Big tobacco and e-cig company reps tell retailers to defend e-cigs from local bans (while doing little or nothing themselves), endorse federal e-cig r

[Bill Godshall]

At NATO show, large tobacco and e-cig company reps tell retailers to defend e-cigs from local bans (while doing little or nothing themselves), endorse federal e-cig regs (even though FDA deeming reg would ban all e-cigs, in hopes of obtaining FDA approval to market their e-cig brand and banning sales of competitive products/brands).
http://www.cspnet.com/category-mana...rticles/dont-get-smoked-out-e-cig-regulations


For many years, I/we have been urging large e-cig companies to join with us in opposing proposed vaping bans at the state and local level, but most of these companies have done very little or nothing. Now, they're telling tobacco retailers to oppose the state and local vaping bans.

And as I've been saying for awhile, the large tobacco and e-cig companies are publicly endorsing FDA regs for e-cigs (in hopes of hitting FDA's jackpot by getting their e-cig brand approved in the future, while all or nearly all of their competitors products are banned) as long as their products and marketing practices aren't banned.

 

[Kent C]

At NATO show, large tobacco and e-cig company reps tell retailers to defend e-cigs from local bans (while doing little or nothing themselves), endorse federal e-cig regs (even though FDA deeming reg would ban all e-cigs, in hopes of obtaining FDA approval to market their e-cig brand and banning sales of competitive products/brands).
http://www.cspnet.com/category-mana...rticles/dont-get-smoked-out-e-cig-regulations


For many years, I/we have been urging large e-cig companies to join with us in opposing proposed vaping bans at the state and local level, but most of these companies have done very little or nothing. Now, they're telling tobacco retailers to oppose the state and local vaping bans.

And as I've been saying for awhile, the large tobacco and e-cig companies are publicly endorsing FDA regs for e-cigs (in hopes of hitting FDA's jackpot by getting their e-cig brand approved in the future, while all or nearly all of their competitors products are banned) as long as their products and marketing practices aren't banned.

Could you be more specific. The generalization "most" tends to demean all - who you talking about? Joyetech, Kanger, Blu, or some of the bigger vendors - Nhaler, TW, Janty, etc. ?? Some of the vendors are and have been doing some things. One well known Ill. dealer testified at hearings and has been on a local radio show.

If you mean the tobacco companies only, they have been so beaten down by the gov't and the anti-smoking groups (cough), and the Attorneys General, that they're probably depicting some kind of Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Could you be more specific. The generalization "most" tends to demean all - who you talking about? Joyetech, Kanger, Blu, or some of the bigger vendors - Nhaler, TW, Janty, etc. ?? Some of the vendors are and have been doing some things. One well known Ill. dealer testified at hearings and has been on a local radio show.

You might take a look at the last media roundup, Kent. I do a pretty detailed review of the piece that Bill linked-to in CSPNet. It's by Melissa Vonder Haar, who might be the closest thing to a world-class mainstream reporter that we have (it's not that she's got a particular philosophical ax to grind like Megan McArdle, it's that Melissa V.H. is objective). For ex., Melissa reported that Altria has exactly one employee who's supposed to help retailers fight these reg.s. (After spending how many millions to acquire Green Smoke? And investing the better part of a $B in that new plant in Italy? You gotta be kiddin' me.)

Fact is, the people we know here at ECF - both ordinary "rank and file" vapers as well as "official" rep.s of orgs like Bill G., Greg C., Julie W. and so forth - may very well do the lion's share of the heavy lifting out there. Bill's very much on the money when he points out that the deep-pocketed BT/BV firms aren't doing much. If I were one of their investors, I'd be fairly irate about that.

 

[2coils]

While I agree the large companies may not be "involved enough" in these local fights.....it seems to me, they are complaining there is little notice to react. CASAA mentions the same thing at times. Who knows how sincere these big companies are actually being though!
I did run into a woman in Trenton who's company represents Altria(I think). She was also at a local vape meet taking video testimonial from vapers. If the others were doing the same and more, it would be a positive.

