TELEVISED COMMERCIAL is fueling the fire!

[haveblue]

I agree.. and the phrases "It's time smoking changed forever" and "digital vapor cigarette" should be changed to "It's time smokers make the healthy switch to vaping (or vapor)" and "digital vaporizer" or "digital vaporizer system"
BT is not smart enough,or willing it seems, to properly design or market an alternative to their golden egg.

 

[DreamWithin]

BT is not smart enough,or willing it seems, to properly design or market an alternative to their golden egg.

Exactly I cringe at the ad's claime to be "the first" X, Y and Z . . . it's just the same tech that's been around for years, maybe with a couple tweaks that have also been around a while. If they truly had any willingness to innovate then they certainly have the monetary resources and brand/marketing power to do so successfully, but all they've shown so far is that they want their piece of the $$ pie

 

[erikajeanT87]

I appreciate all the response. But, let me clarify....the thing that bothered me most was the intention of the company to associate the vape kits to cigarettes. What does it matter if they've been researching tobacco for years. tobacco?!? The word should NEVER be mentioned in a promotion for an e-cig, or vape (the term I prefer). It should only be mentioned to state that it is not a tobacco product. Does anyone share my sentiments about it?

I feel the same and I think most closed minded people (and the government) see it that way and will ultimately deem it a tobacco product

where's the tobacco people?!?

 

[Lessifer]

They are owned by a BT brand RJR.

^^This, RJ Reynolds, makers of Camel.

 

[OCD]

This product is the answer to BTs dilemma. They want their $5 a day yet there is no way to control that if someone can refill, the Vuse is "Digital" as they claim in the ad. The digital part is a chip that shuts it down after a prescribed number of puffs so you have to purchase a new one irregardless of whether or not it is still functioning. At least that is my impression of the product.

The reason there is even a battle in this whole thing is because of the money, BT has certainly promised the FDA that if they can switch folks over from tobacco to vaping and keep it amongst themselves then they will continue to funnel all those funds that have been saddled onto smoking because of its known endangerment to human health.

The rub is that there is no evidence at this point that vaping should include those "sin" taxes which are supposed to go towards the repair of damages caused. No damage = no sin and even if there is some damage it should be sin taxed relative to that damage which would be a far cry from the excessive numbers being proposed all over the place from 50 to 95% and there is never, ever any mention of 0mg... how can you call a product a tobacco product if it doesnt even contain nicotine which is the basis of the argument in the first place?

Big tobacco could become extinct in a few years if FDA, CDC, WHO, AMA, ALA and all of the other three letter organizations who are supposedly looking out for public health simply reported facts based on honest science and media carried this.

 

[rolygate]

It's the classic win-win for cigarette corporations. If they kill ecigs then they win, but if they get a big piece of the ecig market they also win.

If ecigs reduce cigarette sales significantly then BT will make sure their ecig products are the top sellers. However the most likely scenario in a regulated market area like this is that the big players remove the small players by rigging the market (fixing the regulations) in order to exclude small players, by raising costs. By this method, BT then sell both ends of the product line, and can decide which gets the best action. They can easily strangle ecig sales very effectively and make sure the bulk of sales stays with cigarettes.

The thing is, all the big players benefit by giving the market to the cigarette trade and excluding all the small businesses and innovators. There is no gain for anyone by allowing small business and new technology to kill the gravy train.

- Tax revenues must be protected. Federal and regional governments need to protect both their income channels and their cost savings. Smoking is a huge revenue generator and cost saver for government - it is one of their best properties. They get tobacco taxes, and taxes at every stage of the sales and distribution chain, immense MSA payments for the States, and huge cost savings at the other end when smokers die young (especially important in socialised countries).

- Pharmaceutical industry revenue must be protected. Pharma is so closely integrated with government that it can be regarded as part of it, for all practical purposes - no policy decisions will ever hurt pharma. Pharma's income from smoking is enormous (drugs for acute disease, the big boost to general drug sales, and - a much smaller channel - smoking cessation drugs).

- US States are kept afloat by smoking. The Attorneys General are fighting desperately to protect cigarette sales. The MSA funds are a crucial income channel.

- The Public Health industry is funded by smoking to a significant extent. No smoking = no job. The people at the top get million-dollar salaries and they are very well aware their monster incomes depend on smoking and the drug sales it generates.


All the biggest players depend on smoking. It is the world's biggest gravy train. You may think your government is honest and looks out for you, but the reality is that the system is based on corruption since it depends on you buying cigarettes and getting sick and dying early.

 

[MrAngry]

I would bet BT owns the company....commercials cost Millions, and I've seen it many many times on different channels.

RJ Reynolds owns Vuse, and those things are terrible! I'm very glad a friend got me into decent Vaping. Even Blu is a significant step up(and not terrible, honestly).

I think it's RJR trying to drown out he competition rather than actually compete.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk