Tobacco Vapor ecig association
- Thread starter Luisa
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
He owns an e-cigarette company called inLife. Usually when TVECA is quoted, it is either Tom Kiklas or Ray Story (formerly of Smoking Everywhere) quoted. Story split from SE and founded his own company, WannaVape, then got together with a few other of the larger vendors to form the organization TVECA.
Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association
Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association
Interesting, Elaine- I had never heard of them either, but they say they are the "single resource for the facts, science and overall compliance of all TVECA members...." and for bringing compliance of standards, etc. to the e-cigarette industry. Yada yada yada...I clicked for their research and came up empty handed. Do they and CaSAA cooperate with each other? Who are their other members? Just curious.
Thank you for the information. Now,what exactly are they doing to help the SMOKEFree cigarette stay available,affordable, and not taxed to death? Are they helping to prevent the bans? Thanks!
CASAA would work with any trade organization to fight against unreasonable regulation and legislation, so long as the policies of that organization also reflect the values and goals of CASAA and its members.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a general mistrust and lack of confidence in the TVECA leadership by many CASAA members and smaller electronic companies, which has kept CASAA from becoming too involved with the organization. CASAA members have voiced concern to the CASAA board of directors that TVECA members do not seem to have the ability to override the vote of the main companies which run the TVECA board of directors. This has raised some concerns that the TVECA would not equally represent the varied types of business models. Mr. Story has been heard by members saying he would support FDA regulations banning refillable cartridges and flavors. The TVECA released a press statement after the injury of the e-cigarette user in Florida stating "The TVECA does not recognize mods as electronic cigarettes."
CASAA feels that the ability to customize e-cigarettes into something that works well for the user and has an appealing flavor is a large part of what makes them successful, so CASAA would not support regulations restricting them in that way.
Here is the page of TVECA members: Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association
Unfortunately, there seems to be a general mistrust and lack of confidence in the TVECA leadership by many CASAA members and smaller electronic companies, which has kept CASAA from becoming too involved with the organization. CASAA members have voiced concern to the CASAA board of directors that TVECA members do not seem to have the ability to override the vote of the main companies which run the TVECA board of directors. This has raised some concerns that the TVECA would not equally represent the varied types of business models. Mr. Story has been heard by members saying he would support FDA regulations banning refillable cartridges and flavors. The TVECA released a press statement after the injury of the e-cigarette user in Florida stating "The TVECA does not recognize mods as electronic cigarettes."
CASAA feels that the ability to customize e-cigarettes into something that works well for the user and has an appealing flavor is a large part of what makes them successful, so CASAA would not support regulations restricting them in that way.
Here is the page of TVECA members: Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association
Kristin,
I read that about the "mods" too and also about restricting flavors.
In fact, it seems that (upon my investigation) many of the TVECA membership have gone to the tobacco/menthol only regiment even before it is "law" in some places and are bending over to what the FDA seems to want. Large companies complying to what isn't even law sets a bad precedent for all of us- that was my problems with them- they seem to be "bending too much" for what I know most vapers to want. But then again, they are companies looking out for their own pockets- no so much for what the consumer really wants out of vaping.
I read that about the "mods" too and also about restricting flavors.
In fact, it seems that (upon my investigation) many of the TVECA membership have gone to the tobacco/menthol only regiment even before it is "law" in some places and are bending over to what the FDA seems to want. Large companies complying to what isn't even law sets a bad precedent for all of us- that was my problems with them- they seem to be "bending too much" for what I know most vapers to want. But then again, they are companies looking out for their own pockets- no so much for what the consumer really wants out of vaping.
In my opinion, TVECA represents a very narrow and specific segment of the community, one that does not provide much in the way of choices for consumers.
I'm not saying that TVECA is necessarily AGAINST flavors, for example, but I think it's clear that TVECA won't fight for them when push comes to shove. I see what is happening in California as an indication of where TVECA stands on, for example, the issue of flavors. NJOY, one of TVECA's largest members, rolled over and agreed not to sell flavors other than tobacco or menthol when challenged by the California Attorney General. Now, I understand smaller companies feeling that they can't afford to fight that battle with California, but NJOY is a TVECA member . . . where is TVECA on this issue? One of the "benefits" associated with being a TVECA member is "legal representation to preserve the industry."
I guess TVECA doesn't see preserving flavor choices as necessary to preserve the industry.
What other issues will TVECA view in a similar way? Sales via the internet are probably not necessary to "preserve the industry" in TVECA's view. One of the requirements of TVECA membership is that a company have a brick and mortar location where customers can do business in person. Ray Story told that he "knew for a fact" that sales via mail would be banned within months. (That was more than a year ago.)
Ray Story has also said that higher strength nicotine will be banned by the FDA, and most likely liquids as well. If TVECA believes these are foregone conclusions, then it will likely not fight for the right of vendors to sell these items . . . and consumers will be the losers.
There are other problems with TVECA, including the fact that the Board of Directors basically has the final say in making decisions, with it being virtually impossible for the TVECA general membership to override a Board decision. This means that unless a vendor is on the Board, its vote isn't going to count for much, if anything. Moreover, getting on the Board isn't necessarily easy since the Board is self-perpetuating (which in and of itself isn't a bad thing--unless you have a Board that has an agenda).
All in all, there doesn't seem to be much value for CASAA to become involved with TVECA. CASAA is a consumer organization, and I'm grateful that the Board of CASAA keeps the consumers' interests foremost in its decisions.
