The ECA Disclosed

[RjG]

ECA:
If you truly want to the support of all the members of the forum too, the consumers as well as the suppliers, can you post the minutes of the meetings somewhere we can read them?

Posting the minutes would very effectively quiet all the discomfort forum members are expressing.

I would join, support you, and donate, to help with keeping e-cigs on the market.

I can't support a "secret society" though, who keeps everything behind closed doors.

There's a VERY large pool of potential members (and donations) on the forum here.

If you are asking for public efforts, support and donations, then the intentions of ECA should really be in full view, not tucked away in the supplier's forum.

 

[Faethe]

I'm a HUGE fan of childproof bottles and prominent warning labels. No supplier should have been shipping without them.

I just want to make sure once the basics are covered they don't plan on controlling flavors, nicotine content, package sizes, 'safety' seals, etc.

Basically anything that could be used as a tool for price fixing or blocking the market from smaller suppliers.

^ This. I am adult with no children in the house. I could care less if my liquid comes in a childproof bottle or not. I just want to know I can buy it when I want.

 

[Nuck]

^ This. I am adult with no children in the house. I could care less if my liquid comes in a childproof bottle or not. I just want to know I can buy it when I want.

Almost all potentially dangerous liquids and pills are required to use childproof bottles with appropriate labels. Whether the supplier or the association mandates it isn't really relevant since it will be one of the first steps the government takes. The UK is a prime example.

 

[nycsublimegirl]

I signed up for the newsletter, and I wish you all the best.

Question: How will this affect the forum with some suppliers being members and others being non-members?

You would have to ask SJ what his thoughts are...but other then having a possible ECA forum link....i don't think much would change

 

[Retina_Burn]

Hmmm, a few questions that I feel are in need of answers;

1. Will the ECA be setting up a formal business entity and if so, will this entity be for the sole purpose of lobbyism or will it be set up as a non-profit with the goals of assisting suppliers and resellers in ethical business practices? In what state will this entity be registered?

2. I feel that age verification is just as important with nicotine based products as it is with tobacco, the FDA has also expressed this concern with all of the nicotine based products that it has banned. Will the ECA be implementing any sort of age verification tactics on the participating ecommerce sites?

3. Will the ECA be taking any active role in assisting ecommerce sites in updating to the standards that they decide is ethical or are all businesses responsible to meet these goals before admission?

4. How are said dues, fees or donations distributed? Will there be a board elected to decide such matters or will decision makers be appointed? If appointed, who will make that decision?

5. Will the association be communicating requests that resellers or suppliers that are not part of ECA and do not pay "dues" or "Fees" to ECA be avoided or blacklisted until membership has been financially established?

I still see no entity listed on D&B- Dun & Bradstreet -Global Risk, Credit, Sales, Marketing, and Supplier Management Solutions or Company Information from Hoover's including business reports and profiles. This disclosure is still very vague and doesn't outline an actual business resolution or any info about how and where monies collected will be stored or as to how officers will be elected to decide ultimate use of said treasury.

I'd love to have an organization form that will truly address our concerns and try to help everyone to understand and abide by good ethical industry wide standards. As of now I have not been given enough information and would not be comfortable joining the ECA in pursuit of these goals. I also stress the difference between a non-profit organization designed to help and a lobbyist group that focuses on the needs of it's membership.

But this is looking like it wasn't really thought out before leaking hints and then when "Disclosure" comes out, no information about entity type or business structure is revealed. I don't like that. It's either being kept from us or is not known. In either case, I am not very comfortable. I think we should all take a deep breath and take a big step back and really think about the things that Nuck and some others are concerned about.

 

[MonkeyMonk]

RjG, I disagree about posting the minutes of the meeting. I believe that should rest with the members for now. I would agree to a summerization of the meeting, which is what I believe that JoAnna posted.

