Big Tobacco strategy

[Lithium1330]

Synthetic nicotine would be "real" too, in that it would give you the same buzz, but it would be hideously expensive!

It does make me think, though, that there may be some mileage in the idea that the tobacco companies might not unequivocally oppose the advent of ecigs. It could offer a litigation-free market for their leaf (any problems will come home to roost with the manufacturers) - of course, it will probably only work if they can match the per-unit-nicotine price of tobacco grown in other countries - there's not much room for premium flavour leaf in the new market if it's going to be distilled for the chemical content.

Interesting thought anyway.

And just imagine if BT start to use a high nicotine producer tobacco or something like Nicotiana Rustica, no need for cure and process the tobacco, just plain extraction of a BIG FAT load of nicotine!

I don't know if produce pure nicotine is more expensive than produce cigarettes, but I know that BT could produce a very BIG amount of nicotine from their plantations.

 

[jamie]

I most embarrassingly retract my assertion that the nicotine is synthetic.
I thought I had read a report affirming this but I have been unable to find it again.
So until further notice, the nicotine is real!

I don't know about that, per this book:
Drugs of Abuse - Google Book Search


Or news article:
Smokers who wish to kick the habit can now do so for free at 10 "Quit Smoking Clinics" provided by the State Heath Department...."The common treatment for smokers would be the Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) which comes in the form of patches, chewing gum, inhaler and lozenges with different doses of synthetic nicotine," [the Director] said.


Found a few references in Siegel's blog comments that gum and patches are synthetic nicotine, and that this is why it's so easy to get o.d. symptoms like palpitations and migraines, but info was not definitive/sourced. I tend to believe this, I've seen people incapacitated by a patch one step "too high" when they could happily chain smoke any kind of cigarettes.


However NRT gum/inhaler/nasal spray patents:
[0019]The term "nicotine" is intended to include nicotine, 3-(1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl)-pyridine, with its base form, racemic form, R- and S-forms, including synthetic nicotine as well as nicotine extracts from tobacco plants, or parts thereof, such as the genus Nicotiana alone or in combination; or pharmaceutically acceptable salts.


Natural or synthetic nicotine may be used or a pharmacologically-acceptable salt or derivative of nicotine.


With nicotine it is intended to include nicotine, 3-(l-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl)- pyridine, with its base form, including synthetic nicotine as well as nicotine extracts from tobacco plants, or parts thereof, such as the genus Nicotiana alone or in combination or pharmaceutically acceptable salts. Preferred embodiments incorporate nicotine as

(a) the free base form;

(b) a water-soluble pharmaceutically acceptable salt, either per se or adsorbed on an adsorbent;

(c) a complex with a cation exchanger; (d) mixtures of any of (a)-(c);

(e) an inclusion complex, such as a cyclodextrin complex, e. g. β-cyclodextrin, or nicotine in any non-covalent binding;

(f) nicotine bound to zeolites;

(g) nicotine bound to cellulose or starch microspheres; and (h) mixtures of any of the foregoing.

Also, any other suitable pharmaceutically acceptable form may also be employed.

As noted above, numerous nicotine salts are known, and may be used. Particular examples of suitable salts include those presented in Table 1, such as preferably the tartrate, hydrogen tartrate, citrate, malate, and/or hydrochloride.

 

[OldBiker]

I have no problem believing BT plans to profit from e-cigs. I may be a bit cynical in my views of both gov and big industry in this country, BUT I have seen how they operate as have we all. IMO BT could easily be developing or even have already developed an e-cig and are waiting to release it because analogs are more profitable and they want to maintain that profit level as long as possible. Why spend their money on advertising, product development, etc when someone else will do it. Not to mention the fact that unless you enter an established market there is with any new product a period of losing money until it is accepted by the public. It's very possible they are simply using a strategy they see as maximizing their profit potential. Here's one possible scenario.

Step 1: allow someone else to develop and market similar product
Step 2: allow gov to ban imported product for whatever reason they can
Step 3: prove their product is safe (easily done with enough $)
Step 4: sell theirs at inflated price

and presto BT has got a stranglehold on smokers AGAIN

Just my opinion

 

[b00stzx3]

As far as tehcnology goes, what if BT was to start selling their own brand of e-cigs/PVs. Since they would be "legalized" with BTs lobbysists and influences, whats to keep overseas vendors from flooding us with cheaper alternatives, like what we got now? I know customs keeps a good amount of foreign/untaxed ciggs from coming thorugh, but how can they possibly keep devices smaller than pens from sneaking through. Whatever happens, vpaing is here to stay. Thank god for forums and the net, the genies out of the bottle.

