Well that sucks...

There's that re-occuring pain. My ass hurting all the way up to the back of my neck...Our fore father's would be shitting muskets...

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueDevil07

It's going to really suck a$$ if the number of boutique brands on the market drops drastically and prices sore. If you haven't yet, go to the CRA website and fill out the petition letters. This will send letters to your senators and local rep. Not sure how much it will actually achieve, but every little bit helps.

---

Thanks mate....letters sent...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DogRockets

I hate the government. If our Founding Fathers were alive to see how far government reaches into our lives on a daily basis on just about every thing a person can do, they'd work on colonizing the moon I think to get away from this.

---

America has strayed so far from its origin that today we resemble nazi's more than our founding fathers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciro

@rodwha , I pulled this from Halfwheel.com goes into a little more detail.

FDA will regulate cigars of all shapes, size, origin and flavor. In brief terms, cigars will be divided into three categories:

Pre-2007 — Any cigar marketed prior to Feb. 15, 2007 is grandfathered and FDA can only impose certain restrictions on these products. Manufacturers will still be required to put warning labels that cover 30 percent of two main parts of the box and will be banned from giving free samples. They will also likely need to submit a document with a list of ingredients. Manufacturers will not have to receive any sort of approval from FDA about these products.
Post-2007 — Any cigar that is introduced on the market after Feb. 15, 2007, but before the rule goes into effect (Aug. 8, 2016) will be able to remain on the market for at least two years. After two years it will be subject to the same warning label requirements, but manufacturers will have to submit the product to FDA for approval. The cost of this remains unknown (see below).While FDA is reviewing the application, manufacturers will be allowed to sell these products until FDA rejects their applications. Alternatively, manufacturers could choose to keep these products on the market until this time 2018 and then ultimately decide not to submit for FDA approval to avoid paying the fee. However, they would not be able to reintroduce the product to market without getting pre-approval from FDA.
Post-Rules — After Aug. 8, 2016, a manufacturer will have to submit any new products for approval before they are allowed to enter the market. This would likely include any products that were introduced between Feb. 15, 2007-Aug. 8, 2016; but failed to apply within two years of the rule being introduced.
Walk-in humidors, internet sales and flavored cigars will all remain the same for now. Consumers will still be able to walk into a humidor, pick up and smell a cigar; however, they will not be able to be given a free sample by either a retailer or manufacturer.

Barring a lawsuit where a court grants an injunction or congressional action before Aug. 8, these rules will go into effect. A handful of initial takeaways.

1. THE STORM BEFORE THE CALM: IPCPR 2016

If there was any good news from the document, FDA extended the implementation period from the original 30 days to 90 days. This means the rules will not go into effect until after the 2016 IPCPR Convention & Trade Show, which takes place in late July.

The trade show will be crazy.

Barring any changes, this will be the last trade show where new products can be introduced without approval from FDA and I expect that we will see a record-setting amount of new products.

There doesn’t appear to be any rule that says you have to ship a certain amount of product before Aug. 8, 2016, so expect a lot of manufacturers to introduce a lot of new products before that date and then slowly release it to the market. As long as those products end up at one retailer prior to Aug. 8, that product will likely meet the requirement. These products are not entirely grandfathered–anything introduced after Feb. 15, 2007 will need to apply for FDA approval within two years or be removed from market–but introducing product now, even with a two-year lifespan, will be far more cost effective than introducing it on Aug. 9 and waiting for FDA approval.

It’s unclear what halfwheel will look like after August of this year, the amount of new product will come to a screeching halt barring any changes. FDA will have the ultimate authority of what products are allowed into the market and it’s unclear why they would have any incentive to respond to applications in a timely manner.

2. THE COST AND PROCESS FOR APPROVAL IS STILL UNCLEAR

Going into today the obvious question was what will FDA do. But the second largest question was if FDA chose to regulate premium cigars, how would it do it. Many parts of that answer remain unclear.

The document appears to show no outline on pricing for FDA submission or if the agency has any estimated turnaround time. Rumored numbers have been floated since April 2014, but none of those numbers seem particularly grounded in fact and FDA itself has said that it would likely use a different set of numbers and procedures depending on the product type, something it reiterated today.

Once the document outlining costs and the actually submission and approval process is published, we will know a lot more about whether both newer and smaller brands have a realistic shot of continuing to grow their business and whether new cigars will be able to be introduced.

