Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Philip Morris

Philip Morris predicts e-cigarettes to kill off traditional smokes

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/philip-morris-predicts-ecigarettes-to-kill-off-traditional-smokes/news-story/c99f693af56dfa859cef1adb2d5347b5

A BIG tobacco company says it sees a future without cigarettes as it pushes to overcome legislative hurdles to launch a smokeless cigarette in Australia.

The move by Philip Morris International to introduce its new product has so far been thwarted by the Federal Government, which refuses to follow the US, UK, Japan and parts of Europe in allowing the legal sale of e-cigarettes.

Health experts told the Herald Sun smokeless cigarettes were a good alternative to quitting smoking.

“For smokers who are unable to quit, switching to reduced-risk products is likely to substantially reduce their risk of smoking-related disease and death,” conjoint associate Professor Colin Mendelsohn said.

Australian Paul Riley, president of PMI in Japan, believes smokeless cigarettes such as the company’s iQOS product will one day sound the death knell for traditional cigarettes.

The device uses real tobacco, but instead of burning it to produce hazardous smoke and tar, it heats it to produce tobacco-flavoured vapour.

“Our goal in Japan is to switch every one of our users on to this product as quickly as possible,” Mr Riley said. “In the last 12 months it has moved quickly … it is a realistic vision.”

Prof Mendelsohn said although it was preferable for smokers to quit, he believed e-cigarettes were a first step.

“The first choice is always to give up all tobacco and nicotine completely if possible … iQOS heats tobacco to produce an aerosol without combustion, or smoke, and is a much safer alternative to smoking.”

Department of Health spokeswoman Kay McNiece said: “The Australian Government is taking a precautionary approach and is examining the policy and regulatory framework on e-cigarettes.”

david.hurley@news.com.au

PMI IMPACT: CONTROLLING RESEARCH. CONTROLLING POLICY?

Earlier this year Philip Morris International (PMI) launched PMI IMPACT – a funding initiative for projects “dedicated to fighting illegal trade and related crimes, such as corruption, organized [sic] crime and money laundering”. In its first funding call in 2016, PMI IMPACT invited proposals focusing specifically on the illicit tobacco trade in the European Union (EU). Public organisations, law enforcement, private entities and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) were all encouraged to submit.

The initiative puts forward three focus areas; research, education and awareness, and action. Each proposal is required to address at least one area.

PMI pledged US$100 million for three funding rounds and publicised that more than 200 expressions of interest had been submitted to the first funding call from 170 organisations, including government agencies, universities, research institutes and private entities.

Funding applications are judged by an expert panel, consisting of seven individuals with very close links to various United Nations (UN) agencies. These include Mahmoud Cherif Bassiouni, who has previously held 22 UN positions, Catherine Volz, who served in the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) for over 18 years, and Suzanne Hayden, former senior advisor to the UNODC.

PMI IMPACT is not the first research funding initiative from the tobacco company. In 2000, it launched the PMI External Research Program (PMERP), which administered grants to scientists for research on multiple topics, including nontobacco causes of cardiovascular diseases and genetic susceptibility to cancers. Such initiatives are tied to the tobacco industry’s long history of producing misleading research, begining with its attempts in the early 1950s to discredit the then newly-proven causal link between smoking and lung cancer. PMI IMPACT can be seen as another attempt at controlling the discourse around science, the research itself and its
outcomes.

The illicit tobacco trade is one of several policy areas where the tobacco industry is attempting to not only gain access to the policy process, but also to take part in this process as a valued expert and stakeholder.

However, given the industry’s historic complicity in the illicit trade, its questionable preexisting research on the topic and its repeated use of illicit trade as a counter argument to the further regulation of its products, its motives in launching PMI IMPACT are arguably spurious.

In 2004, PMI paid the EU $1.25 billion to settle claims over the company’s involvement in tobacco smuggling, and committed to produce an annual ‘Project Star’ report about illicit tobacco in the EU. These reports were created by the global accountancy firm KPMG and have been widely criticised by academics. PMI has also commissioned multiple KPMG reports on illicit tobacco in Australia. Cancer Council Victoria has produced critiques of several of these reports leading to the Australian Government stated in 2013 that “the tobacco industry`s estimates of the size of the illicit market are not considered to be accurate”. Multiple tobacco companies have commissioned similar reports by Deloitte – another global accountancy firm.

Internal documents include examples of PMI internal documents include examples of the company attempting to influence the drafting of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). In 2000, for example, PMI argued to the US Departments of Commerce and Health and Human Services that government involvement with the tobacco industry would be a more effective way of combating illicit trade than the measures put forward in the FCTC. The consultancy group Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin Inc advised PMI that future FCTC protocols would have a bigger impact on the tobacco industry than the FCTC itself and so should become the company’s main focus. PMI IMPACT might be seen as a key part of continued efforts to undermine policy, particularly the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, known as the Illicit Trade Protocol (ITP).

Calls for new research on a particular topic carry with them the underlying suggestion that pre-existing research is flawed or lacking. The arrival of PMI IMPACT may be an attempt by the industry to further control data on illicit trade and use this to influence policy. With only 17 Parties needed before the ITP enters into force, it is essential that PMI IMPACT, and the research that results from it, are viewed with intense scrutiny by researchers and Governments alike.

Allen Gallagher & Karen Evans-Reeves,
Tobacco Control Research Group,
University of Bath

COP7 MUST FUEL THE FIGHT AGAINST INDUSTRY INTERFERENCE IN-COUNTRY

The report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), “Global Progress in Implementation of the FCTC”, (document FCTC/COP/7/4), notes the incredible advances we’ve made in implementing the life-saving measures of the treaty – often despite aggressive attempts by the tobacco industry to block, weaken, and delay them.

And the long-awaited legal victories in Uruguay and Australia over Big Tobacco have been wind in the sails of public health officials globally.

However, the summary also notes one incredibly important conclusion: “the tobacco industry continues to be the most important barrier in implementation of the Convention”.

This stark reminder highlights the urgency of national-level implementation of FCTC Article 5.3, which states: “In setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law.”

Article 5.3 is the most powerful tool at Parties’ disposal to neutralise the money, power, and influence of this deadly industry and its allies. Implementation of this powerful measure at the national level, which safeguards and facilitates implementation of all other articles of the treaty, must be prioritised by the Parties at COP7. This means reviewing lessons learned from both the progress and challenges contained in the Secretariat’s report, but also a renewed commitment to prioritising implementation of Article 5.3 and its guidelines at the national level, coupled with additional investment and resourcing.

To date, dozens of governments have begun to implement measures in line with Article 5.3 at the national level, and more are expected to follow suit.

For instance, Norway has divested more than US$2 billion from the tobacco industry. Uganda incorporated almost all of the Article 5.3 guidelines into a national tobacco control bill signed into law this year.

Brazil adopted ethical guidelines for representatives of its tobacco control commission, CONICQ, requiring that it has no ties with the tobacco industry.

The European Union has terminated its agreement with Philip Morris International. Australia publishes all meetings between government officials and the tobacco industry on a public website. And the Philippines has barred public officials from interacting with the tobacco industry unless strictly necessary for regulation.

When Parties prioritise implementing Contiued on page 8 measures in line with Article 5.3, it pays huge dividends for tobacco control across the board. By investing time and energy up front into cleaning up the policymaking process and changing the culture within government to recognise the fundamental and irreconcilable conflict of interest between the tobacco industry and public health, Parties find it much easier to pass any and all tobacco control measures into law.

Yet it remains clear that more work needs to be done. For one, though many health ministries have implemented policies in line with Article 5.3, other agencies, such as trade and agriculture, often have not, opening the door to tobacco industry influence. In addition, Article 5.3 is more akin to a good governance measure than a public health measure per se. This can be a barrier for public health officials who don’t have the expertise to implement and enforce, for example, conflict of interest policies for government employees. It also requires coordination across agencies to ensure the article and guidelines are enforced beyond the ministry of health.

Several COP7 agenda items will address the tobacco industry.

Civil society will be watching governments closely.

John Stewart
Deputy Campaign Director: Water & Tobacco, Corporate Accountability International

Uruguay: A giant leap to prevent tobacco-assisted suicide

https://blogs.worldbank.org/health/uruguay-giant-leap-prevent-tobacco-assisted-suicide

Tobacco is arguably one of the most significant threats to public health we have ever faced. Since the publication of the landmark U.S. Surgeon General’s Report on Tobacco and Health in 1964, that provided evidence linking smoking to diseases of nearly all organs of the body (see graph below), the international community slowly began to realize that a century-long epidemic of cigarette smoking was causing an enormous, avoidable public health catastrophe across the world.

History is not linear. The road to progress tends to be circuitous and full of uncertainties, and even more than a few steps backwards. In spite of this reality, at certain points in time, we have to admire those individuals and countries who have stepped in to shine the light to allow us all to move forward.

