All I'm saying is that a true victory would have been if the FDA had had its hands tied and was unable to classify ecigs as either a drug delivery device, or as a tobacco product.
It's a bit of a catch 22. If nicotine was synthesized, not extracted, they couldn't call it a tobacco product. But that would give them a stronger case for it being a "drug" and a "drug delivery system". So it is probably best that they CAN classify it as a tobacco product. 100 years of BT fighting the FDA over whether or not nicotine is a drug, finally paid off.
So what is tobacco, is it a food, or a drug? It must be a food...
This opens up a lot of doors for government. It may not turn out to be a worse case scenario, but no amount of taxation and regulation can be as freeing as none at all. Worst case scenario, as a tobacco product, they could treat ecigs as harshly as they treat analog cigarettes - before the ruling, they only wanted to, now they have the ability, at least in theory.
Best case scenario, they tax them at the low end like snus, and leave the flavors alone, like cigars (though they are going after those as well, and flavored cigars will probably soon be banned).
In regulated and heavily taxed industries such as tobacco and alcohol, big money players and government win, small businesses and consumers lose - period, end of discussion, you can't argue with history. Basic economic theory as learned in college economics, if you tax something, you get less of it. Of course there is a lot of market share in the tobacco industry for ecigs to eat into. When you tax something, you get consolidation in the market. This is an absolute guarantee, less efficient companies that can currently stay afloat, go out of business when the taxes take effect, more efficient companies take over their market share.
Best case scenario, they get taxed lightly, which will still force some vendors out of business and effect the the variety of products available, if even only slightly. This "win" can't lower the costs or prevent government meddling, it is a ruling that gives them the ability to tax and meddle, something they didn't previously have. Period.
How often does the best case scenario happen? In the tobacco world, only to the least popular and least harmful products.
Currently vaping is both, and will always remain less harmful than smoking.
Doesn't the vaping industry and community want to see it expand and overtake smoking? I know I do. If that happens in the tobacco industry, that means eventually higher taxes and regulation than if vaping remains a fringe element. How much remains a mystery until it becomes a reality.
The curiously ridiculous lack of the FDA's ability to regulate the chemical additives (except flavoring, which they have the power to ban), in tobacco products means that if BT gets in the game and wants to put ammonia in your ecig, the FDA isn't going to stop them.
Vaping is already a trillion dollar industry. Now that the FDA has put ecigs in the tobacco aisle next to the analogs (figuratively speaking, but soon to be literally speaking), if you don't think BT is going to want in on that action, you're smoking more than analogs.
Whether it is BT, or simply the wealthiest and most efficient ejuice vendors that push some of the smaller ones out of business once the taxes go into effect, you can expect to see packs of prefilled carts/cartos and bottles of juice next to the snus and analogs at your local convenient store. Even if there are still online vendors, BT and/or the large distributors of ejuice aren't going to pass up the chance to get their wares on the store shelves next to the shiny red and white boxes of Marlb0ros (now that they can do so, now that their product is just another tobacco product) - and who can blame them.
Those items on the store shelves will be more convenient, which is NOT a BAD thing necessarily, but it is a game changer. Online vendors will lose business, or at least market share as more people switch to (or start) vaping. The more successful brands will be more competitive, further forcing others out of business, or limiting their growth - consolidating the industry, just as has happened with cigarettes and hard alcohol.
In years to come, vaping will be less about people ordering juice online, and more about people buying stuff in convenient stores, and as big name brands get more and more popular, the industry will slowly begin to look more like the cigarette/snus industry, and less like the current industry.
That isn't fear mongering, that's just how things work.
Maybe you can buy a tobacco leaf in a cigar shop or in a handful of select online tobacco shops... but where do well over 99% of all tobacco leaves end up, hanging in a cigar shop, waiting for some tobacco hobbyist to buy them? No, they end up in shiny cardboard boxes, wrapped in plastic with a government tax stamp on them, in a gas station. The same will happen to vaping supplies, to some extent, though maybe not as drastically as for other tobacco products.
Can you start your own cigarette company, sell your own brand of smokes? Sure, it's a free country, but the odds of survival are against you in a heavily taxed and regulated market. Ecigs are now a part of that market, they are no longer in legal and economic limbo. They are no longer in a free market. There is no going back now. The FDA didn't get their first choice, they got their second choice, and that is pretty much set in stone.
The face of the industry is going to change as a result of this ruling. Flavored ejuice may not be banned, but it isn't unreasonable to think that the FDA will push for that, they've done it with cigarettes and plan to do it with cigars. So far no plan to do it with chew, snus or pipe tobacco, but those are farther down on the tobacco food chain. Their stated goal is to ban all non-tobacco flavored tobacco products of which ecigs are now a member. It isn't fear mongering, it is a possibility.
You might be able to buy a cigar or tobacco leaf online, but most cigarette sales online are illegal. Technically, an intrastate sale that obeys state laws and taxes would be legal. If ecigs ever get rockstar status in the tobacco industry like analogs have, don't expect to be able to order them from out of country or out of state.
If Canada can stop shipments from the U.S., then customs can stop shipments from overseas. Which is more likely, a shipment getting confiscated of a totally untaxed and unregulated novelty item, or a shipment of a legally classified tobacco product that is regulated and taxed?
Fewer legal channels means fewer legal suppliers, and more consolidation in the industry. This isn't fear mongering, this is how commerce of regulated items actually occurs. Could I buy a bottle of untaxed, and unapproved hard alcohol from a Chinese mom and pop operation that isn't licensed to distribute to the U.S.? Sure, and I probably will get my shipment... but there is a risk it gets confiscated. Some suppliers on the margin will voluntarily close up shop. There may not be MUCH consolidation due to legal considerations, but there will be some, and that amount of consolidation will grow as vaping takes over more market share from the rest of the tobacco industry.
It isn't fear mongering, it is the reality of the legal and economic factors of an industry that suddenly becomes a taxed and regulated industry. This sort of scenario is taught in college economics classes. Regulation and taxation puts pressure on the industry, the industry responds in a predictable manner, though the extent depends on factors that are hard to quantify.
If they instead choose to tax e-liquid like whole tobacco it would be by the ounce and obviously considerably LESS than the rate cigarettes are taxed. 
