E-cigarettes are here to stay

[kristin]

Until recently, e-cigs have been sold through traditional tobacco stores that normally expect a keystone or 100% markup on items other than cigarettes. Though it is hard to determine the number of e-cig users in the U.S., the National Vapers Club estimated that about a million people used e-cigs last year, so it certainly is a growing segment, and the product offers c-stores an excellent alternative to cigarettes with lower taxes and much higher margins.“In 2010 there were 750,000 units sold and that jumped to 2.5 million sold in 2011, and the market is expected to quadruple by end of 2013 to early to mid of 2014,” said Thomas Kiklas, co-founder of the tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association.Close to 20 million cartridges are sold in the U.S. on a weekly basis and about 10 million disposables weekly, Kiklas said.Both disposable and rechargeable packages have distinct markets. Disposables tend to sell best in gas stations and convenience stores where people come in and out quickly, while rechargeables are selling strongly in tobacco stores where customers have time to learn about the technology.“There is still some skepticism on the part of the consumer and the retailer based on whether or not the FDA will get involved to a greater degree,” said Stephen Monaco, director of purchasing for Tedeschi Food Shops in Rockland, Mass.

Regulation Issues
Last April, the FDA announced its plans to regulate e-cigarettes as tobacco products and will work with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to tax and regulate distribution, which means e-cigarette importers must have tobacco importing licenses, and sellers must have tobacco licenses in all 50 states.States are still figuring out how to deal with e-cigarettes. In Hawaii, for example, the product was up against a proposal...[Read More...]​

 

[ctourtelot]

Great article Kristin!

 

[Petrodus]

Last year I came to the conclusion that e-cigs are here to stay
based only on the snow-balling popularity around the world.

The following was quoted on another thread...
However, its worth repeating

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Obviously we are experiencing the early days of stage 3

 

[sailorman]

Last year I came to the conclusion that e-cigs are here to stay
based only on the snow-balling popularity around the world.

The following was quoted on another thread...
However, its worth repeating

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Obviously we are experiencing the early days of stage 3

I wish I could agree. From some of the comments by the general public I've read recently, there are still vestiges of stage 1.
There are still too many powerful interests allied in furtherance of perpetuating stage 2.
We won't really see the zenith of stage 2 until the taxation issue has settled and the FDA is finished with it's destructive meddling and regulation.
If and when we survive that, and the industry has reached some sort of equilibrium without being forced to limit itself to bland, expensive, low nic mini-cigs, we will see the dawn of stage 3.

The survey referenced in the article, while mildly encouraging, reflects results largely attributable to the poor quality of e-cigs that most people encounter when they first discover vaping, or that they are supplied with in studies by researchers who know little about e-cigs. If the FDA and the ANTZ get their way, that caliber of e-cig, or worse, will be the norm. There is nothing to justify the label of self-evident in the rather lackluster results reflected in that survey.

My concern is that a low quit rate and/or a sustained, high dual-use rate will result from the types of regulations imposed on the industry. These are the deficiencies quoted and stressed in the ANTZ propaganda. If the FDA insists on strict limits on things such as flavors, nic. content and form factors, and the states go hog-wild with taxation, they will have created a self-fulfilling prophesy. The exhortations of the ANTZ regarding dual use and low cessation rates will be proven right, due to the very regulations they themselves have promoted and fought for.

 

[Petrodus]

I'm an optimist regarding the future of e-cigs...Way to popular to be snuffed out.
Actually, I do wonder sometimes why BP hasn't already made their move to jump
into the game...Way too much money for them not to.

When they do make their move...They will proclaim e-cigs are their idea and
promote them as the best thing since sliced bread. Personally, I'm not looking
forward to that day...I'm sure they will tinker with the juice to tweak the NIC
to their advantage. Remember how the tobacco companies tweaked the NIC
to keep us hooked?

BP is not in the business to cure anything...Just promote the continued use
of their products.

What stage are we in??? Who really knows for sure and I don't have a crystal ball.
However, bet ya a buck that this time next year we will still be vaping clouds and
discussing more and more positive articles about e-cigs. The authors might even
be BP.

It wasn't that long ago when this forum was full "Call to Action" posts and panic.
Time are changing

 

[sailorman]

I admire your optimism and wish I could share it. But history tells me that BP and BT have not yet begun their strategy.
BP has been waiting for the resolution of the last case. Now that they haven't been granted exclusive rights to e-cigs, they will be teaming up with BT to try to reduce e-cigs to something as inefficient and unattractive as their own products. Meanwhile, BT is working on their own version of an e-cig. Due to their financial resources, they'll be able to meet the stringent requirements that they'll be advising the FDA to impose.

Next year, we will still be vaping clouds, I agree with you on that point. But I fear we are heading toward a two-tier situation where established and experienced vapers, such as ourselves, will be engaging in all kinds of skullduggery to circumvent new taxes and regulations. New vapers will either be turned off by the products that survive all the new restrictions, or they will end up having little choice but to use the offerings of BT and BP. Only new vapers who are tinkerers and rebels will be able to get a truly decent vape. That's a tiny minority of the smoking population and insufficient to reach a state of "self-evidence" among the public.

Articles will be written about us hard-core vapers and what we are doing to maintain our quality of vaping. But these articles won't be able to significantly neuter the effects of the new regulations imposed on behalf of BP and BT. Most people won't bother doing the things necessary to achieve a quality vape. The pool of new vapers will shrink, due to the decreased availability, low quality and high cost of e-cigs. Every time someone tries a poor performing e-cig, there is a significant statistical chance that it will be their last e-cig attempt. First impressions are the strongest. The more substandard e-cigs that are put on the market, due to regulations, the fewer smokers will become committed vapers.

 

[Stubby]

I'm an optimist regarding the future of e-cigs...Way to popular to be snuffed out.
Actually, I do wonder sometimes why BP hasn't already made their move to jump
into the game...Way too much money for them not to.

When they do make their move...They will proclaim e-cigs are their idea and
promote them as the best thing since sliced bread. Personally, I'm not looking
forward to that day...I'm sure they will tinker with the juice to tweak the NIC
to their advantage. Remember how the tobacco companies tweaked the NIC
to keep us hooked?

BP is not in the business to cure anything...Just promote the continued use
of their products.

What stage are we in??? Who really knows for sure and I don't have a crystal ball.
However, bet ya a buck that this time next year we will still be vaping clouds and
discussing more and more positive articles about e-cigs. The authors might even
be BP.

It wasn't that long ago when this forum was full "Call to Action" posts and panic.
Time are changing

BT has invested heavily into smokeless tobacco, and for good reason. Smokeless tobacco use has been going up at a good rate every year while smoking rates fall, and the legal issues are for the most part settled. There is no fear of an outright ban. It makes much more sense for a large cooperation to invest in a stable product like smokeless rather then e-cigs.... for the moment. I don't have my crystal ball out so can't say what the future is. A lot may depend on what the FDA does in the future.

Edit: Sailorman, there is no evidence there is any plan by BT to stifle e-cigs. That is off the wall on your part to be pushing conspiracy theories with nothing to back it up with except your fertile imagination.

 

[sailorman]

BT has invested heavily into smokeless tobacco, and for good reason. Smokeless tobacco use has been going up at a good rate every year while smoking rates fall, and the legal issues are for the most part settled. There is no fear of an outright ban. It makes much more sense for a large cooperation to invest in a stable product like smokeless rather then e-cigs.... for the moment. I don't have my crystal ball out so can't say what the future is. A lot may depend on what the FDA does in the future.

Edit: Sailorman, there is no evidence there is any plan by BT to stifle e-cigs. That is off the wall on your part to be pushing conspiracy theories with nothing to back it up with except your futile imagination.

First off, the legal issues are far from settled. Only the status of e-cigs as a tobacco product is settled. Regulating them opens up an entirely new panorama of possibilities. E-cigs can be effectively banned by the application of sufficiently onerous taxes and regulations.

