They do? Why on earth would they do that? Perhaps they trust BT to be BT. That even I trust them to do. They’ve been doing it since at least the 1930s and seem unable to change even if they want to (which I doubt they even do)
- Status
It’s kind of cool. Never seen him genuinely ...... off before. The vaping actually makes it better. He literally steams. Was it the Irish or the Scottish who have a big dragon on their coat of arms? He’s definitely got that going on.
The FDA I cannot speak to. I’ve consumed probably a larger than average amount of media in my lifetime though.
Back before Ronald Regan(sp?) stuff did work. More or less. What we have seen over the last 30 or 40 years is a gradual removal of safeguards mostly implemented by the FDR administration to keep things from going sideways.
Media:
There used to be limits on how much marketers could lie. There used to be limits on the ability of a single company to control a media monopoly in a given area. There used to be limits on how much control advertisers and executives could have over the output of a media group. There used to be limits on the quality of facts a newsgroup could use.
There even used to be limits of what even constituted news.
All these are gone.
I personally blame a single man, but that’s my pet tinfoil hat theory and I won’t bore you with it.
So I started listening at the suggested 17:03 mark, and he seems to have twisted a basic fact about who it is that even made the announcement/statement within just two minutes. First he spends a bit of time telling us Juul is a disease ... then he gets to the announcement:
17:48 "this is from Altria ... which has a 35% stake in Juul"
(ok, this is true ... the announcement/statement is supposedly from Altria, who do have a 35% stake in Juul)
18:09 "this is the company that owns Juul ... well they don't own it, they have a massive majority share in it"
(uhm ... 35% is not a massive majority share ... it is not a majority share at all)
18:42 "what you're reading here folks, is Altria and Juul now announcing ..."
(wait a sec, this was a supposed announcement/statement from Altria ... not Altria and Juul)
19:05 "this is the damage that Juul is now doing ..."
(and now he just says it is Juul ... sheesh)
Sorry, but there isn't any point to my listening further than that.
17:48 "this is from Altria ... which has a 35% stake in Juul"
(ok, this is true ... the announcement/statement is supposedly from Altria, who do have a 35% stake in Juul)
18:09 "this is the company that owns Juul ... well they don't own it, they have a massive majority share in it"
(uhm ... 35% is not a massive majority share ... it is not a majority share at all)
18:42 "what you're reading here folks, is Altria and Juul now announcing ..."
(wait a sec, this was a supposed announcement/statement from Altria ... not Altria and Juul)
19:05 "this is the damage that Juul is now doing ..."
(and now he just says it is Juul ... sheesh)
Sorry, but there isn't any point to my listening further than that.
I get what you are saying and yes some of his points are somewhat incorrect, but no matter the % of ownership, Altria and Juul are inexorably linked now. Make no mistake we are fighting a war and Juul and Altria just formed the "Axis" and now it is up to us "Allies" to stop them....both. The only way to stop Altria from using their stake in Juul to kill the rest of the vape industry, forcing people to use their expensive product (which could end up a near monopoly), while they reap huge profits, is for us to kill Juul first. Maybe I am missing something, but I see no other way.
No, it was not originally Altria or Juul's idea, but allowing a company to support this crappy idea with no repercussions from their customers WILL eventually lead to the death of vaping as we know it. Consumers have to demand freedom of choice, or it WILL be taken. This is not an IF but a WHEN.
I love Evolv DNA boards, but if they came out in support of a ban on flavors, or a ban on nonDNA devices I would boycott them as well. We have to show these companies that if they side against us, we will side against them.
it is these days. Most of any given stock is owned by mutual funds which are for all intents and purposes robots. They’re non sentient. They behave extremely predictably and if you pay a bit of attention they don’t matter at all as far as actual control is involved. If Atria has the biggest single stake, and that stake is bigger than what any other single sentient group can put together they effectively own control.
now you’re just nit picking. You don’t like the direction he is taking so you’re looking for tiny language problems
Probably not. Your mind seems made up.
So you’re saying it’s too late for that one. Doing this would effectively either turn you into a drug dealer, or force your wife to give up cheap protonated nicotine.
Pretty much. She can't vape base, so a prescription for salts would mean she would either end up back smoking, or paying a crap ton more than what I am spending for DIY.
I'm a regular person.
I don't really like any of the pod style vape systems I tried.