3. INTERNET CIGAR SALES & FLAVORED CIGAR SALES ARE GOOD FOR NOW

In the draft of the document published today, FDA said it did not intend on eliminating the sale of cigars over the internet or of flavored tobacco—and it made good on that promise. Retailers will be required to ask for ID for any individual they believe to be under 26, but it’s unclear based on today’s document whether that will apply for internet sales—it would appear it will not.

FDA oddly seems less concerned with outlawing internet cigar sales. It remains unclear whether the agency could actually do so, particularly with some Congressional precedent set by the PACT Act, but at least for today, internet sales go on.

For flavored cigars, today is not the end, but FDA has announced that it intends on banning “characterizing flavors” from all tobacco products in the future. No timetable has been set on this, but the fight over “characterizing flavors” will be much more than simply ACID, Java and Tatiana—that fight will include Swisher, White Owl and potentially menthol.

4. THE LEGALIZATION OF CUBAN CIGARS IS DELAYED

Whenever the embargo gets lifted, Habanos S.A. will now need to apply as a new product before its portfolio of Cuban cigars can be sold in U.S. humidors.

Depending on the speed at which FDA decides to approve applications, this could mean that even if the embargo is lifted on Jan. 1, 2019 (just a random date) it might be years before they are legally able to be sold in humidors. The rule is clear that the products must be marketed in the U.S. prior to Feb. 15, 2007, something Cuban cigars cannot legally claim status to.

5. OUR HOPE LIES IN…CONGRESS

Congress hasn’t been the most productive place in the world. Now it’s the likeliest savior for the cigar industry.

While lawsuits are certainly coming and injunctive relief might be granted, it’s an expensive and unclear path to victory. Oddly, a Congress that has been fairly inept at passing much of anything might be the premium cigar community’s best hope.

Last month, the House Appropriations Committee passed a draft of its FY2017 agriculture bill. In it were two provisions that would directly affect today’s rule. One would exempt premium cigars from FDA regulation, the other would change the grandfather date to Aug. 8, 2017. The latter is going to be controversial, particularly because it would also grandfather in almost all of the e-cigarette industry, and anti-tobacco advocates have already seized on it as a major issue.

Exempting premium cigars is less controversial and the hope now for cigar smokers must be that cigar-friendly members of Congress fight to keep the language in the final version of the bill.

Unfortunately for cigar smokers, it’s more likely than not that the final bill will not be voted on until after August. It is possible that the rules go into effect in August and then Congress passes a bill with exemption language, meaning the rules were temporarily enacted and then suspended. The good news is, the Agriculture Bill must be voted on at some point, because otherwise agencies like FDA have no funding; the bad news is it’s probably not going to happen until after the November elections.

---

Thinking that we could have a POTUS who might have a poor(mouth) taste when thinking of how a close relative used a cigar.
Don't look good in that case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chad Vegas

America has strayed so far from its origin that today we resemble nazi's more than our founding fathers.

---

I don't think it's gone that far, but the nanny shit needs to hit the brakes and look and remember how the flying fock we started this friggin' country....How damn much blood has been spilled for our liberties and freedom of CHOICE....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Zurg

Branzig! Where u bin?!?

---

I've been around buddy, just not smoking much at all. I am right now however haha.

Good to see ya! I'll try to poke around here a little more often .

As far as this whole class 1 none sense. It's obvious it is geared towards the vape industry. Cigars are just an unfortunate casualty in the middle of it. If they can take a huge whack at the vape industry while causing havoc to cigars too, well why not?

I can't even begin to count all the vape stores that have popped up in my city over the last 5 years. But this will crush all of them. One of the vape stores in particular will really break my heart....they're living the American dream right now. Weren't making it at all. No money. Opened up a chain of vape stores with the help of a little backing from a close friend. Now they have it all. Nice house on the lake, kids getting what they deserve, financial freedom. But all of that will be ripped away from them....with massive debt to follow now that they have so many assets.

It pains my heart way past what cigar lovers are going to go through.

#%&*##@***!!!! :(

I don't mind admitting to you that I'm pissed off about this bull*hit legislation.
I pity the fool that starts some stupid *hit with me anytime soon.

Anybody that knows me, will be very surprised to hear me state such a thing... but still, there it is.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr__




.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allusred

Thinking that we could have a POTUS who might have a poor(mouth) taste when thinking of how a close relative used a cigar.
Don't look good in that case.

