5 ms·

the units weren’t purchased, though, it was an order. If we take them at their word that they worked with a broker, then there’s numerous ways this could have h

the units weren’t purchased, though, it was an order. If we take them at their word that they worked with a broker, then there’s numerous ways this could have happened. For example, the broker could have said “they’ll pay you $x per bag and they need 6,000 units” which would explain the discrepancy. After all, the order was for “units” but what’s ultimately being sold is bags — so there is some translation happening somewhere. The businesses entire pitch is ethics, it would be batshit crazy to try and run such a gambit when ethics is core to their business.

lisper 4y ago
> the broker could have said “they’ll pay you $x per bag and they need 6,000 units” That's possible, but unlikely. The whole concept of "bags" just doesn't enter into it in a wholesale transaction. But even if this did happen, they could have avoided the problem by clarifying: "So that's a total of $X, right?" Also, at some point this deal should have been put in writing, at which point, again any ambiguity should have been resolved. They had a lawyer, surely they would have asked him to review the deal before signing? Sorry, but there is just absolutely no way to spin this so that this is not 100% their fault.
- phphphphp 4y ago
  it’s absolutely their fault in many ways, I don’t dispute that, but I absolutely dispute the idea that this must be a grand conspiracy to trick people into buying coffee with an impossible story. They were dealing with a broker who is responsible for getting a deal done, the broker has no investment in the intricacies of the deal, so it’s totally plausible that the broker was saying whatever was necessary to get the deal done even if that meant providing ambiguous information that could have confused a naive supplier.
  - lisper 4y ago
    > this must be a grand conspiracy I didn't say it had to be a conspiracy, only that I find this hypothesis plausible in today's world. > the broker has no investment in the intricacies of the deal He certainly does. Brokers don't get paid unless their deals close. > it’s totally plausible that the broker was saying whatever was necessary to get the deal done Of course. It's still their responsibility to achieve clarity on what they are signing up for before agreeing. At the very least they should have done a sanity check on the terms and the bottom line.
    - phphphphp 4y ago
      The specifics of the arrangement with the broker are not disclosed but a reasonable guess is that the broker is taking a percentage. A percentage of anything is better than a percentage of nothing. Much like a realtor, the incentives of the broker and supplier are not aligned. If the broker cared about the outcome then the broker would have behaved very differently throughout the entire process. Saying the broker would behave in the suppliers best interests is like saying a sales person in a software business will behave in the best interests of the companies developers.
- LadyCailin 4y ago
  The fault only extends as far as the amount of coffee they had to produce, but not the money. Had the distributors worked like the broker promised (they didn’t) then while the intense 3 shifts a day grind would have had to happen, the money issue wouldn’t be a problem, as they would have then sold it all to the distributor. So yeah, they fucked up, but not quarter million fucked up. That’s on the distributor and/or broker.

lisper 4y ago

> the broker could have said “they’ll pay you $x per bag and they need 6,000 units” That's possible, but unlikely. The whole concept of "bags" just doesn't enter into it in a wholesale transaction. But even if this did happen, they could have avoided the problem by clarifying: "So that's a total of $X, right?" Also, at some point this deal should have been put in writing, at which point, again any ambiguity should have been resolved. They had a lawyer, surely they would have asked him to review the deal before signing? Sorry, but there is just absolutely no way to spin this so that this is not 100% their fault.

phphphphp 4y ago
it’s absolutely their fault in many ways, I don’t dispute that, but I absolutely dispute the idea that this must be a grand conspiracy to trick people into buying coffee with an impossible story. They were dealing with a broker who is responsible for getting a deal done, the broker has no investment in the intricacies of the deal, so it’s totally plausible that the broker was saying whatever was necessary to get the deal done even if that meant providing ambiguous information that could have confused a naive supplier.
- lisper 4y ago
  > this must be a grand conspiracy I didn't say it had to be a conspiracy, only that I find this hypothesis plausible in today's world. > the broker has no investment in the intricacies of the deal He certainly does. Brokers don't get paid unless their deals close. > it’s totally plausible that the broker was saying whatever was necessary to get the deal done Of course. It's still their responsibility to achieve clarity on what they are signing up for before agreeing. At the very least they should have done a sanity check on the terms and the bottom line.
  - phphphphp 4y ago
    The specifics of the arrangement with the broker are not disclosed but a reasonable guess is that the broker is taking a percentage. A percentage of anything is better than a percentage of nothing. Much like a realtor, the incentives of the broker and supplier are not aligned. If the broker cared about the outcome then the broker would have behaved very differently throughout the entire process. Saying the broker would behave in the suppliers best interests is like saying a sales person in a software business will behave in the best interests of the companies developers.
LadyCailin 4y ago
The fault only extends as far as the amount of coffee they had to produce, but not the money. Had the distributors worked like the broker promised (they didn’t) then while the intense 3 shifts a day grind would have had to happen, the money issue wouldn’t be a problem, as they would have then sold it all to the distributor. So yeah, they fucked up, but not quarter million fucked up. That’s on the distributor and/or broker.