In relation to all these topics about quality of espresso, etc, I want to ask one simple question: I go to two Italian restaurants: one charges, say, $25 for a risotto, the other charges $18. The difference reflects, amonst other things, quality and perhaps effort of the chef. Agreed? At the same restaurant, a bottle of Grange, if offered, will be about $350. A bottle of, say, Penfolds Bin 389 (also shiraz) will be overpriced at $40+. The difference reflects quality and ability of wine maker (I assume John Duval doesn't produce their Bin 389) amongst other things. Agreed? I go to a bottle shop, and a bottle of Coopers beer is more expensive than a bottle of Tooheys New. The difference reflects quality of the former compared to the latter, technique, etc. Why, then, does the barista around the corner (whom I have mentioned plenty of times) charge about the same price as the coffee bean murderers across the road, despite his product being many times better, and produced with considerably greater care? Why will the consumer accept price differences reflecting differences in quality for other food goods (food, wine, beer, etc), but not for coffee? Any argument about relative price (the meal is $20+, the wine is $30+, etc) doesn't wash when you look at the beer being in the same ball park pricing as coffee. Any ideas? Patrick PS, FC, I hope to be in Canberra in April or May sometime
