ECA do we want or need them

[Lika]

Just to be clear, Lika, I have not said or claimed this thread was an attack on the ECA.

Constructive criticism is one thing. Challenging the ECA to represent supplier interests and our consumer interests in the best possible manner is one thing.

But Babachoo has done nothing here on this forum but attack the ECA, and in my opinion, in a completely over-the-top, strident and unjustified fashion (with the sole exception of that one post about a car charger, as Outwest noted).

Why would that be?

Hey, it's cool

I had actually written that part of my post yesterday. There were others who indicated that might be the direction of this thread. I was simply making a point that I didn't see it that way. I also didn't take the time to read Babachoo's post or the replies to it before I posted. In retrospect I should have and I probably would have reworded my opening statement.

 

[Kate]

I think you are right Lika, very well put

Hopefully we'll be able to build sound structures for our community that cover us all and empower us all.

Diplomacy is a very valuable asset.

EDIT
You posted while I was writing this, I'm referring to your post before Yvilla's.

 

[Lika]

I think you are right Lika, very well put

Hopefully we'll be able to build sound structures for our community that cover us all and empower us all.

Diplomacy is a very valuable asset.

EDIT
You posted while I was writing this, I'm referring to your post before Yvilla's.

Thanks Kate

 

[yvilla]

Another point of clarity, Lika.

I also responded before taking the time to re-read and fully digest your post (too upset at the other still, I guess).

So I wanted to say I agree with Kate that your post is well-put and thoughtful.

For me, your last paragraph hits on where I am mostly, having a sense of urgency and dread for what is happening right now, so tending toward giving the ECA the benefit of any doubt and a pass on what may be regarded the small stuff at the moment (typos here on the forum is one example).

 

[RjG]

Are the ECA minutes available for download anywhere yet? Or are they still secret?

I'd love to support them, but of course I need to learn what they are doing, and if they are working in my best interests first...

I just can't see sending donations to a "secret closed door - vendors only" club.

Until the minutes are public, there's really no way any non-paying member can agree or disagree with them, since you have NO idea what they are really discussing or doing. All you can do is guess from the sparse official/unofficial postings here.

 

[Letzin Hale]

- after quoting a post from the ECA containing TONS of errors.


So there you have it, 5,328 words and an hour and a half of my time when I should be sleeping (I work graveyard) just to show you all how I and others feel about the ECA. I feel that strongly about showing you all what a joke they are that I'm sacrificing sleep in the hopes that one less sucker will fall for their money-grabbing scam. Have a great day and thanks for your patience in reading this all, once you piece everything together logically, your wallet will thank you.

Having read a couple of posts accusing Babachoo of attacking the ECA I had to read his/her entire postings on this thread. There was I almost joining the queue to jump on the 'hit 'em with a big stick bandwagon' when I realised that Babachoo was not attacking the ECA but was in fact asking some very pertinent questions without resorting to insults, mild or otherwise. I found the 'I wish you would just go away' comment a little sad as it is such a poor form of reply to what was presented as an incisive and eloquent post. I don't think the FDA and other detractors would take much notice if you told them to go away. What Babachoo, Kate, Lika, myself and others have all done is to ask very relevant & searching questions and point out various holes, pitfalls, inconsistencies and general lack of professionalism that has been the Achilles Heel of the ECA so far. Yes we would like to see an organisation that furthers the cause, but one that is seen as credible, capable and consumer orientated rather than the slipshod presentation we have seen in some of its dealings and communications.
It would have been more prudent for instance to wait just a little while in order to formulate a clear, consistent charter that could be presented as a finished article rather than rush out an announcement that the ECA is here to save us all so join up quick but with not enough structure to the organisation and with various people appearing to speak on their behalf.
Now, the ECA has to work damned hard to prove itself and convince not just the detractors but even some of the people who should and could have been on their side from day one. Having read as much as I could find on their website I am now reassured that the ECA IS NOT a consumer orientated association and is a gathering of manufacturers/suppliers who are willing to fork out big bucks every month to be a member. I have no argument with that.


Quote from the ECA website with my comments in red:

The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) is an association of private sector companies engaged in electronic cigarette technologies.