Philip Morris is finalizing a design for a new e-cig as we speak. It will use sealed, tamper-proof cartridges. It behooves them to work toward regulations that severely restrict and regulate nicotine cartridges, flavors, and forms of e-cigs. They benefit by heavy regulations on the production of e-juice. The more severe the restrictions, the more expensive it is to meet testing requirements, the more competitors are excluded from the marketplace and the better their product will be positioned in terms of the attractiveness of their other smokeless products as well.

In an ideal world, they would have e-cigs banned entirely, but they know full well they won't be able to accomplish that. The next best strategy is to ensure that they are in a unique position to meet the requirements and regulations imposed by the FDA, largely at their behest and that of PHARMA. That's not "off the wall". That's a fact. E-cigs are the first real threat to tobacco company profits in decades. They are not going to sit idly by and let them destroy their business. Neither are they going to attempt to compete on a level field with a million other superior designs and products. They're big and influential. They don't have to. Their best option is to employ that power to stifle competition. If you don't think that's what big corporations do every single day, you are terribly naive about the nature of corporations.

I'm backing up my "conspiracy theories" with over 35 years of experience and observation of corporate behavior and politics, as well as close attention to the current regulatory climate.

BTW, my imagination might be fertile, but it's never been futile.

 

[Petrodus]

When I was young...baseball was America's National Pastime.
Today...Lying is our National Pastime
Today everyone just assumes corporations and our elected officials
are lying to us..."They" no longer even really try to hide it.

 

[sailorman]

When I was young...baseball was America's National Pastime.
Today...Lying is our National Pastime
Today everyone just assumes corporations and our elected officials
are lying to us..."They" no longer even really try to hide it.

Quite true. But in America, if you lie for profit, it's called being an astute businessman.

An interesting study was done a few years ago among Fortune 500 executives. It revealed that psychopaths were way over-represented among their ranks. A similar study among MBA candidates found the same thing. It seems that being a psychopath is an asset if you want to climb the corporate ladder. Which, I suppose, makes sense. Who better than a psychopath to make decisions that destroy the lives of thousands of employees, pocket huge bonuses for doing it, and sleep like a baby afterwards.

I'd be interested to see a similar study among politicians. I suspect the results would be similar.

 

[house mouse]

I'm confused. How do they come up with 82% of e-cig users continue to smoke and then the next line down state that 62% quit or cut back?


And I think they are way off base that 82% continue to smoke just on anecdotal evidence from here.

 

[rolygate]

Most new vapers are dual-users.

Most experienced vapers are no longer cigarette smokers.

Whichever comprises the bulk of the group you ask will determine the percentages you get. It is incorrect to say, "Most ecig users are also smokers", or "Most ecig users are not smokers".

 

[sailorman]

I'm confused. How do they come up with 82% of e-cig users continue to smoke and then the next line down state that 62% quit or cut back?


And I think they are way off base that 82% continue to smoke just on anecdotal evidence from here.

If 18% quit smoking, 44% cut back and 38% smoke as usual, then you could say that 82% continue to smoke.

I don't think it's necessarily anecdotal evidence. If you toss some gas station e-cig at some people with no training an crappy juice cartridges, I would expect a low quit rate. That's about what I would assume and that's why I hate to see such garbage being sold. Out of that 82%, the majority of them will give up e-cigs entirely, thinking "I tried e-cigs and they didn't work." In fact, they performed a lame attempt at quitting under substandard conditions.

OTOH, give those people an hour of training, a kGo or other good PV, and a selection of good juice , and I suspect the quit rate would be much higher than 18%, especially if they were given a reasonable time frame before they drew their conclusions.

 

[rothenbj]

Stubby, in addition to what you stated, most of these newer smokeless products are out of sight when being used. The majority of people I come in contact with have no idea I'm enjoying my tobacco, regardless of the setting.