My reservations stem from putting too much in the public domain, I am not refering to us, but to the fact that this forum can be accessed by anyone. If the ECA needs to have a "wrap" on certain things for the time being, then I believe they should be allowed to do that without all of our 2nd guessing.

Eventually, they will allow for full membership for us, and not just a newsletter sign-up, at that time as members all of the information would become available to us.

What I'm saying is that perhaps it is in our best interest that some of the thing that they discussed, specifically stratagies, not be put out in the open where the anti's can then scrutenize and counter potentially winning moves.

 

[nycsublimegirl]

Lots and lots of questions .... I know wish i could speak out on them all... but alas i am not the spokes person just the crazy one up at this hour...

however i will say a board has been appointed and be will made official once they pass the application process that all will have to...

secondly... there is no intention of denying access for reasons of competition...

We are in the process now of writing the bi-laws and forming the association through the proper channels as a non-profit...we are obtaining legal services to make sure it is done completely legit...

some of the very questions you asked have and are being decided upon as we type....

again all i can say is from my perspective we are all in consensus that this be run as upright, upfront, and as fair to all involved or will be involved as fairly as possible.

 

[nycsublimegirl]

Also should add..... the rush is regrettable....we all wish things could have unfolded in a proper manner... however we are not the ones setting the time table... we felt a need to "jump the gun" for the greater good... we have a time line of about a month to get everything to where it needs to be...

but we felt that amount of time with inaction could potentially do more harm then good....hence the piece mail announcements...

I encourage everyone to take this time to be our watch dogs and voice your ideas...we are open to every source to make sure this is done in the best way possible and will be reading your posts!!

 

[RjG]

MonkeyMonk, agreed, posting minutes on this forum is of little value. Any discussion of value would quickly be reduced to... well I don't have to actually say it.

BUT if you've signed up for the newsletter, and as such have committed to some effort in the form of letter writing, phone calling, or cash donations, it's expected to have full disclosure from the entity you are supporting.

Minutes should be on the newsletter, or via logon somewhere on Electronic Cigarette Association.

 

[Idahojo]

Well I joined the ECA. I think it is great what you're doing and just hope we are not too late. There are a lot of comments and worries in this thread. I think we should all be supportive and give these guys time to address all the important things first.

I would like to know why there are just a handful of suppliers involved as of yet. Is there something going on we don't know about? I mean, seriously, don't we all want the same thing?

 

[nycsublimegirl]

Well I joined the ECA. I think it is great what you're doing and just hope we are not too late. There are a lot of comments and worries in this thread. I think we should all be supportive and give these guys time to address all the important things first.

I would like to know why there are just a handful of suppliers involved as of yet. Is there something going on we don't know about? I mean, seriously, don't we all want the same thing?

Thanks so much! that's exactly why we are in a rush!

Why not everyone is not participating can have many reasons...to name a few...just entirely to busy to be involved, simply not interested, sckeptical, haven't heard about it, etc... again we need all the support we can get so i encourage you to email a supplier not on the list and urge them to get involved...as well as yourselves by signing up for the news letter and having your friends and family join as well!!!

 

[Oliver]

Question: How will this affect the forum with some suppliers being members and others being non-members?

Although the forum is not officially affiliated with ECA, I will be ensuring that suppliers on ECF do follow the ECA guidelines with regard to health and safety claims.

 

[strell]

I would like to know why there are just a handful of suppliers involved as of yet. Is there something going on we don't know about? I mean, seriously, don't we all want the same thing?

You mean money, right?

While this seems like a good idea, without universal support I don't see it as anything but divisive. Hell, even something like the ESRB barely gets by whenever there is a legal/PR question and that's with involvement from all three major US video game consoles.

I'm a skeptic.

 

[Faethe]

Almost all potentially dangerous liquids and pills are required to use childproof bottles with appropriate labels. Whether the supplier or the association mandates it isn't really relevant since it will be one of the first steps the government takes. The UK is a prime example.