The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) is a 501(c)(6), a not-for-profit trade organization.
The ECA Board of Directors and Officers are: Matt Salmon - President, Jack Leadbeater - Chair, James Watt - Vice Chair, Chad Green - Treasurer, Antoinette Lanza, Nick Bird, and Rob Winslow.
The ECA has a minimum application fee of $500 USD. If your organization can give more for the good of the entire industry, we encourage you to do so. Below are the ECA Membership levels and the associated monthly dues:

1. Basic Membership: $300 USD per month
2. Bronze Membership: $800 USD per month
3. Silver Membership: $1,500 USD per month
4. Gold Membership: $3,000 USD per month
5. Platinum Membership: $5,000+ USD per month
6. Founding Membership: $400+ USD per month (this membership level must be approved by the ECA Board of Directors and is subject to ECA formation participation)

What's the difference between Basic/Gold/Platinum/Founding apart from 4500+ bucks?!

Something in my head is telling me that 5000 dollars a month would go a long way toward funding the necessary trials/testing/compliancy etc to get a product licensed!! No mention seems to have been made about that possibility?

If you own and operate a very small or new business within the electronic cigarette industry and can not afford even the Basic Membership level at this time, please contact Chad Green about obtaining a personalized payment schedule.
What if someone can't afford to join as they are a very small outfit making a wage and nothing else?
What if manufacturers and suppliers choose not to join? Will they be blacklisted?

The benefits of becoming an ECA Member of a certain level will include a specific Seal that can be used on the Member’s website and marketing materials as well as other benefits to be determined at a later date.
Hands up all those who will insist on seeing a seal before making a purchase.

These funds, along with any donations received, will be used for these purposes:
1) Engaging Policy Impact Communications (Policy Impact) to lobby Congress on behalf of the ECA.
What kind of guarantee do PIC offer, or is it just a case of you pays your money and takes your chance?

2) Engaging Policy Impact Communications to perform the administrative duties necessary to keep the ECA in good standing with the IRS and other government agencies.
I was wondering why an accountant wouldn't suffice to keep the IRS happy as surely the only requirement is that the ECA is shown to have not made a profit in any one year. So, if there is money left over, what happens to it?

3) Engaging a media relations firm to battle misinformation being presented by e-cigarette opponents and to expand the reach of electronic cigarettes so all smokers have the freedom to choose an alternative.
The most effective advertising in this industry has been word of mouth and personal recommendation; 'I tried my friend's, brother's, colleague's etc and it was amazing'. This is also the way to combat misinformation as if it is done via 'media relations' it inevitably comes across as just 2 sides having an argument, just like party political broadcasts.

4) Implement standards to ensure e-cigarette suppliers and distributors meet certain requirements.
Who is going to set those standards and requirements and more pertinently, who is going to police them?
Shouldn't the standards have already been agreed upon so that prospective members know what is expected of them, or do they have to join and then hope that they can afford to come up to scratch?

5) Implement standards to ensure the manufacturing of the products meet certain requirements.
I'm sure that they're quaking in their boots in Shenzhen! Sorry for the sarcasm but they will not give a toss in China about the ECA and that's a fact.

No board members are taking a salary from the ECA. Matt Salmon is employed by Policy Impact Communications and was selected as the ECA President so he can effectively lobby on our behalf. No one ECA member will directly benefit more than any other member. This is about helping our industry, not one company.
Well at least they seem true to their word as I have not seen any reference to the Association representing or campaigning for the rights of consumers, only the industry (apart from: We strive to establish an association with other major producers, marketers, vendors and consumers in the industry) which again prompts the question, why should ordinary consumers donate to a Trade Association?
Also, should the ECA be required to subscribe to the ECF as a supplier with the same restrictions and priveliges that apply to other suppliers and who is the official spokeperson for the ECA?

Alan.

 

[OutWest]

I was wondering why an accountant wouldn't suffice to keep the IRS happy as surely the only requirement is that the ECA is shown to have not made a profit in any one year. So, if there is money left over, what happens to it?

I can answer this one. Contrary to popular belief, non-profit agencies are allowed to make a profit. The distinction between nonprofits and for-profit companies/agencies is what happens to the surplus. For-profit businesses may distribute their gains to the owners or shareholders. Nonprofits must reinvest surpluses back into the organization and its tax-exempt purpose.