 

[Stubby]

First off, the legal issues are far from settled. Only the status of e-cigs as a tobacco product is settled. Regulating them opens up an entirely new panorama of possibilities. E-cigs can be effectively banned by the application of sufficiently onerous taxes and regulations.

You misunderstood that one. I was referring to the legal issues with smokeless tobacco not e-cigs. E-cigs are still largely unregulated but that will not last forever.

Philip Morris is finalizing a design for a new e-cig as we speak. It will use sealed, tamper-proof cartridges. It behooves them to work toward regulations that severely restrict and regulate nicotine cartridges, flavors, and forms of e-cigs. They benefit by heavy regulations on the production of e-juice. The more severe the restrictions, the more expensive it is to meet testing requirements, the more competitors are excluded from the marketplace and the better their product will be positioned in terms of the attractiveness of their other smokeless products as well.

In an ideal world, they would have e-cigs banned entirely, but they know full well they won't be able to accomplish that. The next best strategy is to ensure that they are in a unique position to meet the requirements and regulations imposed by the FDA, largely at their behest and that of PHARMA. That's not "off the wall". That's a fact. E-cigs are the first real threat to tobacco company profits in decades. They are not going to sit idly by and let them destroy their business. Neither are they going to attempt to compete on a level field with a million other superior designs and products. They're big and influential. They don't have to. Their best option is to employ that power to stifle competition. If you don't think that's what big corporations do every single day, you are terribly naive about the nature of corporations.

I'm backing up my "conspiracy theories" with over 35 years of experience and observation of corporate behavior and politics, as well as close attention to the current regulatory climate.

There are many possible outcomes, and no one here knows what the situation will be 5 years from now. You are painting one possible outcome based on your experience on the corporate world, but that's only one possibility and not necessarily the most likely one.

I wouldn't even begin to guess as to how this will evolve, but your own experience is likely blinding you to other more likely outcomes. Much of it depends on us. This is all in flux and our own activism and speaking up is a hugh card in this. I wonder if you just want all of us to lay down and say uncle before the fight has hardly begun. Your pessimistic view certainly implies that that is your plan. Should we all follow you down that road?

 

[sailorman]

You misunderstood that one. I was referring to the legal issues with smokeless tobacco not e-cigs. E-cigs are still largely unregulated but that will not last forever.

Let me refresh your memory. You wrote:

Edit: Sailorman, there is no evidence there is any plan by BT to stifle e-cigs. That is off the wall on your part to be pushing conspiracy theories with nothing to back it up with except your fertile imagination.

The point of the post you made that remark about was the future of e-cigs. If IIRC, that's what this thread is about as well. I'm not overly concerned with other smokeless tobacco products. They're owned by BT. Naturally they wouldn't be trying to put themselves out of business.

There are many possible outcomes, and no one here knows what the situation will be 5 years from now. You are painting one possible outcome based on your experience on the corporate world, but that's only one possibility and not necessarily the most likely one.

I wouldn't even begin to guess as to how this will evolve, but your own experience is likely blinding you to other more likely outcomes. Much of it depends on us. This is all in flux and our own activism and speaking up is a hugh card in this. I wonder if you just want all of us to lay down and say uncle before the fight has hardly begun. Your pessimistic view certainly implies that that is your plan. Should we all follow you down that road?

One man's pessimism is another man's observed reality. Do I think we should lay down? Not at all. If you've read my other posts you'd know that I take nothing lying down. In fact, I take a considerable amount of flak for not being sufficiently subservient and compromising when it comes to asserting the rights I believe we have as non-smokers. I even have a couple of long rants here about not accepting a legal atmosphere where vaping is treated like, taxed like and regulated like smoking. If you think I'm the submissive type regarding these issues, you have me 180 degrees wrong.

Here. Does this sound like someone who is going to lay down and say uncle?

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...we-must-find-middle-ground-4.html#post5606582

(note: I do have a liter of 100mg nicotine in the deep freeze and my China connections are lined up, just in case. Gotta be prepared dontcha' know.)

That does not mean I can't see the writing on the wall. If you notice, I'm predicting what BT and BP will attempt to do. I make few predictions about what they'll actually be able to do. I'm confident that I know their strategy. Whether they will succeed is, like you say, subject to other influences.

 

[DC2]

This...

My concern is that a low quit rate and/or a sustained, high dual-use rate will result from the types of regulations imposed on the industry. These are the deficiencies quoted and stressed in the ANTZ propaganda. If the FDA insists on strict limits on things such as flavors, nic. content and form factors, and the states go hog-wild with taxation, they will have created a self-fulfilling prophesy. The exhortations of the ANTZ regarding dual use and low cessation rates will be proven right, due to the very regulations they themselves have promoted and fought for.

And this...

I wouldn't even begin to guess as to how this will evolve, but your own experience is likely blinding you to other more likely outcomes. Much of it depends on us. This is all in flux and our own activism and speaking up is a hugh card in this.

If we don't continue to grow our numbers, band together, and speak up then it is highly likely we will lose.

Our best weapon is our own personal stories, and of course, the truth.
But as a collective group, we really need to find ways to make sure we are heard.

 

[sailorman]

...If we don't continue to grow our numbers, band together, and speak up then it is highly likely we will lose.

Our best weapon is our own personal stories, and of course, the truth.
But as a collective group, we really need to find ways to make sure we are heard.

And that is why it's so frustrating to me to hear vapers say that they're o.k. with the very same kind of restrictions and regulations imposed on cigarettes and smokers. They generally justify it in the name of "consideration" or "compromise". They vape in smoking areas. They won't vape in public. They won't vape in their own homes. They feel like they have to ask permission to vape any place where a non-smoker might be offended.

I'm sorry. Some non-smokers will be offended by anything that reminds them of smoking. The fact that something that looks like smoke is coming from someone's mouth is enough to put them into paroxysms of visceral rage and self-righteousness. I don't respect irrationality. I don't feel any compulsion to be considerate to irrational people and there is no compromising with them at any rate. If they wish to cling to, and act upon, their irrational and unfounded beliefs, it's not my obligation to accommodate them.

The more I observe the apologetic, accommodating and submissive attitudes of some vapers, the more I'm convinced that there is something even more difficult to shake than cigarettes, something that might take years to overcome. That is, the negative self-identity, the guilt, the self-loathing and generally the mindset that results from decades of being demeaned, dehumanized, socially censured, and made into a social pariah.

Something is at work here that is a lot like the lifelong fat person who suddenly becomes thin, but still sees a fat person in the mirror. Maybe e-cigs work too fast. Maybe they turn people into non-smokers and it takes their minds some time to catch up. We are vapers. We are non-smokers. If we don't act like non-smokers why should anyone treat us that way? If we treat our PVs like cigarettes, how can we expect anyone else to treat them any differently?

 

[DC2]

Something is at work here...

You're definitely right about something being at work here.
In fact, it is a decades old global blueprint that is being followed by almost all of our enemies.

It is a time-tested and proven methodology, and it is why we find ourselves in this position today.

Read it if you dare, although you may never feel the same way again...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger

The contemporary antismoking crusade has manipulated/altered psychology and social/economic/cultural/political structures the world over. One of the manipulations instrumental in its ‘success’ is avoiding scrutiny by smearing anyone that dares question antismoking policies and methods. By its beliefs and tactics, antismoking conducts itself like a cult. The antismoking industry is now so large and mainstream that questionable, inflammatory claims are produced with high regularity. There are so many such claims working to an agenda that it is impossible to keep up with scrutiny.

The current antismoking crusade has a clear beginning and framework. Rather than try to keep abreast of a myriad of questionable claims, it is wiser to consider what the antismoking framework has been from the outset, and to consider it by antismokers’ own words. Provided below are excerpts from antismoking conferences and manuals. By this information, the public can then properly judge the basis and nature of the contemporary antismoking ‘movement’.

 

[DC2]

He used their own words, what is there to question?

And he surely isn't the first to point this out.
There is plenty of literature on this subject, and has been for some time.