I get my drugs filled without childproof caps if I ask they be filled that way? I can understand the concern, but not the methodology. Likely because I don't know enough about what the ECA intends for dealers on this forum or otherwise. I can understand Smokey Joe wishing for businesses listed here to adhere to standards. However, like others have mentioned, I can also see this limiting access to the market that has built up on this forum.

 

[Oliver]

I can understand Smokey Joe wishing for businesses listed here to adhere to standards. However, like others have mentioned, I can also see this limiting access to the market that has built up on this forum.

Why would that limit access to the market? I'm going to see what the ECA decides on acceptable business practice, and because I know they are taking expert legal advice in the matter will insist that any suppliers that take part in the forum abide by the same rules.

I already do insist on certain things, and it's possible nothing changes - but I don't want ECF compromising our ability to get hold of vaping products by hosting suppliers that get the market closed down.

 

[klum]

Why would that limit access to the market? I'm going to see what the ECA decides on acceptable business practice, and because I know they are taking expert legal advice in the matter will insist that any suppliers that take part in the forum abide by the same rules.

I already do insist on certain things, and it's possible nothing changes - but I don't want ECF compromising our ability to get hold of vaping products by hosting suppliers that get the market closed down.

Will this include discussions of suppliers and products that are not part of the ECA or just suppliers access to the supplier forums? I did notice that there aren't any manufacturers listed on the intro page to the ECA as well as many suppliers who are not members. Could all of them be banned from discussions/topics/threads?

 

[Faethe]

Why would that limit access to the market? I'm going to see what the ECA decides on acceptable business practice, and because I know they are taking expert legal advice in the matter will insist that any suppliers that take part in the forum abide by the same rules.

I already do insist on certain things, and it's possible nothing changes - but I don't want ECF compromising our ability to get hold of vaping products by hosting suppliers that get the market closed down.

Because if you insist that someone needs accomplish A, and they can not because of either their size or some other limiting factor that puts them at a disadvantage, they presumably will not have access.

Which is why you are getting questions as to whether only ECA members will be able to have a sub-forum here.

 

[Nuck]

Why would that limit access to the market? I'm going to see what the ECA decides on acceptable business practice, and because I know they are taking expert legal advice in the matter will insist that any suppliers that take part in the forum abide by the same rules.

I already do insist on certain things, and it's possible nothing changes - but I don't want ECF compromising our ability to get hold of vaping products by hosting suppliers that get the market closed down.

It's all going to come down to what they decide are acceptable business practices. If it's simply market claims related to unproven health benefits then obviously that's a positive. If it's the naming of flavors (which they've already mentioned), factory sealing as a requirement, a cap on nicotine levels and/or bottle sizes, then it crosses the line into market control. Combined with the backing of these forums, it could put non-members who don't agree, are too small, or simply want to innovate, out of business.

I don't believe that any of the members has this in mind and that they are working towards altruistic goals, but the danger is definitely there if the issues are approached with a bit too much passion or worse, discussed and decided upon in private.

 

[Oliver]

Will this include discussions of suppliers and products that are not part of the ECA or just suppliers access to the supplier forums? I did notice that there aren't any manufacturers listed on the intro page to the ECA as well as many suppliers who are not members. Could all of them be banned from discussions/topics/threads?

I'm not going to discourage the discussion of anything! I just won't allow members to sign up as suppliers if they are not taking pretty elementary steps towards ensuring consumer protection.

 

[LifeLongJoyRide]

Their hearts are in the right place...it's just very easy to cross from "right" to "self righteous". The fear is that as suppliers don't join, or don't share the same ideas, those outsiders practices are suddenly labeled as wrong. SJ...you just said that it will already be that way on the forum. Even though steps are being taken to establish the market, one groups ideas are hardly universal standards...and should NOT be looked at as such.

Quick follow up...it was asked earlier but never got an answer. Why was there a push by the suppliers to start calling the devices personal vaporizers to distance us from cigarette users, and now many of those same people are using Electronic Cigarette Association to represent us?