As for why an accountant by him/her self wont suffice - for some aspects, an accountant would suffice. But, there are many more aspects to a non-profit which often requires legal counsel, etc. It becomes even more complicated when one wishes to act as a lobbyist or hire a lobbyist.

Note: I am not speaking on behalf of the ECA, these are simply my personal opinions.

 

[Babachoo]

To those who actually read my post and didn't attack me or assume that I have some agenda to attack the ECA or represent one of the ecigarette opponents, thank you. For the record, I work graveyard shift at a juvenile detention facility and during the day I run a music forum. I have no agenda other than protecting people when I see potential harm of the magnitude I have seen here in the form of the ECA. I really wish someone else would step up and start organizing an alternative that is based on protecting consumers and not a select few suppliers who can afford thousands of dollars worth of membership dues, who has no obligation to make any of their funding/expenditures/minutes public.

It's also interesting that the ECA only has a 56% approval rating according to this thread as of right now. I see it continuing to drop based on their refusal, or inability, to conduct themselves professionally here at ECF.

 

[Kate]

Babachoo, some of us have been trying to work on a grassroots organisation that represents and is run by consumers as a voluntary organisation, you might want to have a look - Right to Vape (link in my sig). The group is still small and not very active but it's a start and we will hopefully be able to represent ourselves in an effective way at some point.

I think the problem at the moment for some folk seems to be the sense of urgency in the States. Rather than put time and energy into organising ourselves it can be easier for some people to throw money at the problem hoping that will be an answer.

Some pioneers with strong personalities and some charisma could do a lot for us at Right to Vape.

My hope is that consumers will unite and join traders to represent us all. Co-operation is key here.

I understand most of the concerns you have raised about the ECA but maybe what we should try to do is work with what we have rather than rejecting it for not being perfect.

 

[Babachoo]

Babachoo, some of us have been trying to work on a grassroots organisation that represents and is run by consumers as a voluntary organisation, you might want to have a look - Right to Vape (link in my sig). The group is still small and not very active but it's a start and we will hopefully be able to represent ourselves in an effective way at some point.

I think the problem at the moment for some folk seems to be the sense of urgency in the States. Rather than put time and energy into organising ourselves it can be easier for some people to throw money at the problem hoping that will be an answer.

Some pioneers with strong personalities and some charisma could do a lot for us at Right to Vape.

My hope is that consumers will unite and join traders to represent us all. Co-operation is key here.

I understand most of the concerns you have raised about the ECA but maybe what we should try to do is work with what we have rather than rejecting it for not being perfect.

Thank you Kate, I briefly checked out the RTV site and I see potential with a little lack of direction and people taking the initiative to stand up and lead, but compared to leaders who simply ask for money, put out false information, and avoid questions or attack those who question their leadership, RTV is a breath of fresh air. I admire that RTV is not commercial in nature, no ads were found at all, and that you have the time to contribute at multiple forums with the levels of activity that you have. It takes passion to devote so much time to forums and it's nice to see that you are passionate enough to dedicate so much time to educating fellow vapers.

I have very little free time these days, but I will definitely explore RTV further and consider contributing to the discussions. I have a couple of initial thoughts and suggestions that I may pass along to you there via PM. Thanks for the info and the invite.

 

[Letzin Hale]

I wouldn't pay much attention to the poll as the percentages add up to 104.62!!!!8-o
Alan.


View Poll Results: Do we want or need the ECA
YES, the ECA will help our cause 37 56.92%
NO, waste of time 4 6.15%
YES but the ECA wont make any difference in the end 3 4.62%
NO, the big gov won't listen to an affiliated association anyways 3 4.62%
good idea in principle but the ECA need to get their act together 21 32.31%

 

[Babachoo]

I can't remember, but if the check boxes were square instead of circle, the poll most likely allowed more than one selection. That's the only way the numbers can add up to more than 100%, that is unless the poll was edited by mods or an admin which would add a vote but not a name and thus screw up the total percentages.

 

[katink]

It's just 4%, and the poll has 5 choices... so couldn't it be rounding off happening?

 

[yvilla]

Having read a couple of posts accusing Babachoo of attacking the ECA I had to read his/her entire postings on this thread. There was I almost joining the queue to jump on the 'hit 'em with a big stick bandwagon' when I realised that Babachoo was not attacking the ECA but was in fact asking some very pertinent questions without resorting to insults, mild or otherwise. I found the 'I wish you would just go away' comment a little sad as it is such a poor form of reply to what was presented as an incisive and eloquent post.