 

[Bill Godshall]

If the large e-cig companies truly desired to defeat local and state vaping ban bills, they'd have accepted our many dozens of invitations to join with us (i.e. vapers, vape shop owners and public health activists) in testifying against and opposing state and local vaping ban bills.

We've given them all the information they need (that they'd otherwise pay to lobbying firms) to oppose these bills. On several occassions, SAFTA and NJOY have forwarded alerts to retailers in the affected states and municipalities, but other than NJOY's David Graham testifying at the NYC hearing, I'm not aware of any large e-cig company (nor SAFTA or TVECA) testifying against any state or local vaping ban bill.

While the large cigarette companies won't testify at public hearings, they could be doing a lot more behind the scenes to help us organize opposition to the vaping ban bills (especially considering all the money the cigarette companies spent during the past 25 years to oppose smoking ban bills).

Back then, cigarette companies gave money to virtually every state and local restaurant and tavern association to lobby against proposed smoking bans, while Reynolds and Philip Morris sent monthly newsletters and magazines to most restaurants, bars, bowling alleys, bingo halls, hotels, private clubs, etc. telling them they'd go out of business if smoking was banned in their buildings, which prompted many hospitality business owners, managements and their trade associations to lobby against smoking bans.


Several large tobacco and e-cig companies have collaborated with us in opposing e-cig tax hikes and unwarranted state regulatory bills, and we're all collaborating to enact state laws to ban the sale of e-cigs to minors.


Meanwhile at the federal level, .....

 

[Jman8]

And as I've been saying for awhile, the large tobacco and e-cig companies are publicly endorsing FDA regs for e-cigs (in hopes of hitting FDA's jackpot by getting their e-cig brand approved in the future, while all or nearly all of their competitors products are banned) as long as their products and marketing practices aren't banned.

Seems like par for the course in politics of eCigs.

I believe CASAA does this when it favors (or endorses) bans of sales to minors.

I also believe that vast majority of ECF people would have little to no problem if cigalikes were banned/restricted while bigger devices went untouched in such legislation.

In other words, any group involved is likely, for the most part, to look out for their own interests, and only a small portion of whole eCig community is looking at the bigger picture. And/or "bigger picture" is skewed to one's own view of what eCigs ought to be in say 5 to 25 years.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Please note that CASAA, NVC, I and many others have opposed all legislative and regulatory proposals to ban the sale, import and use of e-cigs (regardless of the type of e-cig product that would be impacted).

 

[Jman8]

Please note that CASAA, NVC, I and many others have opposed all legislative and regulatory proposals to ban the sale, import and use of e-cigs (regardless of the type of e-cig product that would be impacted).

But have you (all) endorsed/favored a ban on sale to minors?

If yes, then that was point I was addressing. And if yes, please don't go onto explain why. I get why, but am just noting that "we" do it to, as a consumer group/advocate. Minors still going to vape regardless of such ineffective bans. Heck, the minors subset shows us that you can still vape even with bans in place.

 

[KODIAK (TM)]

Several large tobacco and e-cig companies have collaborated with us in opposing e-cig tax hikes and unwarranted state regulatory bills, and we're all collaborating to enact state laws to ban the sale of e-cigs to minors.

Meanwhile at the federal level, .....

Well, regarding BT's absence in all this... Why in god's name would anyone want their help? Aren't they poison just by mere association?

It's like the Democrats inviting Obama on their campaign trails.

 

[Nate760]

As much as the prevailing wisdom seems to be that the tobacco industry will wield an ever-growing influence in the e-cig market, I tend to think the opposite is going to happen in the long-term. Big Tobacco's involvement has thus far been limited to acquiring a couple of pre-existing cigalike brands and developing a couple others in-house. While sales of cigalikes might be booming exponentially right now, they're probably very near a plateau; in any event, the current rate of growth is not going to be sustained for more than a year or two.