---

He was just poking fun at her....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jhedrick83

Who does the premium cigar industry hurt? Nobody is rolling blunts with their Padron wrappers. Nobody is getting behind the wheel and killing someone because they just finished a Fuente. Kids aren't secretly smoking an Eastern Standard behind school. Who does it hurt? They aren't dangerous or highly addictive. I don't need a nanny, I'm a grown ass man. It also makes me mad as a small business owner. The big corporations and conglomerates will be fine, they can afford it. The little guys can't. Crush the little guy and let the rich get richer. Not to mention the consolidations and mergers that will happen. Medium/Little guys may be forced to sell out to General or Altadis to keep the doors open. Then the products suffer. I'll stop ranting.

Kris is right though. It would only apply to products legally sold in the U.S. So maybe Viva the Embargo?! This shit is just depressing.

---

Don't ever think this is about children or blunts. Don't think you have any rights as a 'consenting adult' either. Fact is, health care in the USA has been quasi-socialist for decades and now it's approaching full, unapologetic socialism. This puts the health care costs of the masses on the shoulders of relatively few payers and they don't think you should smoke. Fact is, the more tobacco consumed, the higher the net cost of health care. Sure, this is about 'the children' to a point - nobody thinks 8 year old Jimmy should be sporting a pack of smokes. But the larger issue is keeping little Jimmy from becoming a smoker in his adult life because smokers cost more to care for than non smokers. All this is about is reducing the net consumption of tobacco by the masses. Your rights be damned. And it really grinds me that for years now, so many pro-nannystate morons have been clamoring for the government to "do something about health care costs" and now it's happening. If that's one of you reading this post, Geez you asshole, thanks a lot!

Now get ready for Big Brother to start regulating your bacon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Zurg

Don't ever think this is about children or blunts. Don't think you have any rights as a 'consenting adult' either. Fact is, health care in the USA has been quasi-socialist for decades and now it's approaching full, unapologetic socialism. This puts the health care costs of the masses on the shoulders of relatively few payers and they don't think you should smoke. Fact is, the more tobacco consumed, the higher the net cost of health care. Sure, this is about 'the children' to a point - nobody thinks 8 year old Jimmy should be sporting a pack of smokes. But the larger issue is keeping little Jimmy from becoming a smoker in his adult life because smokers cost more to care for than non smokers. All this is about is reducing the net consumption of tobacco by the masses. Your rights be damned. And it really grinds me that for years now, so many pro-nannystate morons have been clamoring for the government to "do something about health care costs" and now it's happening. If that's one of you reading this post, Geez you asshole, thanks a lot!

Now get ready for Big Brother to start regulating your bacon.

---

If they want to mitigate rising healthcare costs, they should be going after people like Martin Shkreli or Valent Pharmaceuticals, not the consumer. I'd wager a large amount that the majority of increases in costs are based on gouging of the consumer than the overall health of Americans declining. Our cigars aren't the problem, guys like this are the problem:

http://www.adweek.com/prnewser/wp-co...pharma-bro.jpg

Michael Jackson looking *&#^*&%#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jhedrick83

If they want to mitigate rising healthcare costs, they should be going after people like Martin Shkreli or Valent Pharmaceuticals, not the consumer. I'd wager a large amount that the majority of increases in costs are based on gouging of the consumer than the overall health of Americans declining.

---

Well sh!t flows down hill. Pharmaceutical companies have money and lobbyists. That puts them on higher ground than mom & pop cigar rolling operations. Plus, you have to be very careful when you talk about cutting profits on Pharmaceutical companies because as soon as it becomes unprofitable to fund R&D on new medicines there will be no new medicines. You think those companies are researching cures for cancer and AIDS out of the goodness of their hearts? Hell no, they're doing it because they stand to make billions if they come up with a working cure.

Second, the health care consumer, in large part, doesn't pay for his prescription drugs. His insurance plan does. Therefore he could care less about what the pills cost, all he knows is that his premiums are too high already and they keep going up. So that's what he bitches about and that's how he casts his vote: "LOWER MY INSURANCE COSTS, DAMMIT!!" The trouble (IMO) is that there are far too many people looking to the government for help. I don't want their help. I just want to pay my own way without their help and be free to choose my health care in a truly capitalist system... but we are far removed from that possibility today.