🅢 = Story: What Are We Really Measuring?

 

How do we know if we’re measuring coffee in a way that actually matters? 

 

The industry has become incredibly good at evaluating coffee through scores and sensory standards, but standards are only useful if they help us better understand the people we’re ultimately serving. 

 

At Fat Miilk, we're beginning to develop our own internal quality rubric that doesn't just evaluate the coffee itself, rather it also evaluates the consumer experience. If a coffee scores exceptionally well on a cupping table but consistently underperforms with guests, what exactly are we measuring? Conversely, if a coffee creates memorable experiences, repeat purchases, and emotional connection, shouldn't that also be part of how we define quality?

 

These aren't questions a traditional scoresheet can answer, but I believe they're questions our industry should be asking.

 

As founders, roasters, and café owners, we need better ways to connect objective quality with real-world behavior. If we want to make more informed decisions about quality, we can't stop at the cupping table. I don’t think consumer preference should dictate everything, but I do believe understanding both allows us to make better decisions from a business and quality perspective. 

 

This is especially important for Robusta. If we're serious about giving it a fair opportunity, we can't continue judging it exclusively through systems designed around another species. We also have to ask how people experience it. How does it perform with milk? How satisfying is the texture? Does it create a lasting impression? Does it become something people genuinely crave?

 

Consumer preferences continue to evolve and our understanding of quality has to evolve with them. And if our goal is to create better coffee experiences and build better repeat businesses, then the customer has to become part of the equation as well. 

 

— Lan Ho, Founder of Fat Miilk

🅘 = Insight: A League of Its Own

 

At Fat Miilk, we roast to order, which gives us an intimate understanding of the beans and the process. With 10+ years in the specialty coffee industry, working in quality control, sourcing, sample roasting, and now production, I’ve never been more excited to share what we’re discovering with Robusta. — Kim Nguyen, Head of Coffee Quality and Sourcing

 

After cupping tens of thousands (literally) of green coffee samples throughout my years in quality control, I've come to realize that comparison is how the coffee industry judges quality. Sure, we can isolate a single sample and evaluate it on its own merits, but at the end of the day, that sample will always be compared to past and future coffees. I wouldn't be able to score a coffee an 86 if I didn't have the context for what an 86 tastes like in the first place.

 

All this is to say that the coffee industry relies heavily on prior sensory references when evaluating coffee. Whatever scores an 80 or above (on a 100-point scale) is generally considered specialty. But we can't score Robusta based on what is considered specialty for Arabica. It exists in a league of its own.

 

Cupping Robusta 

 

From a sensory standpoint, Robusta should always be cupped alongside other Robustas. It isn't a fair comparison to place Arabicas on the same table. Robusta presents different levels of sweetness and acidity, and it shouldn't be judged against the higher perceived acidity that Arabica naturally brings.

 

Robusta is also generally more soluble. On the cupping table, it should perhaps be dosed slightly lower because it has a greater potential for over-extraction as it continues to sit and steep. It should be evaluated both while warm and again as it cools to fully experience how the coffee develops over time.

 

Sweetness should be one of the primary attributes being evaluated, along with overall balance. Is the bitterness lingering too long in the finish? Does it become astringent? Those are the types of characteristics that deserve close attention.

 

Scoring Robusta 

 

The scoresheet currently used throughout the specialty coffee industry was developed around Arabica and its characteristics. While Robusta-specific scoresheets are still relatively uncommon, they are becoming more prevalent as more people begin cupping and evaluating Fine Robusta. This creates an important baseline for distinguishing premium-quality Robusta from commodity-grade coffee.

 

While that makes sense as a starting point, it still attempts to shape Robusta into a framework originally created for Arabica. When scoring Robusta, it should receive points based on its own merits. Its sweetness should be rewarded, and its naturally lower acidity shouldn't be treated as a flaw but rather recognized as one of its defining characteristics. It doesn't need to fit into someone else's box to be considered specialty.

 

Appreciating Robusta

 

Throughout my years in coffee, and in countless conversations with colleagues, one compliment I hear over and over is that a Robusta "isn't bad for a Robusta." I've always found that to be incredibly limiting and unfair. Through the industry's lens, Robusta has long been reduced to being overly nutty or lacking acidity, making it seem inherently less desirable. People wanted it to be something it was never meant to be.

 

I've always challenged that perspective and encouraged people to keep tasting more Robusta so they could experience its own strengths. I wanted to change the narrative around Robusta and appreciate it for what it is, rather than what it isn't. We don't need to force it into the specialty coffee framework we've already built. We simply need to respect it on its own terms and continue creating new spaces where Robusta can stand on its own. That's what I intend to keep doing.

 

 

🅟 = Pulse: The Next Measure of Quality

 

One of the biggest conversations happening in specialty coffee right now isn't about fermentation, processing, or brewing, but rather it's about how we define quality.

 

For nearly 20 years, the industry relied on the SCA's 100-point cupping form as the universal language for evaluating coffee. It gave buyers, producers, and roasters a common framework that helped shape the specialty coffee movement. But over time, it became clear that one number couldn't fully capture why a coffee is valuable or why people choose it.

 

That's why the Specialty Coffee Association introduced the Coffee Value Assessment (CVA), replacing the traditional scoresheet with a more comprehensive framework that separates objective sensory description, personal preference, physical quality, and extrinsic factors like origin and processing. The goal was to acknowledge that coffee creates value in more than one way.

 

At Fat Miilk, we see that as an important step forward. But we also think there's another layer worth exploring. We're building an internal rubric that helps us truly understand, "How does that quality show up for the customer?"

 

We believe the next evolution of coffee quality is already underway, and we're excited to share how we're approaching it.