PayPal Strikes Non-Nicotine Website

Status
Not open for further replies.

Randall Fox

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Feb 9, 2009
452
172
Sparks, NV, USA
www.myPVshop.com
Just to show that PayPal is on an ignorant and arbitrary rampage, take a look at this website. myPVshops.com - Smoking Simulators

We were setting up a new website to sell "smoking simulators" that contain no nicotine or tobacco products. We were doing this to comply with PayPal and FDA guidelines that implied e-cigs were bad because they contained nicotine.

PayPal shut down the website, citing the FDA warnings against the electronic cigarettes. The FDA warnings that PayPal linked us to specifically warned about the nicotine addiction, "for the children", etc.

SO, PP says that electronic cigarettes are bad because they have nicotine, but if you try to sell without nicotine they are bad because they look like other products that do contain nicotine?

We've submitted a request to PayPal to review their decision, but it's been over 24 hours and we have not heard back from them.

I guess if it even looks like a cigarette it must be illegal or dangerous?

Even though no laws have yet been passed?

Even though there is no research showing any negative effects?
 

CHUCKLEHEAD

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 19, 2009
1,830
36
Redneck Rivera
Just to show that PayPal is on an ignorant and arbitrary rampage, take a look at this website. myPVshops.com - Smoking Simulators

We were setting up a new website to sell "smoking simulators" that contain no nicotine or tobacco products. We were doing this to comply with PayPal and FDA guidelines that implied e-cigs were bad because they contained nicotine.

PayPal shut down the website, citing the FDA warnings against the electronic cigarettes. The FDA warnings that PayPal linked us to specifically warned about the nicotine addiction, "for the children", etc.

SO, PP says that electronic cigarettes are bad because they have nicotine, but if you try to sell without nicotine they are bad because they look like other products that do contain nicotine?

We've submitted a request to PayPal to review their decision, but it's been over 24 hours and we have not heard back from them.

I guess if it even looks like a cigarette it must be illegal or dangerous?

Even though no laws have yet been passed?

Even though there is no research showing any negative effects?
MY GOD AT THOSE PRICES YOU WILL BE LUCKY TO SELL ANY AT ALL!!!!!!!:evil:
 

Randall Fox

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Feb 9, 2009
452
172
Sparks, NV, USA
www.myPVshop.com
Sorry... It is a nice looking site.. Much better than the Liberty site. Why does the page load way off to the right. I have to scroll over to see anything...

I was still working on cross-browser compatibility when PP shut it down. The site has only been up about a week, and was only up for live server testing of the cart, account, payment, and other major functions.

I'm going to end up making it into a full website once I get the time, but for now that project is on hold due to many other issues, including our move out of California last weekend to get away from AB400.

p.s. what browser are you using? I'd like to check out that problem.
 

Kate51

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Mar 27, 2009
3,031
22
78
Argyle Wi USA
Just to show that PayPal is on an ignorant and arbitrary rampage, take a look at this website. myPVshops.com - Smoking Simulators

We were setting up a new website to sell "smoking simulators" that contain no nicotine or tobacco products. We were doing this to comply with PayPal and FDA guidelines that implied e-cigs were bad because they contained nicotine.

PayPal shut down the website, citing the FDA warnings against the electronic cigarettes. The FDA warnings that PayPal linked us to specifically warned about the nicotine addiction, "for the children", etc.

SO, PP says that electronic cigarettes are bad because they have nicotine, but if you try to sell without nicotine they are bad because they look like other products that do contain nicotine?

We've submitted a request to PayPal to review their decision, but it's been over 24 hours and we have not heard back from them.

I guess if it even looks like a cigarette it must be illegal or dangerous?

Even though no laws have yet been passed?

Even though there is no research showing any negative effects?
Look, I'm sorry but even if you put lipstick on that pig......
Your site clearly shows something-that-looks-like-smoke coming out of a pretty lady.
Marketing tactics used this way will bring all e-cigs down. It's a deliberate effort to cover yourself from the obvious, it's so obvious, and so not right. Everyone comes down on SE for doing their "try it before your buy it" tactics. It gives the appearance of being misleading, of not putting everything in the sunshine, and when the bill comes it is a total shock because of the auto-ship cartridges, etc......
Again, put your devices and your accessories up front, please stay shy of trying to misrepresent "PV's". They are electronic cigarettes. And always will be.
It will only make you crazy. You cannot build a viable business on smoke and mirrors, it makes a mockery of everyone's intelligence. And who would want to order an over-priced, "PV" without being able to choose an appropriate liquid for their needs, and some variety available presented in a helpful way.
A new customer would be a smoker, not someone who wants covert "PV" vaping with 0 nic juice.
You should be able to advertise the high quality of your products, and your business goals...fast shipping, absolute warranty, and 24-7 service for the best possible customer service.
If you can't do that, you're not going to make it into a business. It will be a really bad tax write off. Business is about customers. It's not about fooling PayPal.
Above everything else, you are trying to fill a need with a good product.
 