Sorry to make you sad.

My comments about Babachoo's attack on the ECA were not solely based on what was said in this thread, and I believe that was in fact apparent in my post itself. On the contrary, my comments were based on on his or her entire record of posting on ECF.

Forget everything I said in the other thread about possibly giving your organization a chance to earn my respect by addressing the questions you've ignored from myself and other users. This thread is the final nail in the coffin and you will will NEVER be able to earn my respect after revealing this BS money grabbing scam.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/eca/18031-eca-application-members.html#post296642

Tell me that's not an attack. And for what? The posting of the ECA membership application, with it's schedule of fees? Who the heck does he or she think is going to pay for lobbying? Why shouldn't retailer members of ECA pay membership and monthly fees to the organization so it can pay for lobbying at this critical point in time? And what's it to him or her or the rest of us consumers anyway? We are not being asked to pay those fees.

And the 3 posts on either side of the one quoted above, in HUGE red, blue and yellow font colors, again repeating the accusation "what a scam". That's not an attack? And that's only 4 posts out of his or her total posting history of 9 at the time.

And yet another post within those first 9 posts was the one slamming the ECA with these words:

I'll just conclude by saying that if it looks like crap, sounds like crap, and smells like crap, it must be crap,

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/eca/16231-please-donate-eca-5.html#post293544

... while at the same time giving out false "information", that the ECA's chosen status as a 501(c)[6] organization would not allow it to carry out one of it's primary purposes for existing, and exhorting all who read the post NOT to donate.

That's not an attack? I'd love to see what you think is an attack.

Bottom line, as I said previously, constructive criticism, yes that's fair game IMO, all out attacks, no.

 

[Letzin Hale]

If one were sensitive the 'crap' remark might have been a bit OTT, but the rest, including the BS money grabbing scam remark, was opinion. You might not like that opinion but it is entirely valid unless there is some form of censorship in place on here regarding self expression. My own opinion is that the ECA was set up by amateurs and still lacks the degree of professionalism that it needs to convince me of its credibility, but that's my opinion. If I am not entitled to express that or it is deemed in bad taste then I will go away.
Alan.

 

[yvilla]

My own opinion is that the ECA was set up by amateurs and still lacks the degree of professionalism that it needs to convince me of its credibility, but that's my opinion. If I am not entitled to express that or it is deemed in bad taste then I will go away.
Alan.

That is an opinion. It's valid to both have it and to express it, of course.

But if you don't see the difference between your expressing your opinion and what Babachoo has seemed intent on doing in each and every post since starting to post here (oops must be fair - except for that charger post), well that makes me a little sad.

 

[Letzin Hale]

quote=katink;301139]It's just 4%, and the poll has 5 choices... so couldn't it be rounding off happening?[/quote]

Well.......it states that 71 people have voted but the figures add up to 74!!



View Poll Results: Do we want or need the ECA
YES, the ECA will help our cause 39 54.93%
NO, waste of time 5 7.04%
YES but the ECA wont make any difference in the end 3 4.23%
NO, the big gov won't listen to an affiliated association anyways 4 5.63%
good idea in principle but the ECA need to get their act together 23 32.39%

Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 71. You have already voted on this poll

 

[laynies]

Well.......it states that 71 people have voted but the figures add up to 74!!



View Poll Results: Do we want or need the ECA
YES, the ECA will help our cause 39 54.93%
NO, waste of time 5 7.04%
YES but the ECA wont make any difference in the end 3 4.23%
NO, the big gov won't listen to an affiliated association anyways 4 5.63%
good idea in principle but the ECA need to get their act together 23 32.39%

Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 71. You have already voted on this poll

71 voters w/ 74 votes... entirely possible

 

[Letzin Hale]

71 voters w/ 74 votes... entirely possible

Feel free to elucidate, educate and enlighten
Alan.

 

[laynies]

Seriously?

Ok then..

Since it is multiple choice, a single voter can cast a vote for 1 or more options. Therefore, 1 person could vote for 2 items counting as 2 votes per 1 person. In fact when I voted I picked 2 of the options which then raised the total number of votes by 2.

Capiche?