FDA FDA deeming regulation proposals

[Kent C]

Agreed with last point. Though we respondents can link to studies, and I'm sure CASAA will suggest as much.

As I've said elsewhere, I think any response that is citing (legitimate) scientific data ought to go to a database in addition to FDA so it is made abundantly clear that (back) in 2014, FDA was given a substantial amount of commentary regarding available 'data' and 'research' regarding what they said they were seeking info on. Otherwise, it could be later in 2014, or sometime in 2016, or perhaps still in 2025 that FDA claims 'to date, we have not seen any evidence (whatsoever) that helps us understand the effects eCigs will have on the public health.' And they could tell bald faced lie of 'we asked for this in our comment period, but no one provided that' or what was provided was not legitimate.

I see science as on our side, and I think FDA knows this, but has been able to play a game of sorts of not acknowledging that for various reasons (namely, because ANTZ controls TCA narrative). This proposal does open the door, and I'm sure us CASAA types will provide that, but if we are all so distrusting of FDA come time of actual rules/enforcement, then I'm not sure why anyone would be trusting of FDA collection process of commentary. If I write response that cites 11 scientific studies and have a rambling philosophical message as well (no seriously, I sometimes ramble), then I'd just copy and paste the scientific portion and submit to this large database that shows that yes, I was one of the respondents, and here are the linked research items that I submitted to FDA.

I'll say this. They're probably still stinging from the beating they got in the courts. That may be a factor. ...but emphasis on 'may'.

Another scenario could be - they put out the worst case scenario - when all they really wanted was a tax. And even if it's a heavy tax, if they leave all else alone, then many will be 'satisfied'*. And CASAA can say: they prevented a ban. It wouldn't be the first time for such a scenario. NRA has done it on a few occasions and there are many more - many leftist groups also can relate to that.

*even then, a black market will form.

 

[Kent C]

You might want to check the joyetech FB page. They've been publishing photos of how you can tell the difference between authentic and counterfiet batteries. IMO it was interesting.

I don't do FB, but thanks. Good to know. I know they have serial numbers on some of their products but not all. Same with Kanger.... I'll see if I can grab photos from google

 

[Lessifer]

I don't personally care if you're a vendor, as long as you don't try to sell stuff in the general threads, but I believe you're supposed to register.

Those who have made it far enough into their vape journey to be here know that the small businesses are who have made vaping what it is today. We will do what we can to keep vaping as vaper friendly as possible.

ETA: seriously though, the multiple posts commenting back to yourself... Maybe take a break and have a vape man.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Liquid mixers had better be prepared to eat a lot of it like cigarette makers did with taxes considering they've had all these years of 1000% markup.

Of course I'm not talking about the higher estimates, for those I'd just expect them to all close up. I don't think there is any amount of liquid you could sell to make $10m per revision back on unless you were the last liquid mixer in the country.

You've mentioned this 1000% markup several times.

Please explain how you get your numbers that permit a juice maker that margin. I find that to be a very difficult number to believe.



Roaring thunderously via Tapatalk...

 

[Danoman]

Can someone PLEASE post a bunch of SOMETHING so i'm not at the top...? Ummmm... please...? I feel like an idiot...

 

[Talyon]

Can someone PLEASE post a bunch of SOMETHING so i'm not at the top...? Ummmm... please...? I feel like an idiot...

I feel your pain, and I to also would love to hear from bonafide vendors. I'll stop there for now.

 

[EddardinWinter]

I feel your pain, and I to also would love to hear from bonafide vendors. I'll stop there for now.

The registered suppliers cannot post in this part of the forum.



Roaring thunderously via Tapatalk...

 

[Talyon]

Let's not go into panic mode here, we have some time to follow the path of our choosing. CASAA will assist in this.

 

[Sirius]

Why do we, an ostensibly free people, put up with government telling us what we may or may not eat, drink, or inhale?

Short answer Rossum -- Most have been conditioned to follow the flock. Sheeple lead to tune of.."we know what's good for you."

 

[Talyon]

The registered suppliers cannot post in this part of the forum.



Roaring thunderously via Tapatalk...

Yes I know that, and I shall check various Vendor forums for their thoughts, however maybe it wouldn't be so bad that they could have a voice within rules in this thread or one similar? Under the circumstances?

 

[Sirius]

The way I see it is, we have three choices to make.
1) Sit back and do nothing and let the FDA, Kidstapo, BT, and Pharm, run every vendor out of business.
2) Donate more to CASSA and let them handle it.
or
3) Raise as much hell as we can with our local state representatives with our voices on how e-cigs got us all off of cigarettes.That they save lives and put off no harmful second hand vapor.
BTW 2&3 can be considered as our best option.