I think the tobacco companies are going to find that the e-cig market is not a good fit for their business model. First, there's the fact that very few people continue to use cigalikes on a long-term basis. They make great training wheels for people first getting off cigarettes, but it doesn't take most customers long to figure out that they've got other, better, less expensive options.

Second, tobacco cigarette makers are accustomed to a type of "brand loyalty" that just doesn't exist for e-cig users. When you smoke cigarettes, you settle on the brand you like and you buy only that brand forever. With e-cigs, on the other hand, the variety of options is one of the things that turns cigarette-quitters into dedicated vaping connoisseurs and hobbyists. How many people, one year after they quit smoking, are still exclusively (or even primarily) still buying the same brand of cigalike they started out with? My guess would be under 10%. Hence, buying or developing one brand of cigalike just isn't going to do that much in the long run to recoup the market share that tobacco cigarettes are going to continue to lose. And cigarette companies aren't likely to enter the APV/mod business, not only because they have no experience or credibility in that market, but because vapers will avoid their products like the plague.

I think in two or three years from now, the news will be about Big Tobacco divesting itself of e-cig properties rather than buying and creating new ones. I'd be curious to hear Bill's thoughts on this.

 

[aikanae1]

I think the big reason BT does not join in against local vape bans is that they believe they've already worked out deals for their members. Their ideal is for more advanced pv's to get banned and online sales severly limited if not ended. That would force dependence on their products, their distribution and protect their profits. There are quite a few people who are oppossed to vaping for the single reason is they believe it's associated with BT - which must be bad.

 

[Nate760]

There are quite a few people who are oppossed to vaping for the single reason is they believe it's associated with BT - which must be bad.

I can't even count the number of people I've heard say the entire e-cig industry is just a plot by BT to keep people hooked on nicotine and/or create new nicotine addicts. When you point out that 1) No tobacco company had any involvement with e-cigs until a year and a half ago, and 2) There are numerous other nicotine products not made by tobacco companies, they just ignore you. In their minds, nicotine = tobacco = tobacco industry = pure evil and rampant death.

 

[2coils]

As much as the prevailing wisdom seems to be that the tobacco industry will wield an ever-growing influence in the e-cig market, I tend to think the opposite is going to happen in the long-term. Big Tobacco's involvement has thus far been limited to acquiring a couple of pre-existing cigalike brands and developing a couple others in-house. While sales of cigalikes might be booming exponentially right now, they're probably very near a plateau; in any event, the current rate of growth is not going to be sustained for more than a year or two.

I think the tobacco companies are going to find that the e-cig market is not a good fit for their business model. First, there's the fact that very few people continue to use cigalikes on a long-term basis. They make great training wheels for people first getting off cigarettes, but it doesn't take most customers long to figure out that they've got other, better, less expensive options.

Second, tobacco cigarette makers are accustomed to a type of "brand loyalty" that just doesn't exist for e-cig users. When you smoke cigarettes, you settle on the brand you like and you buy only that brand forever. With e-cigs, on the other hand, the variety of options is one of the things that turns cigarette-quitters into dedicated vaping connoisseurs and hobbyists. How many people, one year after they quit smoking, are still exclusively (or even primarily) still buying the same brand of cigalike they started out with? My guess would be under 10%. Hence, buying or developing one brand of cigalike just isn't going to do that much in the long run to recoup the market share that tobacco cigarettes are going to continue to lose. And cigarette companies aren't likely to enter the APV/mod business, not only because they have no experience or credibility in that market, but because vapers will avoid their products like the plague.

I think in two or three years from now, the news will be about Big Tobacco divesting itself of e-cig properties rather than buying and creating new ones. I'd be curious to hear Bill's thoughts on this.

I think your take is solely based on an open free market. There will be no "free market" after the FDA gets done with this industry. At least that is what BT is hoping for! If e-cigs were not severely regulated, BT would not have too big a market share IMO. I agree, too too many options out there to stick with just one thing, especially when we get our taste buds back, and realize not everything we vape, has to taste like a dirty ashtray