Pretty good article featuring our own Gregory Conley of CASAA:
Thank You for Not Vaping | The Weekly Standard
Thank You for Not Vaping | The Weekly Standard
- Status
Thank you for posting this. I call the article excellent. Made all the right points, with a good quote from Michael Siegel as well.
A very good article. I just love the statement, "We don't know the long term effects of...". There is absolutely no way to determine the long term effects of anything new. Just ask all the relatives of people or the people that have taken that wonder drug offered by BP after years of testing that suffer from morbidity and mortality issues years later.
Great article! Hit all the nails on the heads; Even the Lindsey Lohan comment!, lol
My only problems with this article are minor.
1. The language used seemed almost hesitant, lacking confidence in e-cigs safeness over analogs despite over 50 years of research into the ingredients into them. It is hardly early-stage research.
2. The first patents were back in the 50s, not 2000s. Modifications leading to the common view of them were the newer Chinese ones, but really are only refined versions of what have been around.
3. It is already a Billion dollar industry, it is predicting to go well beyond that in the next 5 years.
4. Comparing analog sales to e-cig unit sales (1% as stated in the article) is bad economic since the sales shouldn't match given the lifetime of the products.
5. Stating the FDA can regulate E-Cigs but haven't yet is misleading. They haven't yet presented strong enough evidence to regulate them in the first place, which is why they haven't. If they have a trick up their sleeve, we'll see it soon but BT isn't betting on it, why should we.
1. The language used seemed almost hesitant, lacking confidence in e-cigs safeness over analogs despite over 50 years of research into the ingredients into them. It is hardly early-stage research.
2. The first patents were back in the 50s, not 2000s. Modifications leading to the common view of them were the newer Chinese ones, but really are only refined versions of what have been around.
3. It is already a Billion dollar industry, it is predicting to go well beyond that in the next 5 years.
4. Comparing analog sales to e-cig unit sales (1% as stated in the article) is bad economic since the sales shouldn't match given the lifetime of the products.
5. Stating the FDA can regulate E-Cigs but haven't yet is misleading. They haven't yet presented strong enough evidence to regulate them in the first place, which is why they haven't. If they have a trick up their sleeve, we'll see it soon but BT isn't betting on it, why should we.
I would argue that Big tobacco IS betting on it.
And I would argue they are betting that they are going to like it, and we are not.
How could they possibly enforce no vaping in rental properties? How would they know you're doing it? THERE IS NO SMELL!
Vapers will, for the most part, simply ignore
such "insane" vaping bans.
Yeah BT doesn't expect the FDA to regulate in a restrictive manner, that is why BT is dumping a ton of money into the market. NJOY (BT founded company) just took a 75$ million dollar investment a few weeks ago. Altria Group is pouring money into development, Lorillard investing hundreds of millions, R.J. Reynolds is gearing up to expand their e-cigs nationally, and Wells Fargo Securities is predicting E-Cigs to overtake traditional cigs within 15 years.
I would argue that BT is betting on regulations that favor their products, not the products most of us here like and the products that are probably most effective to get people off of cigarettes. Non-refillable cartomizers, small disposable batteries, tobacco only flavors, and no nicotine liquids. Possibly bans on online vendors.
The amount of money the are investing wouldn't logically support that. And remember, they aren't going to be able to regulate the devices so much, as the liquid. BT is dumping too much of their money into hardware instead of the liquid, which is a smart move when you consider the customer base they have access too. I have a feeling because of a bird in my ear that they are spending the money on devices to make equal quality use of not only e-liquids but other things that may become legal soon.
The FDA is very good at looking after their clients. Originally BP and now BT. Star Scientific had two excellent products, Stonewalls and Ariva. They had the lowest level of nitrosamines of any of the tobacco products tested and had plans to develop a snus line. They announced they were getting out of tobacco products at the end of last year. They waved the white flag at the regulations that were crippling their effort.
Anything the FDA does to make it hard for most vendors to comply with regulation oriented toward what BT can provide that others can't may remove a lot of the competition very quickly, or send it to the black market.
Cooking, I wouldn't count on that. The market is very spread around right now with many vendors. To replace the volumes they're used to, they need to get both hardware and nicquid sales. They want you buying exclusively from them and they'll want you buying often. You do that by limiting nicotine availability in proprietary cartridges on proprietary linkage to the batteries.
I'm not saying that is what they will do, but they're very good at working with government agencies and getting regulations that fit their marketing plans.
I'm not saying that is what they will do, but they're very good at working with government agencies and getting regulations that fit their marketing plans.
It doesn't matter how safe they prove they are.They will never be accepted or tolerated..the public sees them the same as smoking and until smoking comes back (which never will) you will have the same hostility against e-cigs.. Thanks for posting the article by the way
I'm quite sure Big Tobacco is counting on restrictive regulations, and THAT is why they are dumping money into this game.
The amount of money they are investing not only logically supports that, it almost guarantees that.
You are forgetting though, the amount of non-e-cig users is HUGE. There isn't enough production from the vendors now to even take a nibble out of it. They have the money, resources, and network to have it for dinner. Everyone is suggesting that BT sees restrictive regulations coming, yet wall street is the only one actually putting money on the line saying they won't be restrictive.
Everybody here is worried about what they currently have/use. I'm sorry but we are an insignificant speck in the big picture that BT is looking at. There are about 2.5 million vapers, but there are about 44 million smokers. Anyone here who has owned a business, worked in upper management, worked in marketing, studied business, or marketing will tell you the same thing. Ignore the current vapers, most will not be receptive to change because of their loyalties, and there aren't enough to make the effort pursuing them worth it. Instead go after the 44 million + who you already do business with, and have a .... ton of market data on. So BT isn't trying to sell us, they are aiming to sell the 44 million people currently on their products (and with e-cigs they'll be able to keep draining them of money longer than with their analog products). To top that off, they will also be trying to sell to non-smokers, which is another 200 million-ish.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