 

[RebelGolfer72]

You've mentioned this 1000% markup several times.

Please explain how you get your numbers that permit a juice maker that margin. I find that to be a very difficult number to believe.



Roaring thunderously via Tapatalk...

I agree 1000%, there is no way the margins are that high.

Thing that many who like to argue is "they charge $xxxx.yy for selling $.000yy worth of material"... And in my opinion, really shows a lack of understanding the real world. Yes, a company will mark up things, however, the so-called gouging they do has to account for paying things such as: rental cost of the building they are using ($1500-3000/month is not uncommon for many suburban areas), cost of keeping the lights on in the place/heat on (what these places pay in a month is more like what most of us pay in 6 months at our homes). The cost of marketing/advertisement/sales(promotions/discounts). The cost of insurance for both the business and employees. The cost of inventory, and loss when something that doesn't sell has to be thrown out because it goes bad/expires/outdated. Engineering/research and development costs. Cost of loss due to theft, returns (can't sell as "new"), loss due to faulty product, and liabilities. Salaries of employees - including themselves (for someone running a shop/business, most likely no time to work another job...and that person needs to have money to live off of!). And ultimately, there needs to be SOME profit, or a business soon becomes a charity. And let's face it, with the stress, uncertainty and amount of work it takes to run a business, if there was no potential to make a profit at the end of the day, why would someone even want to open the business?


So yes, in large scale, the cost of materials on that $20 bottle of juice may only be $2, in reality, after all of the "overhead" is accounted for, the person selling it is lucky if they clear $2 in profit from it.

Here is a real number for you. In the company that I work, a field engineer will make on average of about $25/an hour. We may charge $225 an hour for him to show up on the job. It costs us about $120/hour for just his labor...plus we have the costs of his vehicle+fuel+expenses that come out of the perceived profits...also salaries of the coordinator and other support staff that work behind the scenes (accountants, legal, marketing, sales and so on). So what people see as "paying 1000% more than the engineer is being paid) isn't really as big of a profit as they like to rant about.

 

[RebelGolfer72]

Short answer Rossum -- Most have been conditioned to follow the flock. Sheeple lead to tune of.."we know what's good for you."

Add to the fact that people don't like to take responsibility for their own actions.

It's like the headline I read yesterday about the woman who died in a car crash that was caused by her posting to Facebook on her phone and missing a turn. Luckily, she didn't take anyone else out with her in the crash, but if she would, the knee-jerk reaction that the same people who want to ban vaping would have been "See! Facebook is dangerous! It has cost life after life...we must petition the FCC to make them shut Facebook down! Or at least make it pay-per-post. To keep tragedies like this from happening to innocent children and kittens of America!"

Sounds absurd, and far fetched, but it is an accurate analogy

 

[Schwiggiddy]

WE, my friends are on the same page... (there is an attitude that we used to have as a nation, when all hell broke out in Germany, France, Europe, and Russia...) WE took on Japan and all of Germany and all of them at the same time... they all awoken a beast, at that time. I wonder what that beast looks like now... glosser images, no. You won't see them, Supreme...? No, you won't see them. Naval...? No, again, you won't see them. Our Airforce, again... you won't see them. I'm TELLING YOU, this country has been taken over by the elitists you'd see in Star Wars, the movie and even more so the animation series. THIS is where we are... those nay sayers, prove me wrong, looking at the reality YOU live.

I've been not wanting to say this BUT, it's the world we live in today... it's truth, it's fact and it how it is.

Anyway, lets go have a little fun with what 'WAS' in our past... what brought us to this, where we are now...?

There was a time too when any criticism of the President was labelled as "unpatriotic" or "enabling the enemy." Now it seems it's just the opposite: it's ONLY patriotic to OPPOSE the President at every turn, and "enabling the enemy" would be to do things like give our own people health insurance or raise the minimum wage.

Ask yourself, Mr. Guy That Posts A Ton In This Thread, where is the divisive rhetoric coming from? Who is championing a so-called "sovereign citizen" who is about the most Un-American guy I've ever seen?

 

[Sirius]

Yes I know that, and I shall check various Vendor forums for their thoughts, however maybe it wouldn't be so bad that they could have a voice within rules in this thread or one similar? Under the circumstances?

I've been looking at a few of my vendors on their interweb thingie. So far..nothing.

 

[sonicdsl]

Registered suppliers and forum suppliers are free to post in here, so long as they stay on topic and don't promote their own businesses. I've seen a couple already who have in other threads.