Randall Fox

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Feb 9, 2009
452
172
Sparks, NV, USA
www.myPVshop.com
Kate,

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of the website. We were getting the website set up to be able to sell the hardware in the case of legislation against electronic cigarettes containing nicotine. The website is not meant to be selling anything right now. That's why you will find no links to it anywhere, even on search engines, other than the one I put in this thread. That is also why the prices are outrageously high.

Drug paraphenalia is illegal, glass tobacco water pipes are not. The difference in legal status is due to the "intended use" when marketing.

What is "not right" about trying to ensure continuing supply of a product people enjoy? Or do you believe we should all kow-tow to what the monied interests in this country say is "the best for us common sheeple"?

And where is the "smoke and mirrors"? We will deliver exactly what we sell.

Where is the "misrepresentation"? We will deliver exactly what we sell.
 

JustMeAgain

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 3, 2009
1,189
133
64
Springfield, MO
I wonder why PP is letting this atrocity continue? They'd better shut them down immediately in case some of get to feeling a bit retro. And what about the CHILDREN?

I thought a little levity might be in order here...:)



candy-crate_2074_598684931





Order InformationNameCandy Cigarettes 24ctItem # JS10097Price$6.89Qty





Bulk Retro Candy & Nostalgic Gift Store Info
 
No trashing Randall now he is a great guy and offers great service. It does suck paypal is taking down the suppliers though. Merchant accounts are costly and will just drive prices up a little higher :(. Anyways Randall is a great seller with great customer service and super fast shipping :). I have ordered time and time again and get my product in 2 - 3 days every single time :). Things are even faster now that he is in Nevada.
 

lordmage

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 15, 2008
2,986
105
Dundalk,Maryland, USA
I was still working on cross-browser compatibility when PP shut it down. The site has only been up about a week, and was only up for live server testing of the cart, account, payment, and other major functions.

I'm going to end up making it into a full website once I get the time, but for now that project is on hold due to many other issues, including our move out of California last weekend to get away from AB400.

p.s. what browser are you using? I'd like to check out that problem.
you would be interested in this then [FONT="][URL]http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/42644-california-sb-400-update-so-far-so-good.html[/URL][/FONT]


I can understand someone moving to avoid a current ban but a (maybe at the time of posting) seems leery in my eyes. after all if that's the case by your above example might as well shut down after all if the FDA and ASH have their way then the sale and use are banned federally THRU out the US..(maybe)
[FONT="][/FONT]
 

TaketheRedPill

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 27, 2009
865
1,030
Southern California
...if the FDA and ASH have their way then the sale and use are banned federally THRU out the US..(maybe)

I think a major opponent is being overlooked. A lightbulb went on when I read a few posts last week about employers having their employees undergo mandatory drug testing for......nicotine........and there was no option for exclusion of patch,gum,snu,PV,inhalator, etc. users. In effect, nicotine was nicotine and nicotine meant higher premiums. The not-so-quiet implication was a no-hire/fire policy for any form of nicotine user.

Big Insurance is a much larger player than ASH, even larger than Big Tobacco. Tacticly labeling nicotine users as undesirable to employ, as a group, allows Big Insurance to discriminate through denial-of-care. This, in spite of the billions paid by the Tobacco companies in 'fines' and more billions in cigarette taxes that we were told were necessary and to our ultimate benefit as supplementation/compensation of any catastrophic medical costs of the smoker(/nicotine user) to 'society'. Well, our bill has been paid, but if the Insurance Companys can get out of paying that money back out treating us, they will have made all those billions in subsidies for free. In addition, if the battle can be won over nicotine users, Big Insurance will have momentum and precident to follow through with similar labeling of the obese, those with high cholesterol, high blood pressure, etc. as undesirable to employ/insure, as we saw very recently with an obese 4monthold infant being denied coverage.

Any lobbying we do, that fails to also address Big Insurance meddling, leaves us wide open to defeat (this is not to say a public option wouldn't also have the same, if not stiffer, mandatory behavior/lifestyle modification clauses).

Hope this helps!
 
  • Deleted by Sun Vaporer
  • Reason: spammer
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread