caparo Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 It won't make it easier....we're just going round in circles here.... You've spotted that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 The way I see it.. If we follow the Australian example the packages aren't plain..and there are different "designs" If counterfeiters can do good copies now then I don't see how the "plain" packets make it easier Are you saying that if there are fewer counterfeit cigs ('cos of the chip) then the cig companies won't sell more? How does that work?Will people smoke less? I notice nobody responed to the duty free point I raised!...Strange that is! The 'chip' idea is something thought up by someone on here! I can't find any reference to anyone 'actually' proposing it for real! So it's a bit of a misnoma to base a discussion on something that's not even proposed by anyone. I found a quote by someone, who admittedly is pro-smoking, which seems to sum up in many ways my thoughts. The sale of illicit and counterfeit cigarettes is a huge problem in the UK as well as the rest of Europe. It is estimated that 190 billion are manufactured each year in China alone and 65 per cent of the cigarettes seized in the EU are counterfeit. Making packs look almost identical will probably make their work easier and more profitable. If this happens plain packaging could put children at greater risk not less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I notice nobody responed to the duty free point I raised!...Strange that is! The 'chip' idea is something thought up by someone on here! I can't find any reference to anyone 'actually' proposing it for real! So it's a bit of a misnoma to base a discussion on something that's not even proposed by anyone. I found a quote by someone, who admittedly is pro-smoking, which seems to sum up in many ways my thoughts. Well yes of course we know why people bring in cigs from abroad..don't know how this affects your point about plain packaging.. OK forget the chips..how about the fact that the new packs will be no easier to produce then the original ones...same situation as now..the exercise isn't to stop counterfeiting but to make fags less attractive to kids..is that a bad idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 (edited) I notice nobody responed to the duty free point I raised!...Strange that is! The 'chip' idea is something thought up by someone on here! I can't find any reference to anyone 'actually' proposing it for real! So it's a bit of a misnoma to base a discussion on something that's not even proposed by anyone. I found a quote by someone, who admittedly is pro-smoking, which seems to sum up in many ways my thoughts. But the proposition that plain packaging showing nothing but cancer infested lungs and rotten teeth would lead to more counterfeiting was also only brought up by someone on here and has no evidence to back it up. The proposition of a microchip is the simple remedy should counterfeiting become an issue. At the moment the authorities clearly feel the incentive of knowing you aren't sticking human feces in your mouth is sufficient incentive to most to buy reputable goods. Edited August 17, 2012 by caparo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I would contend that faking packets of fags with graphics of a mouth full of rotten teetth and mouth ulcers is more difficult than copying Marlboro's logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I didn't realise there was an 'argument'...I thought it was a discussion, sorry if I misunderstood. I'm afraid anyone who resorts to insults, veiled or otherwise, has lost an argument! I just won't respond to you further! I think that it's you people should stop responding to. It is a well proven fact that smoking damages your health, yet you insist on arguing against plain packaged with the weakest of unsubstantiated points. If people are daft enough to pay £0.35 for a cigarette to poison their bodies do you think that the slight increase in cost for a microchip will deter them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 Well yes of course we know why people bring in cigs from abroad..don't know how this affects your point about plain packaging.. OK forget the chips..how about the fact that the new packs will be no easier to produce then the original ones...same situation as now..the exercise isn't to stop counterfeiting but to make fags less attractive to kids..is that a bad idea? The problem being, as far as attractiveness to children is concerned is that there is no evidence to substantiate these claims. It's supposition and guesswork. Plus the fact that they are already an under the counter product. Advertising is banned, so how are the kids ever going to see the pretty and attractive packaging and want to buy them? Not to mention the laws which already exist in regard to under age sales and proxy buying...etc Counterfeit sales are already a problem globally, not just here, but everywhere. If kids really do want to smoke (and yes some do), not that I would advocate it, they will find a way to get them, even if it's from backstreet sellers, who don't give a monkeys toss about who they sell them to. So in a perverse way, it's kinda counter-productive. Try to put yourself out of the box for a moment. Imagine you were someone involved in either importing duty free cigs, or counterfeiting, or selling dodgy cigs. How would you maximise your sales? (assuming you had no scruples whatsoever) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 The problem being, as far as attractiveness to children is concerned is that there is no evidence to substantiate these claims. It's supposition and guesswork. So is everything you have posted on this thread. I would think a child seeing a mouth full of green teeth may well be detered from smoking. I presume the Australian Government have based their ideas on far moe evidence than you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 , so how are the kids ever going to see the pretty and attractive packaging and want to buy them? By seeing adults smoke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 So why not smoke bacon? I have smoked it in a BBQ before, really good to do to, to preserve it and add flavour. Smoked fish is great too! But I wouldn't smoke it like I smoke a ciggy. Nor would I eat tobacco. Bacon is just a good thing to compare for price. You can half imagine the tax on bacon being increased to such a level in some regions of the globe that it's price becomes distorted, like the price of tobacco. Australia recently increased it's bacon tax, and in some places bacon is prohibited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now