E Cigarette sales rapidly lose steam - WSJ

[this is my name]

Except for DIYers. The only persistent sales there are nicotine, flavors, and PG/VG -- all much cheaper than finished ejuice.

Andria

Yea I just did the math and the $150 I just spent on DIY supplies is equal to $10,400 in premium juice(bought 30ml at a time). That's gotta be kind of tough to track from an outside perspective.

 

[Kent C]

Analogy:
U.S. gun sales are down but it may only be because everyone is already stocked up

 

[AndriaD]

Yea I just did the math and the $150 I just spent on DIY supplies is equal to $10,400 in premium juice(bought 30ml at a time). That's gotta be kind of tough to track from an outside perspective.

And then try to figure out the difference between the finished ejuice figures, and how many cigarettes you would have smoked in that time period -- and it's just because of that huge discrepancy that every gov't everywhere, plus BT & BP, is literally foaming at the mouth about vaping. They simply cannot stand that we've developed/discovered not just a way to save our lives, but also save our money from all those vultures and leeches.

Andria

 

[this is my name]

Ticks and vultures and leeches. Oh, my!

 

[Jman8]

I attribute the perceived decline 99% to smear campaigning. "Health concerns" would be example of smear campaign.

I can't think of any industry that would continue exponential growth if many (so called) scientists got together and made it their business to constantly bombard the public with "health concerns" wrt the product(s) offered. And the irony of the 'concerns' amounts to, "we have no idea" and "no knowledge of long term effects."

Credibility of scientists have gone down for me on this issue. Science is fine, always will be. Scientists, today, not so much. I'm surprised they aren't claiming the world is flat, and backing that up with "we have no idea."

 

[Bill Godshall]

WSJ reporter Tripp Mickle wrote:

"Sales of electronic cigarettes have fallen sharply in recent months, bringing an end to five years of triple-digit growth and making the much-touted category look more like a potential fad than real threat to Big Tobacco."

Except that sales of PVs and e-liquid (in both volume and dollars) have continued to increase significantly, and about 20% more cigalikes have been sold this year than last.

The problem is that Tripp Mickle confuses cigalikes with PVs & e-liquid, confuses volume with dollar amounts, and doesn't allow the facts to interfere with his predetermined story line.

 

[Jdurand]

Yea I just did the math and the $150 I just spent on DIY supplies is equal to $10,400 in premium juice(bought 30ml at a time). That's gotta be kind of tough to track from an outside perspective.

The DIY thing is definitely skewing some of the growth numbers, but even on this forum, complete DIY'ers are the minority. If we are a minority here, we are a micro minority in the real vape world.

 

[EBates]

So here's my take (for what it's worth):
Folks tried the BT cig-a-likes, OMG! Is That All Their Is?
The News Flies, OMG! E-Cigs Are Gonna Kill Us All!
The FDA, OMG! Prohibition!!!!
The State and Local Govments, OMG! The Taxes! The Prohibition! The Restrictions!
The prices for PVs has dropped considerably of late.
Increase in competition putting pressure on high profit margins.

Could any of this have something to do with the growth rate decline?

 

[nicnik]

This is just another example of how you can use numbers to say whatever you want them to. If any industry had triple digit PERCENTAGE growth for two years and then had a 57% growth in year three, that industry expanded as much as it did in year one (or close). As any industry gets larger the percentage of growth will go down, even if it is expanding at a tremendous rate.

Simple number example. 1000 people start to vape, next year 2500 people start to vape = 150% growth rate. Next year 3500 vape and anther 2000 start, that would be less than a 100% growth in the industry, but still represents the same number of people starting to vape.

The larger it grows the lower the percentage of growth will be in the equation. Even if there is a larger number of people starting to vape, you can still report, Growth Down by X percent.

The 57% is nowhere near sustainable. If applied to number of people vaping regularly in the U.S., which is estimated to be about 9 million currently, that level of growth would bring it to well over 800 million regular vapers in 10 years, and over 1.25 billion in 11 years. There won't be enough adults for that, or even people, so no way can it keep up unless everybody, including teenagers, kids, toddlers, newborns, dogs and cats take up vaping.

 

[AndriaD]

The 57% is nowhere near sustainable. If applied to number of people vaping regularly in the U.S., which is estimated to be about 9 million currently, that level of growth would bring it to well over 800 million regular vapers in 10 years, and over 1.25 billion in 11 years. There won't be enough adults for that, or even people, so no way can it keep up unless everybody, including teenagers, kids, toddlers, newborns, dogs and cats take up vaping.

I won't worry unless my cat suddenly sprouts thumbs.

Andria

 

[rico942]

I won't worry unless my cat suddenly sprouts thumbs.

Andria

Too late ...

Mice too ...

 

[AndriaD]

Too late ...

Mice too ...

Oh dear. Now dogs will want them too... which will put an end to those hilarious Beggin' Strips commercials ("I'd get it myself, but I don't have thumbs!")


Andria

 

[edyle]

Analogy:
U.S. gun sales are down but it may only be because everyone is already stocked up

That's a good analogy.
If you look at gun sales alone it doesn't say much compared to if you check ammo sales;
ammo sales are going to be more persistent.

Same with ecig industry; hardware sales is one thing, but the eliquid sales will have persistence

 

[rico942]

Oh dear. Now dogs will want them too... which will put an end to those hilarious Beggin' Strips commercials ("I'd get it myself, but I don't have thumbs!")


Andria

Some dogs got thumbs ...

 

[sofarsogood]

I spent $3,000 a year smoking. I spent $1,000 on vape stuff the first year. If I'd had perfect foresight I could have spent $250-300 the first year for everything I actually use today, including DIY, and $100 a year after that if I only bought what I need. Asking a few vape shops about their traffic is almost irrelevant. I wonder how much stuff Fasttech ships every day. There has been too much attention paid to health issues. Saving money is going to be the real driver.

 

[Kent C]

That's a good analogy.
If you look at gun sales alone it doesn't say much compared to if you check ammo sales;
ammo sales are going to be more persistent.

Same with ecig industry; hardware sales is one thing, but the eliquid sales will have persistence

Yep. I was trying to find a good graph on before and after sales during two periods - when the '94 assault weapons ban was in congress, sales skyrocketed in 92 and 93 and started to drop when the legislation passed. And before the 2008 election (once things became apparent) you see the same phenomena - except still rising :- ) People were stocking up just like some are now. And it isn't just ECF - some shops (not all) - whether for their own sales or for fully informing their customers are talking about it.

 

[DC2]

Yep. I was trying to find a good graph on before and after sales during two periods - when the '94 assault weapons ban was in congress, sales skyrocketed in 92 and 93 and started to drop when the legislation passed. And before the 2008 election (once things became apparent) you see the same phenomena - except still rising :- ) People were stocking up just like some are now. And it isn't just ECF - some shops (not all) - whether for their own sales or for fully informing their customers are talking about it.

Some of us live in a country where the direction the government is taking is leading us to stock up.
What we decide to stock up on depends on our priorities and level of concern.

And some of us live in a country that happily votes for those who help urge the government in the current direction.

It's not the government causing this problem.
It's those who've put this government in place and keep it going this way.

One just needs to look in the mirror to figure out which one they are.
And then one needs to decide if the image looking back at them is truly a good image.

I suspect both sides will like what they see.
And therein lies the problem.

 

[AndriaD]

Some of us live in a country where the direction the government is taking is leading us to stock up.
What we decide to stock up on depends on our priorities and level of concern.

And some of us live in a country that happily votes for those who help urge the government in the current direction.

It's not the government causing this problem.
It's those who've put this government in place and keep it going this way.

One just needs to look in the mirror to figure out which one they are.
And then one needs to decide if the image looking back at them is truly a good image.

I suspect both sides will like what they see.
And therein lies the problem.

Yeah... I was one of the misguided who voted for our current prez, thinking he might actually do something helpful... He's actually done everything he can possibly do to make things worse, and that really takes some doing. So the last mid-term election, I just voted straight R. Anything to get the D's outta there!

Andria

 

[Kent C]

It's not the government causing this problem.
It's those who've put this government in place and keep it going this way.

History tells the story better. There were certain gov't officials that did differently than what the people wanted. However, laws passed benefitted some. And those 'some' became a voting block. And they expanded the welfare state (for both people and businesses), to where the old adages have become true:

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”

"A democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury."

One just needs to look in the mirror to figure out which one they are.

Obvioiusly there are some here who voted for and supported (and still support) certain politicians that are responsible for the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act and the deeming and are pushing for a final rule in a hurry.

But there are many who didn't vote for or support those politicians. To attempt to say 'you're responsible' is simply not the case for at least 50% of the people and likely a higher percent of smokers, ex-smokers and vapers. The common refrain of 'after all it was you and me' is just stupid and doesn't reflect reality. Esp. with JFK (in the Stone's song).

How many politicians have campaigned on certain ideas "read my lips", "reduce the size of gov't", "reduce the debt", "the most transparent administration ever", "to end partisanship" or "repair racial divisions", "you can keep your doctor"?? Too many more to list. And then did just the Opposite once in office. GHW Bush didn't get re-elected, but so many more did.


Now, back to the WSJ article - which as I mention above and elsewhere - a 'blip' on the screen - as far as sales, etc. go - interesting and all, but the more immediate issue is the deeming - where sales can go to zero.

 

[Jman8]

But there are many who didn't vote for or support those politicians. To attempt to say 'you're responsible' is simply not the case for at least 50% of the people and likely a higher percent of smokers, ex-smokers and vapers. The common refrain of 'after all it was you and me' is just stupid and doesn't reflect reality. Esp. with JFK (in the Stone's song).

Very debatable topic you bring up here, in terms of reflecting reality.

As it relates to this topic, if everyone has varying degree of ANTZ in them, then it really does seem like reality is "we are doing this to ourselves." But if the point is only about who created FSPTCA, called that to a vote and determined that would be method to make all subsequent decisions, then I understand/agree with your point.

Off topic, though not much, is idea of voting playing the role it does. If I do not vote (in national elections), and agree with G. Carlin when he said I'm not part of what made the problem that we have in politics today, therefore all you who are (and did), then you all can't possibly be part of the solution. Saying that, I think gets the ire of vote-happy people, who don't want to have things framed that way. In fact, refuse to have it framed that way. But, I think it speaks directly to some of what you're bringing up.

This is very very short version of the what I find debatable. Would help if we could establish what 'reality' actually is, but as that just gets way too convoluted, I chose to stick with the political reality, and make points I find reasonable in relation to shared responsibility.

Btw, us who don't vote are the majority.