JUUL dancing with the devil.....*

[stols001]

I remember this really wonderful time when like, the separate but equal rule was applied and restaurants and bars were like, able to have separate areas and ventilation systems for smokers and non-smokers. It was so great. You'd get looks if you took your five year old into the "bad" section but it seemed everyone was just FINE with it otherwise.

That was actually due to the restaurant and bar industry lobby (in my state anyway) they were terrified they were gonna lose business otherwise. It did not last long even though everyone was HAPPY.

So I guess I have to think of it (if I use the African American analogy) is that non smokers CARE about smokers and vapers. They want us to have EQUAL access to non-smoking spaces, the whole damn world of them.

I have no clue politically what's going on any more, it's like totally schizophrenic! Burn vapers at stake! Tax them to death! Make the vaping age 21 and the smoking age 18, so kids have 3 years to get addicted to tobacco first! (Seriously my state did that as their very FIRST vaping ordinance and I totally believe THAT was their logic, although I am a cynic.)

But yes, tobacco and vape are in a rather unhappy marriage at the moment. I wish all the players involved would just pack up their opinions and Go Home. And return in 50 years to see what the free market has done, etc.

Anna

 

[dripster]

Altria seems to think there's continued phenomenal growth potential for Juul.

What do you guess the revenue of Juul will be like after the powers that be come up with the ingenious idea to either ban (or use profound taxations/regulations to effectively force out of business the manufacturer of) every last vaping system that doesn't closely resemble a Juul in terms of things like having an internal battery with severely limited battery power resulting in severely limited cloud production with no easy way to rebuild or modify so that the vast majority of smokers can't in any way successfully use it for an actual smoking cessation tool that works well? Have you ever thought about that for a small minute?

 

[dripster]

Do you know a trojan horse when you see it? I'll give you guys a hint: it's got a cowboy riding on its back.

 

[Rossum]

What do you guess the revenue of Juul will be like after the powers that be come up with the ingenious idea to either ban (or use profound taxations/regulations to effectively force out of business the manufacturer of) every last vaping system that doesn't closely resemble a Juul in terms of things like having an internal battery with severely limited battery power resulting in severely limited cloud production with no easy way to rebuild or modify so that the vast majority of smokers can't in any way successfully use it for an actual smoking cessation tool that works well?

I disagree with the premise that you ended this run-on sentence with.

Juul was not yet on the market when I switched from my 40+ a day habit in 2013. If they had been, and I had started with them, I'm fairly confident I would have succeeded just as quickly as I did with the gear I purchased then. I did try a Juul when they were relatively new in 2015. Although I concluded that it wasn't for me at that time, I did think it would make an excellent stealth-vaping or backup device, and ended up carrying it as a backup for quite some time.

Today, I look at it this way: If all my existing gear and consumable supplies somehow disappeared, and Juul (or Juul-like devices) were the only thing available, I wouldn't be very happy about it, but I would use it rather than going back to smoking.

So, will I make a prediction regarding Juul's future revenues? No, I won't. But consider this: Juul has grown from zero to $1.5 billion of revenue in less than four years while competing with every other type of vape system available, ranging from BT's cig-alikes to the high-powered DL gear that some people favor....

 

[zoiDman]

... things like having an internal battery with severely limited battery power resulting in severely limited cloud production with no easy way to rebuild or modify so that the vast majority of smokers can't in any way successfully use it for an actual smoking cessation tool that works well? ...

That's Funny... Because that Very Accurately Describes what myself, and Tens of Thousands of Others like myself, quit Smoking with.

I think sometimes when someone wasn't around when things were Different, that they can get a Skewed Perspective. And sometimes think that the Only way things can work are with the things that are currently Available Today.

 

[r77r7r]

baffles me that BT and BP couldn't come up with a juul device on their own. they couldn't see the profit?? must be where we're at with fda guidelines. easier to just hop on the back of someone else's cart. duck a little and pretend you're not really there.

 

[Rossum]

baffles me that BT and BP couldn't come up with a juul device on their own.

I don't think BP wants to be seen as being in the "recreational" nicotine business.

BT tried and failed. See MarkTen and Vuse. I don't think anticipated Juul's success, and if they tried to compete directly, Juul would go after them for patent infringement with the nic salt patent they hold.

 

[Opinionated]

Deleted.

 

[Nermal]

[QUOTE="dripster, post: 21427527, member: 302679" If everyone quits smoking till there no longer exist any smokers, then the anti-smokers have no-one left that they can still persecute. [/QUOTE]

It almost sounds like you are saying some people just like to tell others what they can and cannot do.

 

[zoiDman]

baffles me that BT and BP couldn't come up with a juul device on their own. they couldn't see the profit?? must be where we're at with fda guidelines. easier to just hop on the back of someone else's cart. duck a little and pretend you're not really there.