 

[OldBiker]

Boost, with all the bad publicity products from China have gotten recently in my way of thinking BT would only have to prove theirs is safe and a lot of people would buy theirs even at inflated prices to avoid the "unsafe" products from other countries.

 

[Mex]

Big tobacco will always continue to make money. Altria Group, Inc. is one of the richest and best run companies on the planet.

Currently they are attempting to snuff out e-cigs. If e-cigs thrive, tobacco sales will decline. It's that simple. So the ban or delay (3-5 years) of the sale of e-cigs is in their best interest.

In the event that the FDA does not stop all e-cigs, the game changes. Then it becomes in their best interest to own the biggest chunk of the e-cig pie. They will buy out the manufacturers and reduce the competition. They will charge more for an inferior product, because again, they want people smoking tobacco not vaping.

We are going to fight the FDA for them and at the end of the day big tobacco will still be making money.

I can assure you that you hit the nail on the head. I have been thinking about ways to stop this from happening. Has anyone besides me thought about starting a church. Call it something like The Church of Truth In Fog. Part of our religious beliefs are finding peace, truth and understanding by partaking of the "Vapor Stick". The government and big tobacco would have a hard time stopping us from practicing our Constitutional right to freedom of religion. As "The Church" we could get a tax benefit, distribute our religious trinkets, and if anyone touches us they will commit political suicide. If we do the legwork on this now, it may stop the FDA and Tobacco from pursuing it any further. I am aware this is being done by people that use payotee. Any thoughts on this let me know.

 

[TropicalBob]

This has been joked about at least six months ago.

And let's set up headquarters on an Indian reservation. Not part our country, etc.

 

[Kitabz]

I think I have figured out what Big Tobacco is planning to do with E-Cigs. They are holding out for a better price. Of course this all rides on respecting copyright laws and that I know little about. Why pay a premium for the rights when it is sure to take a beating in the future? I'll bet they are running tests and trials right now.

Just thinking about this, it's interesting that Australia, Canada, Mexico, Hong Kong and others (none of which AFAIK have any tobacco industries to speak of) have banned these things yet the USA and the UK - homes of "Big Tobacco" have not [yet at any rate].

Given the lobbying power that BT is perceived to have, doesn't this seem curious?

 

[jamie]

Jit's interesting that Australia, Canada, Mexico, Hong Kong and others (none of which AFAIK have any tobacco industries to speak of) have banned these things yet the USA and the UK - homes of "Big Tobacco" have not [yet at any rate]. Given the lobbying power that BT is perceived to have, doesn't this seem curious?

I know folks keep saying it's about big tobacco and yes Phillip Morris is getting a gimme from the Waxman bill, but I still believe that when it comes to e-cigs the hammer is coming from big pharma. They had the lock on long-term nicotine maintenance and everyone already accepts that tobacco cigarettes aren't the future.

 

[TropicalBob]

Oh Jamie, you are so absolutely correct. Many posters just race down dead-end alleys. You are so right.

 

[Boston George]

Phillip Morris is getting a gimme from the Waxman bill

The Waxman bill was drafted from negotiations between PM and tobacco free kids. If its not the definition of a deal with the devil I don't know what is.

If the hammer falls, does it really matter if it was PM or pharma behind it?

Currently it is legal, at least in my opinion to market and sell e-cigarettes. I have a thread discussing this. Check out Nicogel as another cigarette alternative.

Products like nicogel and e-cigarettes exist in the gray area between the FDA and the ATF. The Waxman bill eliminates this gray area and gives clear control of anything with nicotine to the FDA. Since the FDA has already made their stance on e-cigarettes rather clear. I would say that the Waxmen bill is the current largest threat to the e-cig and just so happens to have been set into motion by Big Tobacco. I am not going to speculate as to if they did this knowing its effect on the e-cig, it doesnt really matter.