 

[skoony]

Sirius,

As a liberal, I've had many occasions to dislike FOX. I think it's very telling that I am now defending and applauding them. The e-cig issues have definitely turned me against the Democrats. (Still a liberal, though; I suspect that's incurable for me).

winston churchill was to have said(please note mr churchhill was a known chronic plagiarizer,he was extremely well read.)
"if in your 20's you are not a liberal,you have no heart.if in your 40's your not a conservative,you have no brain."
regards
mike

 

[Jman8]

I think your missing the point of why I suggest banning cig-a-likes. First, I don't expect it to pass. Second, the fastest way to disarm an objection is to agree. Ends the normalization concept - give it to them just like we all agree that minors should not have access to nicotine. No objection, we'll even help. (of course they'll figure something else out eventualy) and Third, we will dissociate ourselves with BT.

All things I disagree with, especially the ban against minors. Contrary to most, or many, I don't care to disassociate with BT, until such a time that it is proven BT = ANTZ.

There are some who see BT as some value to the vaping community and IMO that's nuts. Looking at local state fights, what I've seen is BT do very, very little until MAYBE (and a big one at that) they show up at the last minute only if our interests are aligned with theirs. Where were they earlier? Nowhere. Basically they are setting us up to fight their battles for them, over and over again. I can assure you that BT is not interested in seeing the vaping community survive.

Let us agree to disagree on this last point.

The idea of painting a target on cigalikes is to take a swing at BT. I'm not saying that's the only way to do it. That's just what I thought of. If that were suggested, I'm pretty sure there would be a lot of cockroaches crawl out from under the carpet swinging. And we wouldn't be one of them. Chances are we'd still work with them when convienent and vice versa.

But I have little doubt there was the hand of BT behind the deeming regulations. I can't prove it. They were just a little too happy with the regulations. It's more of a what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It also creates an opening for vapers to mention how important it is to customize, adjust the delivery and support small business, etc.

I can accept that BT played a part in shaping regulations, but also see most big vaping vendors doing the same, and telling their customers that they did so.

When we respond in comment, we too will be shaping regulations. All you who want a ban against minors and note this in your comments will be on record for a) agreeing with FDA on regulations and 2) seeking a ban. Guess how well that sits with me?

Cigalikes are here to stay, just as vaping is here to stay. I reckon cigalikes will be regulated, at a superficial level, differently than other hardware. My cigalike product, which I've used 99% of time I've been vaping in 2+ years is not owned by BT, but the smokes that I still choose to smoke are. When I went cold turkey, I didn't hate on BT. Not a game I'm all that interested in.

I don't expect BT, or corporate style vaping vendors, to fight the fights we fight and thus to shape policy like a consumer approaches this. I hope we are all on the same side, but even us consumers can't say as much. I principally oppose bans to minors and advocate vaping everywhere. From my perspective, that makes me very concerned about consumer vaping rights. From another consumer's perspective, I'm misguided. So, if some of us are saying BT is misguided, I take that with a grain of salt. Always up for having this discussion/debate, but hard to get around certain things when a mind is made up and won't budge.

 

[skoony]

hi all,
i've read all the posts so far.there are a lot of angles being presented to all
aspects of the proposed regs from the FDA.
the topic that concerns me the most is the so called registration process.
i haven't made up my mind on the hardware side yet but,as e-juice with nicotine
will most certainly have to be registered here are my thoughts on that.
first a lot has been discussion on the cost.i have heard numbers from hundreds of dollars
to 10 million dollars for each and every item.i think in a month or two some realistic numbers
should be coming forth.
now research.it seems to me that we know whats in juice,propylene glycol,vegetable glycerin,
nicotine,and food flavoring and coloring.
individually and in some cases used together these have all been approved as safe by the FDA.the FDA must have on file all
the applications they passed for these.so just pull these applications,take all the studies
that were used to prove this,and resubmit those with each and every product.
along with all the studies cassa has listed on there web site this would be quite formidable.
the FDA would be hard pressed to come up with a reason to say juice was not a safer
alternative than smoking.in no way they could compare it to smoking.
they would have to contradict a lot of already approved products to do so.
we could sort of hoist them on there own petard.
i know it doesn't quite literally work that way.i'm just thinking that something along
these lines for our individual responses to the FDA and our elected officials.

running this up the flag pole to see if any one salutes regards,
mike

 

[Myk]

You've mentioned this 1000% markup several times.

Please explain how you get your numbers that permit a juice maker that margin. I find that to be a very difficult number to believe.



Roaring thunderously via Tapatalk...

It costs me >5¢/ml to DIY. I guarantee they get it cheaper, 1000% (50¢/ml after markup at my cost) is actually pretty low ball.

Even if you include a glass bottle and childproof cap at minimal bulk prices (my cost) you end up with >$2 for a 30ml bottle, x10 = $20. Yes 1000% is a pretty good guess even when including marking up the bottle.
Note that I am saying markup and not profit margin (in case you want to start claiming overhead like RebelGolfer72 does).