexico), have to settle for nothing more than a small niche market at this time.  After Starbucks surrenders, and the rest of the gourmet coffee industry falls into line, I guarantee you we do plan to take on the bigger coffee giants.  But we are in this battle to win, to move organic and sustainable agriculture from being a niche to being dominant, not just to fight the good fight.  Once we build up our US and global grassroots campaign capacity to the point where we can affect the bottom line of the largest and nastiest companies, we will take them on. In the meantime the gourmet coffee companies, such as Starbucks, who claim to be doing the right thing, are going to have to start "walking their talk" or else face reputational and marketplace consequences.

Your criticisms of Global Exchange are off-base. Starbucks is now the largest purchaser of Fair Trade, shade-grown coffee in the USA, mainly because of the campaign efforts of Global Exchange. Our campaign will succeed, in large part, because of their previous hard work.

Your belief that certified organic coffee is to be preferred over Fair Trade coffee is sectarian, and harms the economic livelihood of the millions of small coffee growers in the world producing coffee who would like to make the transition to organic but who lack the economic means to get certified at the present time.  There is an ample supply of high quality coffee right now available which is certified (or easily could be certified as Fair Trade or transition to organic) as Fair Trade, but which is having to be sold on the conventional coffee market (for sub-standard prices) because companies like Starbucks are refusing to brew and seriously promote it. Our belief is that yes, we want as large a market share as possible for certified organic coffee, but equally as important is creating mass market demand for Fair Trade (transition to organic) coffee.  And of course there is no ethical justification for companies like Starbucks buying so-called "high quality" coffee from coffee plantations who are exploiting workers and damaging the environment.

Sincerely,

Ronnie Cummins

_____________________________________________________________

on 3/14/01 5:05 AM, Mark Inman at mark@taylormaidfarms.com wrote:

To: Ronnie Cummins Organic Consumers Association

March 6th, 2001

Dear Ronnie,

After reading your most recent newsletter, I am saddened and dismayed at the course of action that your group is taking.  As the President and co-founder of ORCA (the Organic Coffee Association), which is a world wide coalition of certified organic coffee growers, importers, exporters, roasters and retailers, I must inform you that our association will not sanction, nor participate in your action.  Indeed, we must recommend to our members that they boycott your action.

As a group, we are in agreement on nearly all of your points, specifically:

GE coffee is a significant threat, and roasters should take pledges not to embrace such technology as it becomes available (ORCA members are unable to use such coffees as a condition of their organic certification) Organic coffee production is viable, sustainable, and should be encouraged worldwide Global coffee prices are ridiculously low, well under the cost of production Actions by global coffee conglomerates are facilitating the oppression and forced relocation of indigenous people in coffee producing countries Genetically altered or hormone contaminated food, including milk, is a threat that consumers should be warned about in order for them to choose what they eat.

These are laudable goals, and it was the inattention to these issues by other coffee specific and organic-specific organizations that sparked the genesis of ORCA.

Over the last year, however, we have learned some hard lessons regarding how to address these problems. The first thing that we learned was the reality of the coffee business.  As ORCA members, we are all working members of the coffee trade, who simply believe that certified organic coffee is the most viable and sustainable path for the industry to take. We learned (the hard way) that we will not achieve our goals by attacking our own membership - change must come from within.

The path that you are proposing is very hazardous, indeed it threatens the long term realization of our mutual goals.  We have two main problems with your approach:

1.   You have chosen Starbucks as your first target, mirroring the failed attempt by Global Exchange  This is a hypocritical move, and a tactical error.

2.   You have chosen to align your movement with Fair Trade.  We humbly submit that you haven't done your homework.

Please learn from our experience!  Here's our thoughts on each point.

#1.  In your article, you state:  "Currently four food giants basically control the world's coffee supply: Procter and Gamble (Folgers); Kraft/Phillip Morris (Maxwell House); Sarah Lee (European brands), and Nestle (Hills Brothers)"

This is accurate.  Therefore, these should be your targets!  Starbuck's may not be one of America's best loved brands, but they are very popular with their consumer group.  You are also way off the mark if you think that they have the volume or influence to make things happen with regards to world-wide coffee supply.  Starbuck's buys coffee with one goal in mind - quality (see Fair Trade, below).  In their quest for high-quality coffee, they pay huge sums for coffee beans, usually well over the $1.26 quoted by Fair Trade.  It is a commonly known fact in the coffee trade that Starbuck's buyers are some of the most aggressive bidders around.  Nearly all of our roaster members have lost a coffee to Starbuck's at one time or another. ( ORCA membership is comprised of some of the industries most knowledgeable and experienced buyers )  The sweatshop accusation simply doesn't stick.  Pick another target - you will get much better results. Global prices are so low because the 4 companies referenced above DO pay

.30 cents for coffee.   Starbuck's simply doesn't.

Do you find the big 4 "too big" to go after?  Going after Starbuck's will simply hurt the biggest buyer of specialty coffee, one that pays well for quality coffee.  What's the point?  Nobody has love in their heart for

Phillip Morris.

#2.  Fair trade coffee is not ready for prime time.  Sorry, but it is true. The reason that Starbucks does not market it is that there isn't enough of it that can pass even a minimum quality muster.  Why?  Fair Trade is not indexed to quality.  When you force a company to buy Fair Trade, you send a message to farmers throughout the world that coffee, regardless of quality, is worth $1.26/lb.  Global Exchange makes this statement proudly, and often.   I submit that Deborah James has never had to buy coffee which she must then sell to consumers.   Telling roasters (who you'll need on board to make this work) that they must pay more, for an inferior product, is the Fair Trade message to the industry.  This is not a market reality - and it never will be.   You cannot with good conscience subsidize a low quality product and tell producers that this is sustainable.  Sooner or later, roasters will refuse to buy it, regardless of the activist pressure. Coffee is a product whose prime consumer factor is quality - and thus that must drive price.  Price floors are an excellent idea, but they must be indexed to quality.  The Fair Trade economic model has a fatal flaw when it comes to coffee. The coffee industry wants to solve these problems, and we are being prevented from finding a workable solution by the FT "bull in a china shop" assault.  Being loud and aggressive doesn't make you right. Find another partner!

The Board and Membership of ORCA would encourage you to do the following instead:

1.  If you must campaign against Starbuck's -  limit it to the rBGH issue. Admittedly, Starbuck's is a huge dairy consumer and purveyor.  We suggest that you should re-think the selection of Sbux as a target at all, for now. This company is doing the best it can in a difficult market - let's give them a chance to do the right thing.  There are a lot more companies who flagrantly violate the will of the people, and as such deserve to hear from the people.  Let's bring it to them.

2.  Organize and campaign against the "big 4".  ORCA can offer a creative solution for these brands - such as embracing transitional organics, setting price floors, etc...   As a trade based group, we can work the "good cop" angle.  If these companies are given the space to take even one positive step, it will make a huge difference.

3.  Continue, as we do, to sound the alarm on GE coffee.   The best way to ensure this never happens is to continue to promote certified organic coffee, as it prohibits the use of GE.

4.  Work with us and other recognized industry groups to find a way to address the social issues of coffee.  The Specialty coffee industry has been trying for years now to self regulate, and the debate is at a high level now.   What we need now is a small screwdriver, not a hammer.  We are so much farther along than the clothing industry - and as such, we require a different approach.  Please don't set us back in our efforts!

5. Let's keep talking.  ORCA is having a Board Meeting on April 18th in Miami, and we would welcome an OCA representative at our gathering.  I'm sure we have lots of knowledge that we could share with each other.

Sincerely,

Mark Inman

President and co-Founder

Organic Coffee Association.