You were getting the last recorded show when you refreshed. It took a little bit, but they got it back on.
ECTA ON TVN! Sunday!!!
- Thread starter JayTheVapingGuy
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- canvape
- Status
I had to refresh 43 times before it came back. Jibba's pc decided to shut down.
Hi everyone! ♥ Huge thanks to Katherine for a stellar interview on TVN this evening (especially given the ungodly hour in the UK, lol). In my view it was a really good show. Informative, positive & fun. Huge thanks to HawtAngel, Eva & Jibba for hosting too. And thanks to everyone who showed up to watch and/or participate!
Now it appears that (unfortunately) only the latter part of the 2-hour program was recorded. Would've been nice to have the whole thing, but what can you do. In any case, there's 51 minutes & 10 seconds of recorded footage available (which luckily includes some of the best bits) - spread between two videos. For those who missed the show, or just want to watch it again...here are the links, for your convenience.
Vid #1: http://www.stickam.com/viewMedia.do?mId=193184531 (13 min, 45 sec)
Vid #2: http://www.stickam.com/viewMedia.do?mId=193184368 (37 min, 25 sec)
I'm certain there will be many more opportunities for shows/interviews, particularly as things progress with ECTA (so stay tuned!).
For now: happy vaping everyone, and *vape proud!* ♥
Now it appears that (unfortunately) only the latter part of the 2-hour program was recorded. Would've been nice to have the whole thing, but what can you do. In any case, there's 51 minutes & 10 seconds of recorded footage available (which luckily includes some of the best bits) - spread between two videos. For those who missed the show, or just want to watch it again...here are the links, for your convenience.
Vid #1: http://www.stickam.com/viewMedia.do?mId=193184531 (13 min, 45 sec)
Vid #2: http://www.stickam.com/viewMedia.do?mId=193184368 (37 min, 25 sec)
I'm certain there will be many more opportunities for shows/interviews, particularly as things progress with ECTA (so stay tuned!).
For now: happy vaping everyone, and *vape proud!* ♥
If ECTA isn't paying you, Rachel, they definitely should. It can't be easy being a cheerleader.
The show was BS. Neither of the interviewers had a clue about the problems(or "drama" as they put it so eloquently) people have with ECTA. The show was basically one long repeat of information already freely available on the ECTA website. Nothing against the interviewers, they did great, but they should have at least done a LITTLE homework.
I said it in the chatbox, and I'll say it again (with bold lettering) No one has a problem with ECTA's principles or is against the ideals they wish the bring forth. We have a problem with some of the shady people on ECTA's board. We fear these people are going to bully other vendors in to paying ECTA so they don't fear having their business shut down.
The show was BS. Neither of the interviewers had a clue about the problems(or "drama" as they put it so eloquently) people have with ECTA. The show was basically one long repeat of information already freely available on the ECTA website. Nothing against the interviewers, they did great, but they should have at least done a LITTLE homework.
I said it in the chatbox, and I'll say it again (with bold lettering) No one has a problem with ECTA's principles or is against the ideals they wish the bring forth. We have a problem with some of the shady people on ECTA's board. We fear these people are going to bully other vendors in to paying ECTA so they don't fear having their business shut down.
You know i am just as confused to what the ECTA is as i ever am. The Web site is a little unclear, but then maybe i read it at like 3am. Trying to gather both sides of the story....ECTA board and the consumer about it...the interview provided me little help, but this is just going deeper and deeper into confusion.
Do not get me wrong, i am not trying to flame, or argue with encee_rz or anyone else on this thread, i am merely saying for someone like me who joined the races already in progress as it were, i am clueless.
Sorry but i think this one time is where ignorance is bliss, and until this all gets muddled out, and less confusing i am sitting all this out
Do not get me wrong, i am not trying to flame, or argue with encee_rz or anyone else on this thread, i am merely saying for someone like me who joined the races already in progress as it were, i am clueless.
Sorry but i think this one time is where ignorance is bliss, and until this all gets muddled out, and less confusing i am sitting all this out
I didn’t see the show live, but I did watch the second hour of interview per the links Rachel provided. (Thanks Rachel)
As an interview it was a complete Fail, but I’ll get into that. There were still some good moments that came out of the show. Some of the regulatory issues were brought more to light. The explanation of the details of classification and the use of correct terminology as it applies to the law was explained a little better (in my eyes) so that I understand some of the issues. The benefits of vaping were outlined. Some anecdotal experiences were shared. ECTA reiterated its general platform and what the underlying principles were as far as the association goes, with attendant side benefits to the consumers. All good stuff in the abstract, but much of which had already been covered. Still, for the benefit of fresh eyes, ears and minds that’s not really a bad thing.