But even though I am a harsh critic of TVECA from a consumer standpoint, if a particular issue were to come up where interests of consumers and TVECA were aligned, I'd be the first to say that CASAA and TVECA should talk. Work cooperatively when it makes sense . . . but right now, it doesn't make sense, imo.
I'm not saying that TVECA is necessarily AGAINST flavors, for example, but I think it's clear that TVECA won't fight for them when push comes to shove. I see what is happening in California as an indication of where TVECA stands on, for example, the issue of flavors. NJOY, one of TVECA's largest members, rolled over and agreed not to sell flavors other than tobacco or menthol when challenged by the California Attorney General. Now, I understand smaller companies feeling that they can't afford to fight that battle with California, but NJOY is a TVECA member . . . where is TVECA on this issue? One of the "benefits" associated with being a TVECA member is "legal representation to preserve the industry."
I guess TVECA doesn't see preserving flavor choices as necessary to preserve the industry.
What other issues will TVECA view in a similar way? Sales via the internet are probably not necessary to "preserve the industry" in TVECA's view. One of the requirements of TVECA membership is that a company have a brick and mortar location where customers can do business in person. Ray Story told that he "knew for a fact" that sales via mail would be banned within months. (That was more than a year ago.)
Ray Story has also said that higher strength nicotine will be banned by the FDA, and most likely liquids as well. If TVECA believes these are foregone conclusions, then it will likely not fight for the right of vendors to sell these items . . . and consumers will be the losers.
There are other problems with TVECA, including the fact that the Board of Directors basically has the final say in making decisions, with it being virtually impossible for the TVECA general membership to override a Board decision. This means that unless a vendor is on the Board, its vote isn't going to count for much, if anything. Moreover, getting on the Board isn't necessarily easy since the Board is self-perpetuating (which in and of itself isn't a bad thing--unless you have a Board that has an agenda).
All in all, there doesn't seem to be much value for CASAA to become involved with TVECA. CASAA is a consumer organization, and I'm grateful that the Board of CASAA keeps the consumers' interests foremost in its decisions.
But even though I am a harsh critic of TVECA from a consumer standpoint, if a particular issue were to come up where interests of consumers and TVECA were aligned, I'd be the first to say that CASAA and TVECA should talk. Work cooperatively when it makes sense . . . but right now, it doesn't make sense, imo.
I don't think that NJOY is a member of TVECA. In all fairness to Sottera, Inc (dba NJOY), they were still involved in the suit against the FDA in the Federal courts when Jerry Brown, who was then the AG of California, sent them and Smoking Everywhere (the two plaintiffs against the FDA) letters telling them that they were selling an illegal product and must cease doing business in CA.
I would have to check the timing on when the various legal filings took place, but I'm guessing that Jerry Brown came up with the idea of offering a consent agreement when it began to look as if the FDA would not be winning the case at the Federal level, which would take away CA's main justification for shutting down the e-cig businesses. Since the company was already not doing most of the things that the consent agreement forced them to agree to not do (e.g., selling to kids), their attorneys probably advised them to give in on the issue of flavors and sign the agreement in order to continue doing business in CA. I would venture to guess that the expenses of the Federal court case were so high that they could not afford a legal battle at the state level at that time.
I would have to check the timing on when the various legal filings took place, but I'm guessing that Jerry Brown came up with the idea of offering a consent agreement when it began to look as if the FDA would not be winning the case at the Federal level, which would take away CA's main justification for shutting down the e-cig businesses. Since the company was already not doing most of the things that the consent agreement forced them to agree to not do (e.g., selling to kids), their attorneys probably advised them to give in on the issue of flavors and sign the agreement in order to continue doing business in CA. I would venture to guess that the expenses of the Federal court case were so high that they could not afford a legal battle at the state level at that time.
You are absolutely right, and I stand corrected. NJOY was a member of the original ECA (now defunct), but did not join TVECA.
While as a consumer I'm dismayed, truthfully, I don't quarrel with individual businesses signing those consent agreements with the California AG . . . it's a lot to fight individually, especially if, as you say, the consent agreement basically confirms the company's business model (as was the case with NJOY).
I think my larger concern is that TVECA says it fights for the industry, but I just don't see flavors as being something it will be willing to fight for. Certainly, some of TVECA's members carry flavors, but looking at the members' websites, it doesn't appear that liquids or flavors are a particularly important part of their businesses.
This is just my PERSONAL opinion.....but I don't think that would ever happen unless the "consumer" happened to be purchasing one of TVECA's members products. Just sayin...I have also heard that in order to "join" this org a potential company will be asked to "dontate" a large sum of money. probably just a rumor......
However.....SmokeStik was recently sent this link by a customer and I think we FINALLY (we....all of the ecig community) have a new friend in the medical community. This is very exciting because here is a man not afraid of contraversy. If CASAA is not already aquainted with this gentlemen perhaps he would be open to helping ? I have no idea...I have not tried to contact him myself because we believe this kind of friend belongs to the entire community and not just one company.
UofL research shows substituting with smokeless tobacco saves lives — University of Louisville
FINALLY!!!!!!
CASAA is well acquainted with Dr. Rodu's work, and I correspond with him on fairly regular basis. He just sent me the brochure about smokeless tobacco that their program is using. The intended audience is physicians. I'll post it here.
View attachment RoduPhysiciansBrochure040111.pdf
Yes, I link CASAA's Facebook wall to Dr. Rodu's "Switch or Quit" site and page on Facebook pretty frequently. We also use his work in our educational materials.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