I think in some ways, BT was stuck in "IBM" thinking. That they were Big and Dominate. That they were in control of there own Destiny. And people like JUUL were like Compaq. An Annoyance. But Not a Threat.

And I can't say that I 100% Blame them.

Because you need to set the Way-Back Machine to Early 2014. That is about when you would Need to start a New Product to get under the 8-8-16 line in the Sand. And think what the e-Cigarette Landscape looked like. And where Most felt things were heading.

A MarkTen or a Vuse would have done Much Better in a Heavily FDA Enforced post 8-8-16 Market. And are still (most likely) PMTA-able.

 

[Rossum]

I think in some ways, BT was stuck in "IBM" thinking. That they were Big and Dominate.

An attitude that I imagine was strongly reinforced by the Marlboro Protection Act.

A MarkTen or a Vuse would have done Much Better in a Heavily FDA Enforced post 8-8-16 Market. And are still (most likely) PMTA-able.

Would they? I think those products got their clocks cleaned by Juul, not the open systems that we use. Juul also met the 8/8/16 cut-off, and stated back in 2015 or early 2016 that they intended to apply for a PMTA. I also don't think there's much question that Juul would have had the resources to get an application in by the original 8/8/18 deadline.

 

[zoiDman]

An attitude that I imagine was strongly reinforced by the Marlboro Protection Act.

Winner - Winner. Chicken Dinner.

Would they? I think those products got their clocks cleaned by Juul, not the open systems that we use. Juul also met the 8/8/16 cut-off, and stated back in 2015 or early 2016 that they intended to apply for a PMTA. I also don't think there's much question that Juul would have had the resources to get an application in by the original 8/8/18 deadline.

I do think they would have Done Better.

Not overtake JUUL better. But better as in Not Fall On Your Face Better.

 

[dripster]

I disagree with the premise that you ended this run-on sentence with.

Juul was not yet on the market when I switched from my 40+ a day habit in 2013. If they had been, and I had started with them, I'm fairly confident I would have succeeded just as quickly as I did with the gear I purchased then. I did try a Juul when they were relatively new in 2015. Although I concluded that it wasn't for me at that time, I did think it would make an excellent stealth-vaping or backup device, and ended up carrying it as a backup for quite some time.

Today, I look at it this way: If all my existing gear and consumable supplies somehow disappeared, and Juul (or Juul-like devices) were the only thing available, I wouldn't be very happy about it, but I would use it rather than going back to smoking.

So, will I make a prediction regarding Juul's future revenues? No, I won't. But consider this: Juul has grown from zero to $1.5 billion of revenue in less than four years while competing with every other type of vape system available, ranging from BT's cig-alikes to the high-powered DL gear that some people favor....

It isn't a premise. Rather, it is just a common observation.

You talk about judging it based on your perception you had a few years AFTER you had already stopped a 40+ a day habit, but my point was there's a gap much, MUCH wider than the length of my run-on sentence between 1/ a relapse prevention tool for ex-smokers or a temporary backup for smokers trying to quit and 2/ a smoking cessation tool for smokers who have never tried to quit by using a REAL smoking cessation tool before. The former type tool (and also your average "starter kit" that has a lot more in common with that than it has in common with a REAL smoking cessation tool) can pretty much effortlessly be flogged under the guise of "your premise is flawed". The makebelief I was referring to earlier in the thread gets propelled exactly by flogging it in this way.

 

[dripster]

That's Funny... Because that Very Accurately Describes what myself, and Tens of Thousands of Others like myself, quit Smoking with.

I think sometimes when someone wasn't around when things were Different, that they can get a Skewed Perspective. And sometimes think that the Only way things can work are with the things that are currently Available Today.

Hardly anyone ever mentions the people who have tried to quit smoking with it and failed so they are still smokers, many of whom completely lost interest in vaping so they continue to be still smokers as a result, and so they aren't usually to be found in places like a vaping forum website, either lurking or actively posting. I think often times when someone was around when things were different, that they can get a skewed perspective about these failure rates and about how much these failure rates can be reduced further by simply acknowledging the genuine importance of several of the new technologies instead of the classical old "what worked for me should work for you because, if it turns out that it doesn't, then your own skewed perspective is why it doesn't". The simple fact a certain kind of vaping setup didn't exist yet at the time when you quit smoking, also means you never had the chance to try it for a smoking cessation tool. To be able to try that, you'd first have to become a smoker again. So there's your bias.

 

[dripster]

It almost sounds like you are saying some people just like to tell others what they can and cannot do.

What I'm saying is some people just like to get paid royally in exchange for spreading a whole bunch of cheap lies and keeping those lies alive for as long as it takes to get more money, even if that means throwing "the others" lovingly under the bus.