NJOY to Discontinue Flavors, Takes Additional Steps to Prevent Underage Electronic Cigarette Use

[Treece]

Doesn't make this move any less idiotic.

Agreed. It also doesn't address the millions of current smokers who have yet to try PVs. The flavors are a big part of why vaping works.

So they take away the flavors, ban PVs where smoking is prohibited, can't make health claims ... exactly what is supposed to motivate smokers to switch?

 

[kristin]

Doesn't make this move any less idiotic.

Agreed. It also doesn't address the millions of current smokers who have yet to try PVs. The flavors are a big part of why vaping works.

So they take away the flavors, ban PVs where smoking is prohibited, can't make health claims ... exactly what is supposed to motivate smokers to switch?

It's not an idiotic move. It's brilliant. It takes away a huge argument point from the antis and is fighting against negative public perception. If they can't use the "it's targeting kids" argument, they lose a HUGE amount of ammunition against e-cigs.

I only hope that they'll offer "unflavored" and then we can flavor our own. I think we need to write ECA en masse and request that consideration - I can't see the antis being able to argue that no flavor=targeting kids.

I don't think this will hurt things at all. 99% of the people who come to ECF are looking for "the closest thing to a real cigarette in looks and flavor." That is what njoy is offering. Then, they'll come here to learn more and find out that they can buy some Lorann's and flavor their own!

So, we need the ECA to push offering unflavored as an option, so they can keep & build their client base. Contact them now, support their decision and request that they strongly consider that option!!

 

[Mac]

It's not an idiotic move. It's brilliant. It takes away a huge argument point from the antis and is fighting against negative public perception. If they can't use the "it's targeting kids" argument, they lose a HUGE amount of ammunition against e-cigs.

I only hope that they'll offer "unflavored" and then we can flavor our own. I think we need to write ECA en masse and request that consideration - I can't see the antis being able to argue that no flavor=targeting kids.

I don't think this will hurt things at all. 99% of the people who come to ECF are looking for "the closest thing to a real cigarette in looks and flavor." That is what Njoy is offering. Then, they'll come here to learn more and find out that they can buy some Lorann's and flavor their own!

So, we need the ECA to push offering unflavored as an option, so they can keep & build their client base. Contact them now, support their decision and request that they strongly consider that option!!

All well and good. I have always said that the Marketing team at Njoy is nothing short of brillaint.

Alienating potential members and defamating every mall kiosk in business all over ABC news regardless of their individual policies and moral scope is NOT very clever however and I don't get it. THAT is idiotic and despite the fact that NJoy is only a part of the ECA it is a big part. I would have to disagree that we need the ECA to do anything at this point except shut up and go away. They are a disgrace.

 

[Treece]

It's not an idiotic move. It's brilliant. It takes away a huge argument point from the antis and is fighting against negative public perception. If they can't use the "it's targeting kids" argument, they lose a HUGE amount of ammunition against e-cigs.

I only hope that they'll offer "unflavored" and then we can flavor our own. I think we need to write ECA en masse and request that consideration - I can't see the antis being able to argue that no flavor=targeting kids.

I don't think this will hurt things at all. 99% of the people who come to ECF are looking for "the closest thing to a real cigarette in looks and flavor." That is what Njoy is offering. Then, they'll come here to learn more and find out that they can buy some Lorann's and flavor their own!

So, we need the ECA to push offering unflavored as an option, so they can keep & build their client base. Contact them now, support their decision and request that they strongly consider that option!!

Except the vast majority of vapers don't come to ECF--or to any online forum.

Look, I hope you're right that it won't discourage new vapers (the tobacco flavor lasted about a week for me and most vapers I know, but maybe we're the exception).

The bigger picture is that the ECA is conceding something that's ludicrous to begin with. The ban on flavored cigarettes is ludicrous, since they exempted the one flavor that kids actually smoke and Big Tobacco actually sells, which is menthol. The actual market for other flavored cigarettes was always a tiny fraction, and none was produced by the big three tobacco companies.

Matt Salmon made a fact-based, logical argument when he said that the propensity for flavors is universal. Seems to be working for the alcohol industry, at any rate.

 

[VapingRulz]

IM A GROWN MAN WHY CANT THE NANNIES LEAVE ME ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i feel a little better now ... lets fire em all in 2010!!!!!

Yup - motion to vote ALL incumbents out of office as a means to send a very clear message to Washington. Enough is enough.