Recently, Uruguay, a small country in South America, offered us a good example of how a government that is committed to protecting the health and wellbeing of its people was able to withstand for more than 6 years the pressure of litigation from a giant multinational tobacco company, whose annual revenues of more than US$80 billion exceed the country’s gross domestic product of close to US$50 billion. As discussed in detail below, Philip Morris started proceedings in February 2010 claiming that the comprehensive tobacco control measures adopted by the Government of Uruguay since 2003 violated obligations under international trade and investment arrangements.

We are heartened by the resolve of leaders in Uruguay, which reflects the “garra charrúa” or the “resourceful, daring, and never to give up attitude” of the Uruguayan people. Perhaps in this case is apt to paraphrase the words of Apollo 11 astronaut, Neil Armstrong, after he stepped onto the lunar surface for the first time in 1969, to describe Uruguay’s victory as “one small step for a country, one giant leap for global tobacco control.”

Although cigarettes are “legal” goods that are produced, traded, and sold across the world, it is an indisputable fact, as one of us can attest as a specialist in vascular disease, that tobacco acts in a number of direct and indirect ways to cause damage to our blood vessels, heart and brain. Over time, these injuries raise blood pressure, reduce ability to tolerate exercise, and increase risk for blood clots and cancer.

adverse_effects_of_tobacco_smoking-png_1

Indeed, the bleak truth is that tobacco is the only “legal” product that kills when used as advertised. Despite decades of accumulated epidemiologic and experimental evidence on the causal relationship between tobacco smoking and lung cancer and other diseases, as well as significant progress achieved in reducing tobacco use globally since the adoption in 2005 of the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), smoking remains one of the largest causes of preventable disease and death, with nearly 80% of the world’s one billion smokers living in developing countries. Data from the 2015 Global Burden of Disease study show that tobacco-attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost have continued to rise across the world because of increases in population and aging that overwhelm declines in both exposure and risk-delated rates of related disease burden. In 2015, more than 7.1 million people died due to all tobacco smoke-related cases, up from 6.8 million people in 2005.

The lawsuit by Philip Morris, the biggest tobacco company in the world, against Uruguay argued that the country’s rules on tobacco packaging negatively impacted its intellectual property rights and sales in violation of the terms of a bilateral investment treaty between Uruguay and Switzerland, where the tobacco company has its headquarters. At its core, the lawsuit opposed provisions in two tobacco control measures adopted by the Government of Uruguay for protecting public health from the adverse effects of tobacco promotion, including false marketing that certain brand variants are safer than others, even after misleading descriptors such as “light,” “mild,” “ultra-light” were banned, and to increase consumer awareness of the health risks of tobacco consumption and encourage people, particularly the youth, to quit or not to take up smoking. Ordinance 514 issued by the Ministry of Public Health in 2008 requires each cigarette brand to have a “single presentation” and prohibits different packaging or “variants” for cigarettes sold under a given brand. Presidential Decree 287 of 2009 mandates an increase in the size of prescribed health warnings of the surface of the front and back of the cigarette packages from 50% to 80%, leaving only 20% of the cigarette pack for trademarks, logos and other information. The application of these provisions forced Philip Morris to withdraw most of its brands (such as Marlboro Red, Marlboro Gold, or Marlboro Green) from retail stores in Uruguay.

On July 8, 2016, however, the International Center of Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an independent arm of the World Bank Group, dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety and ruled that Uruguay should be awarded compensation for all the expenses and costs associated with defending against these claims. In essence, the ruling accepted the claim made by the Government of Uruguay that its anti-tobacco measures were “about protection of public health, not interference with foreign investment.” We should be clear, as Uruguay’s President, Dr. Tabaré Vázquez, an oncologist, stated in a televised address to the country after the ruling, the ICSID award reinforces that “it is not acceptable to prioritize commercial considerations over the fundamental right to health and life.”

This landmark international ruling came at just the right time, as India prepares to host in early November 2016, the Conference of the Parties (COP7), bringing together 180 Parties, which includes almost every country in the world, as well as regional economic integration organizations like the European Union, for reviewing the implementation of the WHO’s FCTC and the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.

At COP7, the victory of Uruguay needs to be highlighted echoing the words of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an international public health champion, who provided financial support to help Uruguay deal with the litigation: “No country should be ever be intimidated by the threat of a tobacco company lawsuit, and this case will help embolden more nations to take actions that will save lives.” Indeed, countries across the world have now an important precedent to follow for the benefit of their people.

