Comments on: Stats of Excellence

By: Enter Dave stage left… « Dublin Barista

Enter Dave stage left… « Dublin Barista — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 22:17:04 +0000

[...] Excellence and for a few moments had us all petrified that we were all as predictable as ?r². The post outlined past results and predicted the upcoming Brazilian COE. Forget that he got it wrong and [...]

By: Blogger apathy, the death of Bloglines and missing links « Sam Kinsley

Blogger apathy, the death of Bloglines and missing links « Sam Kinsley — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:20:44 +0000

[...] Stats of Excellence [...]

By: Twitted by uberproject

Twitted by uberproject — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:35:27 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by uberproject [...]

By: Red Links 18/01/10 | Alexia Golez

Red Links 18/01/10 | Alexia Golez — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:48:30 +0000

[...] Interesting stats on the Cup of Excellence awards for coffee. [...]

By: David

David — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:38:32 +0000

That was just me being too lazy to edit anything out. “Warts and all” I say. Also used a program called Primitive Word Counter to give more quantitative feedback http://www.primitivezone.com/primitive-word-counter.html

It doesn’t have nice pretty graphics though.

By: Rasmus Helgebostad

Rasmus Helgebostad — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:28:29 +0000

I share Ola’s skeptiscism for the causation, but I love how your word clouds make the descriptions look incredibly silly. There shouldn’t be a correlation between the simple aroma descriptor “apple” and mid-priced coffees – the fact that it is certainly makes it reasonable to look again at how those descriptors are gathered.

Is “Notes” in the second cloud a mistake?

By: David

David — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:41:48 +0000

Some really great points there Steve. Absolutely I agree, there are a lot of factors, many of which I have not touched on. Not my intention to conclude anything definitive, rather to present some observations based on available evidence.

By: David

David — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:39:45 +0000

Ola – you are quite right. While I may have observed some correlations, we cannot assume causation. There may be other explanations. That said I think the supply and demand argument fits nicely. Also from looking at the data on the size of the auctions, lot size plays some role in contributing to the overall size, but the number of coffees plays a much bigger role eg there were 36 coffees on auction in El Salvador 08 CoE, compared to 25 in Guatemala the same year, and only 18 in Colombia.

By: Ola Brattås

Ola Brattås — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 07:08:51 +0000

Statistics. A very tricky thing. You can read volumes into this, but your assumptions still might be wrong. The numbers can be put into various different models and produce different results. I’m not saying that what you’re pointing at is wrong, but having a wife with a PhD in this has made me aware of these dangers.

Yes, thats right wifey; I actually did pick up a word or two of what you were saying even though I was watching The Simpsons.

As for the lot sizes; the increasingly smaller lot sizes has made it less interesting for some larger buyers to buy from the program so they more and more often buy them outside the program directly. This may account for the lower overall prices.

As Steve pointed out there probably is more behind the numbers than what has been pointed out.

Still a very interesting post with many great points and graphs! Thanks for doing such a thorough job of putting the numbers into a system. Great post!

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:35:32 +0000

I think CoE’s strength is the focus on discovery of the special. In that CoE looks through all these coffees and allows people to cup a highly select representative of a countries coffee. To me it encourages people to form relationships and shows origin to roaster isn’t as hard as some would like us to believe. I think the pricing and quality data collection is an area that is influenced by alot of other factors. A look at direct trade and diversity of coffee points to the benefits.