 

[doc g]

Seeking some clarification of the term "big tobacco" aka BT.
I think the term refers to big cigarette companies & my understanding is that they are merely tobacco processers & cigarette manufacturers & not tobacco farmers. (& would not be surprised to find most tobacco is actually imported these days)
I bring this up as we ponder the furure of nicotine & I admit I'm out of date on tabacco farming since the Vietnam war took me far away from the farm & I never really went back.
At my grandpa's farm we grew it from seeds, transplanted the seedlings in the fields, cut it & hung it in the barn to dry, then sold it at an auction somewhere in kentucky in the dead of winter. After my grandpa passed away, my uncles continued to farm it for a number of years & were actually paid federal subsidies to not plant the entire field.
It's my guess that BT could deal with the FDA & adapt to eliquid manufacture to satisfy the vapers.
It also seems like motorola could easly make the ecigs that their chips
(& batteries?) are going into.

 

[jamie]

If the hammer falls, does it really matter if it was PM or pharma behind it?

Yes, because big pharma supports the movement to change smoking bans into everything-but-NRT bans, and they are having some success. What good are ecigs if apartment dwellers have to go outside at 3am in a blizzard to use them or face eviction?

 

[Lorddrek]

What good are ecigs if apartment dwellers have to go outside at 3am in a blizzard to use them or face eviction?

This statement is a bit extreme. Tobacco smoke is very easy to smell many hours after burnt. Vapor does not suffer from this. Just one of the many appeals to vaporizing nicotine liquid.

 

[jamie]

That's funny. I almost rewrote that example for that very reason however I figured readers here would understand my point.

 

[Lorddrek]

I just see so many rash statements here sometimes it's tough to read into what a person is really trying to say.

 

[kishd]

If the pharmaceutical industry succeeds in getting the nicotine in e-cigs regulated effectively banning it they would then be able to continue pushing their other NRT's. However tobacco is not regulated and the Tobacco companies can then produce and sell a "tobacco extract" for vaping essentially keeping their market and still make huge profits.

 

[jamie]

I just see so many rash statements here sometimes it's tough to read into what a person is really trying to say.

While your note was correct, my example wasn't so rash. Apartment dwellers do walk the hallways, get the mail in the lobby, spend time hanging/removing/folding laundry, use community recreation... and really who wants to be so careful all the time to put away or not show their ecig at their home? All it takes is one jerk, and people do get evicted for much less than real legal violations.

We're talking about people who celebrate using the law to force hospice residents to "go smoke-free". And if you think that's extreme you aren't reading their materials.

 

[funkyZero]

Big tobacco will always continue to make money. Altria Group, Inc. is one of the richest and best run companies on the planet.
----snip----
We are going to fight the FDA for them and at the end of the day big tobacco will still be making money.

I'd have to agree somewhat. Rember, BT doesn't own tobacco. It's farmed by individuals who sell to the market. They may own some farms, but not even close to everything.

BT wants the e-cig dead. They did sit by and watch, just like record companies ignored the digital age of music distribution, large newspapers ignored the internet. BT sat on it's hands and is now worried. They may try to buy up any patents that they can but it's already too late. The Chinese don't care much about copyrights and patents in general, they are just trying to make a buck and not starve to death.

BT's days are numbered and they know it. Pharma wants in on the action too, they are floundering these days and this is a guaranteed source of revenue they don't even have to develop... all they need to do are the trials. Watch it goe perscription only, thats my prediction.

 

[StudioKraft]

They did sit by and watch, just like record companies ignored the digital age of music distribution, large newspapers ignored the internet.

I couldn't help but notice that correlation myself. The pattern is obvious, the big entrenched companies who have enjoyed dominant market share for years either ignore new and emerging technology, or are too burdened by their own size to modify their business models to incorporate the new technology.

The fastest moving department of these companies seems to be the legal department, which once they see the writing on the wall, they deploy in full force.

The appearance of e-cigarettes on the market has already caused the anti-smoking lobbyists to basically admit that they have no real argument against e-cigs, so they too need to modify their "business model" to include any product that contains nicotine. (Aside from the NRT products already on the market which provide the anti-smoking organizations with their funding of course.)

This promises to be very interesting while those who wish to control every aspect of our lives try to justify the regulation or ban of e-cigarettes without resorting to the parental reasoning of "because I said so".