Philip Morris is ‘telling smokers to quit’ – as it brings out new smokeless tobacco sticks

http://metro.co.uk/2016/10/24/philip-morris-is-telling-smokers-to-quit-as-it-brings-out-new-smokeless-tobacco-sticks-6211771/

In what might be one of the biggest U-turns in history, tobacco giant Philip Morris is looking towards a ‘smoke-free’ future, according to Bloomberg.

‘We can’t stop cold turkey,’ says CEO Andre Calantzopoulos – as he unveiled the company’s new ‘smokeless’ alternative to tobacco.

Forget vaping, though: the new product is a stick which heats tobacco, rather than burns it.

The new product – IQOS, pronounced ‘eye-koss’ – is 90% less harmful than traditional cigarettes, but has the flavour that e-cigarettes lack, Philip Morris says.

The iQOS is a tobacco stick that is heated just enough to produce an aerosol but not combust- and which looks like an e-cigarette machine.

The refills, sold as Marlboro Heatsticks cost the same as normal cigarettes, at least in Japan.

The product has already been a hit in Japan – and Philip Morris is now rolling it out to new markets.

The industry has been grappling with widespread anti-smoking campaigns which have forced companies like Philip Morris to diversify into nicotine replacements and e-cigarettes to meet consumer health concerns.

Companies such as Philip Morris are moving into ‘heat not burn’ technologies – which are expected to ‘accelerate’ rapidly, according to Owen Bennett, an equity analyst at Jefferies International.

 

In Marlboro Country, a Big-Money Race for the New Smoke

You want a trip to Philip Morris International Inc. to feel like a visit to Marlboro Country. But the company’s Swiss research center, aka the Cube, just won’t play along.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-24/in-marlboro-country-a-big-money-race-for-the-new-smoke

Perched above crystalline Lake Neuchatel, southwest of Zurich, the glass hexahedron holds secrets to a future when, Philip Morris says, the world will be blissfully smoke-free.

That’s right: Philip Morris, of all companies, is telling smokers to quit. Here, beyond the sun-dappled reflecting pool, scientists in lab coats are searching for the Big Tobacco’s magic bullet: cigarette substitutes that will sell — but won’t kill.

The push gained new urgency Friday with news that British American Tobacco Plc was offering $47 billion to buy out Reynolds American Inc., a move that would topple Philip Morris as the world’s largest publicly traded tobacco company.

The stakes could scarcely be higher. Tobacco claims more than 6 million lives every year. With smoking on the decline around the world, tobacco giants are racing to find new, supposedly safer products to feed nicotine addiction, even as they lean on old-fashioned cigarettes to sustain their profits.

Not Cold Turkey

Can Big Tobacco really kick cigarettes? More to the point, can it afford to?

“We can’t stop cold turkey,” says Andre Calantzopoulos, the chief executive officer of Philip Morris International. A crucial test could come in 2017 when his next big hope — an iPhone-esque contraption that heats tobacco inside a cigarillo-size tube — potentially hits the U.S.

Quitting old-fashioned smokes won’t be easy for tobacco companies or their stakeholders. Philip Morris turned out 850 billion cigarettes last year, generating net revenue of about $74 billion. All that tobacco pays off handsomely for global investors: Counting dividends, the company’s stock has returned roughly 70 percent over the past five years.

For Calantzopoulos, an electrical engineer by training and reformed smoker who’s spent his career at Philip Morris, the challenge will be to come up with new moneymakers as society radically redefines the way it uses tobacco. That, while BAT is grabbing the rest of Reynolds to help power its own push into so-called next generation products.

Seeking Smokers?

Critics are skeptical. They say Big Tobacco is simply doing what it’s always done: selling addictive products, with a gloss of feel-good marketing, while keeping tobacco at the heart of a $770 billion global industry.

“Philip Morris has demonstrated time and time again in the past its introduction of new products has led to more smokers,” says Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a leading U.S. anti-smoking group. “Given their history, no one should ever trust what a tobacco company says it intends to do.”

Naysayers aside, what’s happening inside the Cube goes well beyond popular alternatives like electronic cigarettes, which exploded onto the scene in the late-2000s and made “vape” the Oxford Dictionaries 2014 word of the year.

Philip Morris doesn’t even have a word for what comes after “vape.” Its four-pronged strategy starts with something called iQOS, pronounced, EYE-kose.