 

[Surf Monkey]

It's not an idiotic move. It's brilliant. It takes away a huge argument point from the antis and is fighting against negative public perception. If they can't use the "it's targeting kids" argument, they lose a HUGE amount of ammunition against e-cigs.

Pardon me, but I think that's utter hogwash. The flavors argument is the FDA's weakest point against these devices. Conceding that point at the outset amounts to a white flag. Why surrender right off the bat on the easiest point to refute?

 

[Surf Monkey]

The bigger picture is that the ECA is conceding something that's ludicrous to begin with. The ban on flavored cigarettes is ludicrous, since they exempted the one flavor that kids actually smoke and Big Tobacco actually sells, which is menthol. The actual market for other flavored cigarettes was always a tiny fraction, and none was produced by the big three tobacco companies.

Exactly. The ECA may as well go ahead and concede that e-cigarettes represent just as big a health risk as traditional smoking at this point, because making that concession would be just as absurd IMO.

 

[Our House]

Exactly. The ECA may as well go ahead and concede that e-cigarettes represent just as big a health risk as traditional smoking at this point, because making that concession would be just as absurd IMO.

Sadly, conceding that point makes no difference at all as far as the law is concerned. The companies in court right now are fighting for ecigs to be a tobacco product. What better way to achieve that than to put them on equal grounds as cigarettes (and then tell the consumer the REAL truth about combustion, etc. when selling to them)!

Unfortunately we, as the consumers, are losing to gov't agencies on both fronts. They declare ecigs to be drugs when it's convenient for their benefit (e.g. to ban sales to everyone) and then turn around and also declare ecigs to be cigarettes when it's convenient for their benefit (e.g. to prevent use under current tobacco laws). It's a xxxxty spot to be in, and I fear it won't change until the court case is over.

 

[kristin]

Pardon me, but I think that's utter hogwash. The flavors argument is the FDA's weakest point against these devices. Conceding that point at the outset amounts to a white flag. Why surrender right off the bat on the easiest point to refute?

It's not the FDA's arguing point - it's every other anti e-cig group's arguing point and it's WORKING to get them banned all over, regardless of how "weak" it seems to us. People believe it, so the truth doesn't matter.

It's the same way "they" got analog flavors banned. Kids weren't even buying them. Studies showed that most kids buy menthol and guess what - menthol is still available. The tobacco companies conceded the special flavors, because they knew by doing so that it would make the antis happy to have a "win" and it wouldn't stop the majority of their customers from buying their product. Njoy is now doing the same thing with their e-cigs.

By conceding flavors - which most vendors know people can flavor them themselves - they help keep e-cigs available in general. By continuing to argue for flavors, they'd keep the target placed on ALL e-cigs.

 

[Treece]

People believe it, so the truth doesn't matter.

This is exactly how the anti-smoking groups have been justifying their actions for decades. They did it for the same reasons you want to: It will save lives. Now they're so blinded by their own fanaticism that they're ready to ban something that could ... save lives.

It's not up to you or me or anyone else to decide the truth doesn't matter, why it doesn't matter, when it doesn't, or to whom. Nor is it up to you to bend it, stretch it, or flat-out discard it.

Anyway, we don't need to. The truth is on our side. It's our strength, not our weakness.

 

[Surf Monkey]

It's not the FDA's arguing point

Yes it is. They've made that point many times.

- it's every other anti e-cig group's arguing point and it's WORKING to get them banned all over, regardless of how "weak" it seems to us. People believe it, so the truth doesn't matter.

Oh, so people are ignorant, therefore you should cater to them? That's the logic? 3 million idiots can't be wrong? If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

Maybe it's just me, but I'd much rather see the ECA spreading the truth and helping educate people. The reality of the situation is that the vast majority of Americans have never even heard of PVs. If ASH, the FDA and the ECA are all telling people that "flavors are bad," then what's been accomplished, outside of feeding and propagating an ignorant viewpoint? I don't see how this helps the PV cause in any way.

It's the same way "they" got analog flavors banned. Kids weren't even buying them. Studies showed that most kids buy menthol and guess what - menthol is still available. The tobacco companies conceded the special flavors, because they knew by doing so that it would make the antis happy to have a "win" and it wouldn't stop the majority of their customers from buying their product. Njoy is now doing the same thing with their e-cigs.

That's not how I remember it at all. The way I remember it is that Phillip Morris lobbied to have flavored cigarettes banned because they knew that RJ Reynolds was basing a big part of their product strategy on flavorings. It's also why Phillip Morris was careful to exclude menthol (their biggest selling flavor) from the ban. As I remember it, ASH and others were just acting as dupes for the interests of a corporation looking to achieve a competitive advantage with the help of government intervention.