Maybe by "regular people" you mean, "speaking for myself "
no, but it looks like it might be less bad than the alternative of just letting JUUL and BT kill off every bit of vaping except themselves
nope. It was the idea of BT in an attempt to kill vaping. The government resisted it and won.
it isn’t even remotely contradictory behavior. They did it in one place and it worked, and now they are about to apparently do the exact same thing in another
Correct. Exactly what BT has been crying for for years because they were barred from selling those flavors themselves for the same reason
Yep. People are hooked now.
Yep. Convenience stores were punished by the FDA for not carding. They deliberately DIDN’T pull flavors from vape shops to give them an edge because they do card. So BT wants to change that so everyone can’t sell flavors not just them. Just like they’ve been trying for years now.
Both for as long as they can I suspect. Or until enough people are hooked and they can dump flavors and put the vape shops against the wall.
Juul doesn't support a ban on flavors. Juul sells flavors. They just sell them on their website instead of stores. That move may have actually delayed proposed government action that would affect all vape companies.
Also the statement was conditional. The condition was good age verification practices. And that is something that Juul claims to use on their web store. Other companies might improve their age verification. Some still use a check box. If they use good age verification then they've met the condition.
Last edited:
Depends on how they word the law. There were personal use exemptions for
for a long time before it was fully legalized. Personal use exemptions or even style prescription cards would solve the issue. You wouldn’t be able to sell it to anyone though.As far as I know, Juul Labs is still a private company (it is not a publicly traded stock), and Altria's 35% is not a controlling interest (either factually or effectively). If you have evidence to the contrary feel free to share.
It isn't nitpicking ... he starts by saying Juul is some evil disease. Why? Well first look at this announcement/statement by Altria, then listen to me conflate Altria and Juul in little (nitpicking) steps, at the end of which, tada ... Juul is an evil disease.
If that's the kind of confirmation-biased logic you wish to follow, have at it.
If I were uber-rich and bought a large (but non-controlling) stake in Vape-Company-X, and then proceeded to use more of my wealth to lobby for regulations that might harm other vape companies and benefit Vape-Company-X (thereby benefitting me) ... should you kill Vape-Company-X ... or just me?
. None specifically. Not being publically traded may change things. The level of control BT gained over JUUL becomes a currently unknown rather than an absolute. The number 36% is interesting though. Not a round 35%, but 36%. I don’t know enough about corporate structures and law in general or JUUL’s particular situation to even surmise what exactly it means. It probably needs to be looked into though. JUUL is certainly behaving like it’s being controlled.
Your statement is based on believing is JUUL not being controlled by BT. His statement is based on his belief that it is. IF BT controls JUUL he is correct. I personally suspect that it does, at least to some extent based on sudden about faces JUUL has announced on basic stances. What form that control might take and how powerful it might be I do not know. I kind of want to know.
It seems you assume 0% control while he assumes 100% control. I suspect neither is correct, but I have no data. Confirmation biased logic isn’t logic. It’s an attempt to manipulate through pseudo logic.
You did seem to identify a possible major flaw in his logic though. The assumption that he is trying to manipulate is unlikely though. He has always struck me as a pretty straight shooter.
I think the take away is that the nature of that 36% stake needs to be looked at hard. IMHO that it does grant effective control is definitely possible. Whether or not his statement is merely a conspiracy theory as you seem to contend is unknown, at least to me. As I said though I don’t know much about corporate structure. I assumed JUUL was publicly traded. It’s definitely big enough to be. He may have too. The concept that it is not though doesn’t completely negate the possibility in my eyes. A lot of people seem to think so, and one of them heads the FDA. That guy probably is in a position to know.
Last edited:
If Vape-Company-X was your ONLY weakness then kill Vape-Company-X is the correct answer. Follow the logic, if you are a vaper then by definition you are already boycotting Altria, so how, as a consumer, can you impact their bottom line (which is the ONLY thing Corporations understand)? Answer, you have to boycott the vaping products that they have a financial stake in, which in this case is unfortunately Juul.
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate Juul and I would take no pleasure in making them go out of business, but there is no other way to impact Altria. Now if Juul buys back the stake Altria bought then they are off the hook.
Depends on how they word the law. There were personal use exemptions for
You mean like how they can't currently sell to anyone under 18?
So I did a bit of googling.
Working Control
20% is officially considered working control of a company. apparently in practice it is much more variable.
- Status
Similar threads