From an “interview” standpoint, to be honest I didn’t hear one at all. A critical listen will reveal that the questions were either leading questions or statements made by the interviewer which ECTA was then asked to confirm or expand on, which they did. The “questions” were segways into platform speeches. Questions from the viewers were basically nonexistent. Near the end of the second part it was asked whether there were questions from the viewers, and it was stated that the discussion there had no relevancy. I find it hard to believe that in all that time that no one except the guy who had his question answered three different ways was interested in getting more information. If that was the case then why not express an opinion on some of the questions raised in the forum? Too heavy on general commentary and anecdotes and not enough on providing information.
Some general observations, which you can all feel free to agree or disagree with (as with what I said above)
1) Good on ECTA for recognizing its communications failures, and for not having concrete plans for many aspects of the program. Had that just been said out of the gate it would have saved headaches.
2) Why use lawyers? They don’t know anything about the industry! Actually, it’s just that they don’t know anything about it yet, because like anyone else they have to learn, and at some point some lawyer is going to have to. There will be an investment there, to be sure, and lawyers aren’t cheap, that’s correct, but let’s not say they’re useless just because you don’t want to front end load the expenses. There will need to be one to deal with regulatory issues at some point. The government will have them. You will need one. And no, I’m not a lawyer.
3) Testing. ECTA keeps talking about testing, and yet no where can I find any information about what standards of testing are desired. This can’t be secret, can’t compromise a vendor, and shouldn’t be harmful to share in any way, so what is the standard of testing envisioned? After all, this is the backbone of the regulatory aspect. What is it?
4) Fees, there’s no actual fee structure set up yet, according to the interview. No problem. There’s an obvious need for fees to help support the cost of the people needed to take the fight to The Man. No problem. What happens when that gets done? There will be some ongoing component of review needed, but nothing like at the beginning. Where will the fees go then?
5) There wasn't really a lot of bravery involved in having the vendors put their name up on the ECTA site, since the internet business are all up on the internet anyway. A casual look through the forum or a google search would bring any of them up, so there's no real extra risk added by also having the name up on the ECTA site, since the business aspect is what they are at risk for, and not the fact that they belong to a trade association.
My dos centavos.
As an interview it was a complete Fail, but I’ll get into that. There were still some good moments that came out of the show. Some of the regulatory issues were brought more to light. The explanation of the details of classification and the use of correct terminology as it applies to the law was explained a little better (in my eyes) so that I understand some of the issues. The benefits of vaping were outlined. Some anecdotal experiences were shared. ECTA reiterated its general platform and what the underlying principles were as far as the association goes, with attendant side benefits to the consumers. All good stuff in the abstract, but much of which had already been covered. Still, for the benefit of fresh eyes, ears and minds that’s not really a bad thing.
From an “interview” standpoint, to be honest I didn’t hear one at all. A critical listen will reveal that the questions were either leading questions or statements made by the interviewer which ECTA was then asked to confirm or expand on, which they did. The “questions” were segways into platform speeches. Questions from the viewers were basically nonexistent. Near the end of the second part it was asked whether there were questions from the viewers, and it was stated that the discussion there had no relevancy. I find it hard to believe that in all that time that no one except the guy who had his question answered three different ways was interested in getting more information. If that was the case then why not express an opinion on some of the questions raised in the forum? Too heavy on general commentary and anecdotes and not enough on providing information.
Some general observations, which you can all feel free to agree or disagree with (as with what I said above)
1) Good on ECTA for recognizing its communications failures, and for not having concrete plans for many aspects of the program. Had that just been said out of the gate it would have saved headaches.
2) Why use lawyers? They don’t know anything about the industry! Actually, it’s just that they don’t know anything about it yet, because like anyone else they have to learn, and at some point some lawyer is going to have to. There will be an investment there, to be sure, and lawyers aren’t cheap, that’s correct, but let’s not say they’re useless just because you don’t want to front end load the expenses. There will need to be one to deal with regulatory issues at some point. The government will have them. You will need one. And no, I’m not a lawyer.
3) Testing. ECTA keeps talking about testing, and yet no where can I find any information about what standards of testing are desired. This can’t be secret, can’t compromise a vendor, and shouldn’t be harmful to share in any way, so what is the standard of testing envisioned? After all, this is the backbone of the regulatory aspect. What is it?
4) Fees, there’s no actual fee structure set up yet, according to the interview. No problem. There’s an obvious need for fees to help support the cost of the people needed to take the fight to The Man. No problem. What happens when that gets done? There will be some ongoing component of review needed, but nothing like at the beginning. Where will the fees go then?
5) There wasn't really a lot of bravery involved in having the vendors put their name up on the ECTA site, since the internet business are all up on the internet anyway. A casual look through the forum or a google search would bring any of them up, so there's no real extra risk added by also having the name up on the ECTA site, since the business aspect is what they are at risk for, and not the fact that they belong to a trade association.
