I made a post along time ago that said TA as an ingredient is a natural tobacco extract. My issue has never been with the ingredient itself, or whether it is or isn't a tobacco extract--it obviously is--and as stated in the original post, it can do some really special things to a juice. But, a vendor that only uses the ingredient, common TA, as their NET does not get the same consideration for being a "NET vendor" as someone who makes there own extracts. See? (Not you VM.)
I think sometimes we do too much cursory reading of posts and jump the gun with interpretation.
I also wanted to point out something else in the original post. When I said that just because a vendor is using similar techniques as one who makes an absolute, that needs to be understood. Absolutes come from concretes first! You can make a tobacco extraction from alcohol, like HHV, and you can make a concrete with alcohol and subsequent TA from that, but that does NOT mean HHV is making an absolute. HHV has made some of the more grassy and hay-like juices I've had (I love that), but while absolutes have those traits (grassy and hay notes) that doesn't mean it's time to leap to thinking HHV makes and or uses tobacco absolutes. Picking up on certain aspects of absolutes is a key to determining if you have a juice with it, but it doesn't end there. The final say should be the vendors word.
.................................
Has anyone tried ROAR's tobaccos? I have yet to try them, but they use common TA.
I think Roar is THE MOST overrated juice on the market. I didn't like them the first time I tried them. But I gave them the benefit of the doubt and ordered again after my taste for vaping tobacco matured. Rubbish. That's just my , though.