Flip open the white- or blue-colored plastic iQOS case and you’ll find a heater that looks like a stubby pen. Into one end you insert what amount to munchkin-size cigarettes, called HEETS. The iQOS — which some have said is an acronym for “I quit ordinary smoking” — gently heats the tobacco without burning it, producing a warm, nicotine-laced aerosol.

New Name

It’s not smoking. Nor vaping. It’s, well — Philip Morris isn’t quite sure what. Its best idea so far for what to call it: “HEETing.”

IQOS has been a hit in Japan and parts of Europe. After an extensive application process with U.S. health authorities, the product is expected to reach America next year, though without claims that it’s any safer than regular cigarettes. IQOS will have to pass a second hurdle with the Food and Drug Administration before it can be marketed as safer.

After HEETS comes TEEPS, a heat-not-burn product that looks pretty much like an old-fashioned cigarette. Here again, Philip Morris is relying on tobacco. But instead of lighting up the old way, users ignite a carbon tip that heats the tobacco.

The taste and nicotine intake of iQOS and TEEPS are closer to that of ordinary cigarettes than e-cigarettes, the company says, a stab at fixing smokers’ No. 1 complaint about early vapor products.

Nicotine Salt

A third device, STEEM, is a twist on a medical inhaler: It combines nicotine and a weak organic acid to produce nicotine salt, which is absorbed without vapor. A fourth, called MESH, is a more conventional e-cigarette using flavored nicotine liquid.

So far, Philip Morris has spent more than $3 billion on its post-cigarette push.

Whatever the concerns about cigarette substitutes, many agree e-cigs and the like are safer than ordinary smokes. But there are fears that all these new products may ultimately drive people back to conventional cigarettes — or get nonsmokers hooked on the habit.

“These products are not zero-risk,” Calantzopoulos said.

Getting iQOS to America’s doorstep also has been a slog. The reduced-risk application to the Food and Drug Administration, expected in by the end of this year, is already more than 2 million pages. The application to get the product on shelves will likely be filed early next year.

“We are aware of the history of the tobacco industry, but our job is to take the sciences they have submitted and objectively evaluate what their data is and how far it goes to addressing the mandatory statutory standards,” said Mitch Zeller, director for the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products.

New-Product Race

Philip Morris isn’t running this race alone. BAT, Reynolds, Altria Group Inc. and Japan Tobacco Inc. are all working on a variety of products.

“The race is not money, but time,” Calantzopoulos said.

Here in Switzerland, the Philip Morris campus isn’t smoke-free. But the company is making an effort to project a post-cigarette image. The main building has three sections: Earth, Wind and Air. Fire is missing. Indeed, e-cigarettes and iQOS have caught on among the company’s former smokers.

Jacek Olczak, the chief financial officer, said iQOS helped him quit regular cigarettes.

“I’m extremely happy,” he said. “My company solves my own problem, and I can make money off of it.”

Nearly everyone in the industry acknowledges that the road ahead for Big Tobacco will be long. Public health officials, and many ordinary people, are wary of the industry and its intentions.

So change won’t be easy. As Calantzopoulos put it: “Decades of history are not going to change in one afternoon.”

Big Tobacco sees its future in cigarettes, not vaping

http://theconversation.com/big-tobacco-sees-its-future-in-cigarettes-not-vaping-67363

In 2012, in the early days of the rise of e-cigarettes, Kingsley Wheaton, Director of Corporate and Regulatory Affairs at British American Tobacco, said “Our core business is, and will remain in, tobacco”.

So have the intervening four years made much difference? Apparently not.

This month, senior Philip Morris International executive Werner Barth told shareholders at its investor day presentations the company fully expected its cigarette brands to remain highly profitable. Investment analysts Motley Fool summarised the presentation by saying that Philip Morris planned to have cigarettes “keep bringing in the bulk of its revenue for years to come.”

In 2014, more than one billion smokers spent some $US744 billion on 5.6 trillion cigarettes. By contrast, the global e-cigarette market had estimated sales of $US6.1 billion in 2015 (0.8% of the cigarette market). Bullish forecasts about the future of e-cigarettes are easy to find on the internet. Many of these are undoubtedly efforts to attract investors.

But recent data point to a major slowing in the growth that has been seen in some nations for about five years. In the important US convenience store sector, sales of vapour products fell continuously for seven months (note that this data does not include online or vape shop sales).

A report earlier this year in the industry magazine Tobacco Reporter quoted a Euromonitor tobacco analyst saying:

Western Europe – for the first time in several years – saw positive [tobacco] volume growth as economies recovered and out-switching to illicit and vapour products lessened.