My dos centavos.
Last edited:
A very good overview, Talion. I agree with you on all points, and I myself felt the "interview" had more than a bit of a rehearsed feel to it. There were a lot of things that were rehashed and there was not a lot (if any) new information brought to light. Alas, I did not expect it to be any different.
The issue now is that they are no longer on the forum because of the "drama", so they are going to lose all the support (if any) that they had, or could have had, from the community -- which is coincidentally the very people they are trying to impress upon. Not a very good move IMO, but time will show that. I am still waiting to hear if there are going to be some new faces on the forum from the group of ECTA members that're a bit more socially adept and can answer the questions that need to be answered in a straightforward manner. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that.
The issue now is that they are no longer on the forum because of the "drama", so they are going to lose all the support (if any) that they had, or could have had, from the community -- which is coincidentally the very people they are trying to impress upon. Not a very good move IMO, but time will show that. I am still waiting to hear if there are going to be some new faces on the forum from the group of ECTA members that're a bit more socially adept and can answer the questions that need to be answered in a straightforward manner. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that.
Great post, I agree with everything you said. I wanted to address what I thought about that point though. Aside from being able to show the government and enforcements agencies reports and whatever. I doubt it matters to ecta if vapers know what they are doing for testing. The important message for us it that it is safer to order from ecta members. Even if the batteries, and the liquid come from the same factories and labs in china, getting them from these vendors is safer because they have done some tests on 'em. The Industry Standard of Excellence as they say.
Only time will tell, but i really doubt they ECTA will ever go into detail about what exact tests they have done, and what kind of paper work they got from it. Why would any new vendors join them if they could see that information, and do it themselves right? I think they are going to keep that stuff secret. So for the regular ecig people, we will just have to take their word for it.
Edit: I guess they will have something like this
http://www.ecita.org.uk/theise.html
Not a whole lot of info. Liquid is tested for to make sure it only has whats its supposed to... whatever that means. Also, possibly more important, that the bottles are child safe, and that we are getting the advertised amount of eliquid that we order.
Last edited:
Thanks, and that's kind of the point, from a consumer standpoint. Of course ECTA would want consumers to buy from ECTA members. That's the point of the association. I disagree with you on them not wanting others to know though. They will have to have standards to discuss with the regulators if they hope to advance that cause with them. Once the government gets behind it then the information would become public domain anyway, so why hide it?
In addition, if you're going to distinguish yourself from the non-ECTA members then you need to be able to identify what it is that you're doing better. The critical purchaser will want to know more than just "better". 0.0001% better on average than non-ECTA members is still better when you say "we do it better than they do". What does "better" mean? Without knowing the degree of variability between the two camps (members and non-members) saying that something is done "better" is a meaningless statement. if you do it significantly better then why wouldn't you say so? It would help sales.
What I gathered is that you can pay to become an ECTA member so that you can be provided with the information on how to get your materials tested (at a cheaper fee I think). You can do all this without being an ECTA member but you will also have to find your own channels for carrying out the tests (and possibly pay more).
One thing I noticed was that Katherine kept talking about "enforcement officers" randomly checking out vendors. I understand that. That's how it's done in the UK. But as far as I know there aren't any of these enforcement officers checking out vendors. Vendors are basically just being told to shut down without any notice or way to get checked.
The big problem I see for ECTA is that(puts on tinfoil hat) the Canadian government doesn't WANT this industry to come to fruition. They WANT their tax dollars from cigarette sales. If there is no law against the sale of these materials then why does HC keep portraying their misinformation, and why would they just push over when presented with the proper documentation?
One thing I noticed was that Katherine kept talking about "enforcement officers" randomly checking out vendors. I understand that. That's how it's done in the UK. But as far as I know there aren't any of these enforcement officers checking out vendors. Vendors are basically just being told to shut down without any notice or way to get checked.
The big problem I see for ECTA is that(puts on tinfoil hat) the Canadian government doesn't WANT this industry to come to fruition. They WANT their tax dollars from cigarette sales. If there is no law against the sale of these materials then why does HC keep portraying their misinformation, and why would they just push over when presented with the proper documentation?
What I got from the interview mostly is a confirmation, in my eyes, of what I've suspected all along. I don't think ECTA fully realize what they're up against with the various other stakeholders including BT, Pharma, the Gov't and all their legal teams. I think it's naive to think that 'the law is clear and on our side' as ECTA would have us believe. It's never that simple. There will be other interpretations of 'the law' particularly in the more contentious areas and this often comes down to who has the better lawyer to make the arguments. It's equally naive to think BT and Pharma won't put up a real stink about all this when they get wind of and have a chance to fully digest the ramifications of ECTA's intentions.
