Robert Goble wrote:Not quite done though Brett.
Of course not. I also don't think most consumers have quite caught up to the truths this board generally agrees on, so I don't think it's in their financial interest to try to flip thousands of locations to the Stumptown model overnight either. Having said that, I think my optimism for the future is justified, though.
Compare this company and the coffees they offer today to those from even 2 years ago. "Dark roast" no longer unquestionably denotes "the utmost quality". 38 years ago, it would have been pretty freaking refreshing, though. Also, I doubt that you'll be seeing the extreme-light tea-like roasts like a few others in the market, but the door is officially open to experimentation, albeit on a small scale. If enough consumers vote with their wallets, they will change.
I find a strong parallel to the Marzocco's presence at 15th Ave and the roasting capabilities I've seen made available for parts of this effort-- roasters that were considered "toys" because of their small capacity. Using a Marzocco doesn't automatically mean the coffee's better, but in the right hands, it COULD be better. How many cyncras have you seen out there that are serving dreck? You could make that same argument for the superautos, but folks just never took the time to get their tweak on, so the result ended up being, well, you know. Back to the wandering point-- in the same way that Starbucks has access to (and have in fact used) production roasters that are smaller than Stumptown's 12th Ave setup, that doesn't mean they're going to roast a Sidamo like the Stumptown does. But, if the market is there and if the model is sustainable, they might someday roast more like an early 00's Stumptown than a late 90's Starbucks.