Skip to content
Ground Up

Method

How we decide what can go on the site

We wrote these rules after finding unsupported claims in our first draft. They cover numbers, photographs, names and certification. The missing documents are visible on each lot page.

  1. 01

    A number appears only with a source, a URL and a date.

    If we cannot link the source, we leave out the number. That is why some rows on this site are blank.

  2. 02

    A row is “verified” only when a document exists for it.

    The document can be a receipt, invoice, weigh ticket, customs declaration, log sheet or written reply from the person who did the step. Its reference number is printed next to the row. A lot with even one undocumented row keeps its pilot stamp.

  3. 03

    No photograph of a person we did not photograph.

    An earlier draft used stock portraits next to invented names and quotes. We removed them. People now appear only in photographs we took, or received with permission and a credit.

  4. 04

    No name without written permission.

    Producers, volunteers, recipients and roasters choose whether we use a full name, first name or role only.

  5. 05

    No certification we do not hold.

    We are not Fairtrade certified, Rainforest Alliance certified or independently audited. US law draws the same boundary: Section 5 of the FTC Act prohibits deceptive claims, the FTC expects an advertiser to hold its substantiation before the claim runs rather than after someone asks, and using a registered certification mark without the right to use it is trademark infringement under the Lanham Act.

  6. 06

    An undocumented row says so, in the same place as a documented one.

    GU-0001 has two rows with a document and two without, and the record shows all four. The counter at the top of each lot page is read from those rows, so it cannot be set by hand.

  7. 07

    Corrections stay on the page.

    When we remove a claim, we keep it in the list below with the reason. That gives us something to check before we reuse it.

Fact ledger

The outside numbers we currently use

We keep these in one file and check the link and date before a presentation. Market prices move, so older figures stay dated.

World market price for green coffee (ICO composite): 287.34 US¢/lb

source checked

International Coffee Organization, ICO Indicator Prices · July 2026 monthly average

Published monthly. Re-check before every presentation — this one moves the most.

source

Fairtrade minimum price, washed arabica, FOB: US$1.80/lb

source checked

Fairtrade International, Minimum Price and Premium Table · in force 2023-08-01 → 2026-11-30

A floor a certified buyer must pay. We are not certified; we cite it as a benchmark, not a claim about us.

source

Fairtrade premium, paid on top of the price: US$0.20/lb

source checked

Fairtrade International, Minimum Price and Premium Table · since 2023-08-01

At least US$0.05 of it must go to productivity or quality work.

source

From 1 December 2026 the washed-arabica minimum rises to US$2.00/lb

source checked

Fairtrade International, Minimum Price and Premium Table · effective 2026-12-01

Announced, not yet in force. Applies to contracts signed on or after that date.

source

Modelled farmer net income on a kilo of ground coffee in Germany: €0.41 of €8.06 — about 5%

source checked

BASIC for Global Coffee Platform, IDH & Solidaridad, “The Grounds for Sharing”, §5.2.2 · data year 2021; published 2024-06-18

Net income AFTER production costs, and it already includes the family’s own unpaid labour. €1.97 of the €8.06 reaches the cultivation stage as gross value — never quote the 5% without the “net” qualifier, because the same study supports “24%” on the gross measure.

source

Unpaid family labour, valued at minimum wage, would add ≈ €0.80/kg to the cost of that kilo

source checked

Coffee Barometer 2026 (Panhuysen & de Vries), p.58 · published 2026-06-10

True cost €8.86 against an €8.06 shelf price. The gap is being covered by somebody working for free.

source

Share of final retail value captured by coffee-producing countries: ≈30% in the early 1990s → ≈10% recently

source checked

Coffee Barometer 2026, p.57, citing ICO Coffee Development Report 2020 · ICO data vintage 2018–2020; restated 2026-06

source

The original version of the claim everyone repeats — Oxfam, 2002: farmers received 1% or less of the price of a cup sold in a coffee bar

source checked

Oxfam International, “Mugged: Poverty in your coffee cup”, p.20 · September 2002

This 24-year-old sentence is the ancestor of every “the farmer gets 7 cents” post. It was real, it was sourced, and it is old. We cite it as history and use the 2021 modelling for the present.

source

What a direct-trade roaster actually paid at FOB, published: US$4.18/lb weighted average

source checked

Counter Culture Coffee, Transparency Report 2025 · 2025 purchases

The benchmark our own price sheet has to stand next to. Olympia Coffee published US$4.85/lb for 2024 on the same basis.

source

Average cost of producing a kilo of dry parchment coffee in Colombia: COP 9,790/kg

source checked

Solidaridad / Acuerdo Café, Bosque y Clima — “Costos de Producción de Café 2024”, 1,283 farms in 11 departments · 2024 harvest

A survey of 1,283 farms, not a national figure — the report says so itself. Harvest labour alone is 54% of that cost.

source

Average US retail price for a pound of ground roast coffee: US$9.32/lb

source checked

US Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Average Price Data, series APU0000717311 · July 2026 (published 2026-08-12)

The shelf price our own bag price has to stand next to. 100% ground roast, all sizes, US city average, not seasonally adjusted. Down from $9.46 in June and $9.72 in April. The link returns the raw series — read the last row rather than trusting this one.

source

Share of American adults who drink coffee on a given day: 66%

source checked

National Coffee Association, National Coffee Data Trends · released 2025-09-09

More than any drink except bottled water. The same release puts consumption at close to three cups a day among those drinkers. It is a survey commissioned by a trade association, so we cite who paid for it.

source