'We don't need a lawyer because we're not going to court' was also a recurring theme in the interview that is unrealistic. You don't need a lawyer just to go to court but also to be taken seriously. I don't necessarily blame ECTA for trying to take the cheaper approach, in an attempt to avoid unnecessary legal fees by simply hiring an experienced UK consultant to present their position. This 'initial' approach is not altogether unreasonable.
But what you have right now is a bunch of vendors and their UK consultant vs. the vast and extremely sophisticated legal resources of the gov't, BT and Pharma who can (and likely will) say 'No. Your move.' Then ECTA can cry all they want about the government not following their own laws, being unfair, etc., but then will have to prove that.
I'm pretty sure that ECTA are going to get a few nasty surprises along this road. Good luck.
'We don't need a lawyer because we're not going to court' was also a recurring theme in the interview that is unrealistic. You don't need a lawyer just to go to court but also to be taken seriously. I don't necessarily blame ECTA for trying to take the cheaper approach, in an attempt to avoid unnecessary legal fees by simply hiring an experienced UK consultant to present their position. This 'initial' approach is not altogether unreasonable.
But what you have right now is a bunch of vendors and their UK consultant vs. the vast and extremely sophisticated legal resources of the gov't, BT and Pharma who can (and likely will) say 'No. Your move.' Then ECTA can cry all they want about the government not following their own laws, being unfair, etc., but then will have to prove that.
I'm pretty sure that ECTA are going to get a few nasty surprises along this road. Good luck.
I'm not sure if you caught the sarcasm in my post. Your post came in before my edit though, if you look at ecita, you get no real info about anything. It links to regulation about microchips, and batteries, and all kinds of stuff nobody really cares about. No real info about what kind of safety tests they do, except the very vague stuff about the juice testing. No results or anything like that.
With that in mind, i see any claims of quality from ecta as the same kind of fluff. They are going to do what they can in the background to show HC what they are doing is legal. But publicly, its nothing more than marketing.
When it comes to non ecta vendors, i dont think they really care that much. Either health canada is going to be ok with nicotine in ecigs, or they're not. None of the other stuff is important.
Last edited:
Exactly!! ^^^
My thoughts on the interview are ....... it was a waste of time and internet bandwidth.
I "think" (and I could be wrong) the enforcement she was talking about was their "mystery shopper" much the same as the actual government does current for tobacco sales.
There are enforcement officers. I use to work in a grocery store as a supervisor and I was in charge of tobacco sales/displays. We would (once a quarter) get a mystery shopper who looked under 25 and if we failed to ID them we would face fines. Usually a couple days after the mystery shopper and actual enforcement officer would come by and talk about it and ensure we were following the laws (displays of products, signage, etc).
So yeah there are enforcement officers in Canada. I just don't know what else they enforce as thats the only dealings I've ever had with them.
Based on the outcome of the recent drama, here on the forum & facebook, Encee, I can see your concern as being a valid one. However, the point seems speculative to me, at best. Everything about ECTA & HC is speculative as well. This is why most are either pessimetic or optimistic when it comes to ECTA. Although, I don't agree with the way, ECTA was formed - I do support anyone who wants to challenge HC with their advisory. It's not costing me, anything. If I had money invested in ECTA then hell, yes, I would want my say & concerns addressed. Until ECTA presents HC with testing results & rules & regulations get created this speculations will forever surface.
Having watched a documentary on ColdFX on Marketplace, a cold medicine that needed market authorization was FAST-TRACKED into the market with almost no study. In other words, it just took the right person with the right data to push it through. Whether that be a politican, lawyer or a UK consultant. My point to all of this is I think we just need to take 1 step at a time & see what happens & not think too hard about what could happen way down the road.
How could a ECTA bully a non ECTA vendor or have them shut down? Seems kinda hard to me when all vendors are basically importing the same hardware from China. Doen't everyone carry the Ego-C & Stardust? Should ECTA or anyone else succeed & have the legal door open for vendors e-cigs & e-liquid - there will be some rules to follow - As long as the non-ECTA vendors follow the rules set out by ECTA/HC/Customs/RCMP etc - it's an equal playing field.
This is just the way, I see or speculate it. Who really knows what will happen but these type of discussions get me thinking things out & I like it.
I think this is one of the major roadblocks as well. They believe that they can get where they want to go without lawyers, which I think is thinking with the rose coloured lenses. If the y want anything substantial to become of this then they will eventually end up in court and they're going to be mightily unprepared for it.
I hope they have an extraordinary lawyer hidden in the wings that they haven't told us about. I really think this is going to take trip to the court house. I also think this is going to have to be won on the first attempt, rather than having to switch gears.
- Status
Similar threads