By conceding flavors - which most vendors know people can flavor them themselves - they help keep e-cigs available in general. By continuing to argue for flavors, they'd keep the target placed on ALL e-cigs.

And relegating PVs to niche, hobby status. Joe American isn't going to seek out flavorings and DIY some RY4. By conceding flavors you've effectively limited the popularity of PVs, conveniently wounding them so that it'll be that much easier when the FDA comes in for the final kill. The best weapon we have is popularity. The more these devices are used, the more widely they're consumed, the firmer ground we have to stand on. Banning flavors cedes their weakest point against us and gives up our strongest defensive weapon all in one fell swoop.

Really great job.

 

[kristin]

That's not how I remember it at all. The way I remember it is that Phillip Morris lobbied to have flavored cigarettes banned because they knew that RJ Reynolds was basing a big part of their product strategy on flavorings. It's also why Phillip Morris was careful to exclude menthol (their biggest selling flavor) from the ban. As I remember it, ASH and others were just acting as dupes for the interests of a corporation looking to achieve a competitive advantage with the help of government intervention.

Yep. Pretty smart on their part and it worked. Pre-emptive strike. Exactly what Njoy is doing.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Yep. Pretty smart on their part and it worked. Pre-emptive strike. Exactly what Njoy is doing.

A pre-emptive strike that involves cutting off your own arms doesn't seem in the least bit effective to me.

 

[kristin]

A pre-emptive strike that involves cutting off your own arms doesn't seem in the least bit effective to me.

I just don't think it's going to have the effect that you think it will. I guess time will tell.

That's not to say that I don't agree 100% that we need to educate the public - that is one of CASAA's main goals and one of the reasons I write my articles - I got sick of waiting for someone else to do it.

 

[Surf Monkey]

I just don't think it's going to have the effect that you think it will. I guess time will tell.

Indeed.

That's not to say that I don't agree 100% that we need to educate the public - that is one of CASAA's main goals and one of the reasons I write my articles - I got sick of waiting for someone else to do it.

And for the record, you do a FANTASTIC job with those. Keep up the good work. We don't agree on the flavor/mall ban, but we're absolutely on the same page when it comes to educating the public and I really admire the work you're doing in that area.

 

[Our House]

My take:

Getting a product's approval as easily as possible is the most important thing. It's a lot more important than fighting a much tougher battle and running a greater risk of not getting it approved at all.

Once the product reaches approval status, then it's easier for good things to happen (e.g. adding flavors, using it indoors etc.) and harder for bad things to happen (e.g. prescription only, outright ban, etc.).

 

[kristin]

Indeed.



And for the record, you do a FANTASTIC job with those. Keep up the good work. We don't agree on the flavor/mall ban, but we're absolutely on the same page when it comes to educating the public and I really admire the work you're doing in that area.

Thank you. And for the record - I don't agree with the ECA's stance on kiosks. I think they should have offered licensing & regulation, not elimination. THAT I think will hurt e-cigs, because so many people have their first experience with e-cigs at kiosks.

 

[kristin]

My take:

Getting a product's approval as easily as possible is the most important thing. It's a lot more important than fighting a much tougher battle and running a greater risk of not getting it approved at all.

Once the product reaches approval status, then it's easier for good things to happen (e.g. adding flavors, using it indoors etc.) and harder for bad things to happen (e.g. prescription only, outright ban, etc.).

Excellent point. Win the big stuff first. Once we get e-cigs approved and accepted, people will be more open to other options.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

My take:

Getting a product's approval as easily as possible is the most important thing. It's a lot more important than fighting a much tougher battle and running a greater risk of not getting it approved at all.

Once the product reaches approval status, then it's easier for good things to happen (e.g. adding flavors, using it indoors etc.) and harder for bad things to happen (e.g. prescription only, outright ban, etc.).

It is called inconsistant pleading Our House. Counsel for NJOY plead to the Court that it is a tobacco product. If NJOY represents to the Court that it is a tobacco product then it has to adhere to the current laws in place with regards to tobacco products.

Since the flavoring ban already went into effect with tobacco, NJOY is simply being constant with it's postion it has advanced to the Court.


Sun

 

[cruisedoc]

The e-cig opponents use the flavors as a weapon claiming they lure kids. We know it's BS, but an old fart legislator hears about 'candy' flavors designed to 'lure children' and it's effective. So they are doing this to take away that argument.