Barth highlighted three high-growth segments for cigarettes: low-tar cigarettes, which Motley Fool noted “have become an important way that some smokers have aimed to address their concerns about potential health impacts of smoking”; slimmer cigarettes (a strategy usually targeted at women); and the capsule market, where smokers can burst a capsule of flavour embedded in the filter.

Low-tar cigarettes have of course been thoroughly discredited as false and misleading harm-reduced products. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has banned the light and mild descriptors in Australia. The tobacco industry knew about this deception for decades (see below) but is apparently still happy to benefit from and not actively correct consumer misunderstandings here.

Big Tobacco knew 44 years ago that people did not smoke like tar measuring machines.  Legacy Industry Documents Library

Big Tobacco knew 44 years ago that people did not smoke like tar measuring machines. Legacy Industry Documents Library

In recent years we have seen an incontinence of rebirthing talk from Big Tobacco companies such as Philip Morris, British American Tobacco (BAT), RJ Reynolds and Japan Tobacco International about their commitment to manufacturing non-combustible nicotine delivery devices, particularly e-cigarettes and Philip Morris’ heat not burn products.

The hope for these products, like a conga line of hyped harm-reduction failures of the past, is that they will significantly reduce disease and death from what follows from nicotine addiction.

Tobacco companies of course all wish that two in three of their very best customers didn’t inconveniently die from using their products years earlier than normal life expectancy. They would much rather they could all keep smoking for a normal life span and keep the cash registers turning over.

For decades companies just denied that smoking killed. In the 1990s, these lies were stopped in their tracks when the companies were forced to publicly swallow truth serum in the form of their own newly public internal documents, released via whistleblowers and through litigation. These showed they knew the problems with tobacco all along.

If the industry really cares deeply about the deaths of its customers, this care is not enough to do anything to stop it selling the deadliest forms of nicotine delivery, nor to desist from its major attacks on tobacco-control policies it knows are most effective in reducing smoking. Plain packaging, which started in Australia, continues to attract massively funded attacks and legal challenges, currently in full swing in Canada which is nearing legislation.

Every day British American Tobacco’s twitter feeds around the world are choked with its best efforts to demonise tobacco tax rises, all in the hope that governments will reduce tobacco tax. This would see both smoking and the diseases it causes rise.

The very last thing that Big Tobacco hopes for harm-reduced nicotine products is that they will cannibalise their mainstay cigarette markets. Instead, the business model is dual use (people smoking where and when they can smoke, and vaping when they can’t); luring ex-smokers back as customers with promises of negligible harm from vapoursied nicotine products; and intriguing young people who have never used any nicotine product and who are increasingly never likely to, to start experimenting with vaping and hopefully doing it regularly.

In the United States, the latest National Youth Tobacco Survey shows the historically continuing fall in youth smoking has come to a screaming halt coincident with record use of e-cigarettes. The anxiety in the tobacco industry about this must be all-consuming.

There is now a small group of experts in public health who are now openly or covertly collaborating with the tobacco industry over e-cigarettes. They are being comprehensively played. In mouthing its newfound concern for tobacco’s harms, the industry’s harm-reduction division personnel can now cosy up to a suite of naïve or historically amnesic public heath urgers who lend Big Tobacco a credibility it craves.

Meanwhile, down the Big Tobacco corridor in the cigarette divisions, the harm-reduction staff’s colleagues continue promoting smoking and attempting to thwart effective tobacco control as usual.

This new, embarrassing and appeasing embrace is rather like charity leaders warmly embracing a mafia boss for his generous annual cheque, knowing full well from where the largesse was derived.

Philip Morris Boosts Cigarette Alternative Investments

The tobacco firm will expand sales of these products to more countries as well as increase its development of new products.

http://www.nacsonline.com/Media/Daily/Pages/ND0930166.aspx

The head of Philip Morris International has his eyes on alternatives to cigarettes as a good investment strategy for his company. CEO Andre Calantzopoulos said that the company will shell out an additional $100 million in 2016 to develop next-generation tobacco products, Bloomberg reports.

“We are more confident than ever that these products have the potential to fundamentally transform our business,” he said. One product in particular has received more funding: the iQOS heat-not-burn tobacco device. Philip Morris forecasts the product will hit shelves in 20 markets by the end of 2016.

IQOS consists of a rechargeable electronic device that heats tubes of tobacco. These “HeatSticks” look like half a cigarette. According to the company, iQOS has already gained more than a million smokers in Italian and Japanese test markets. “We are still in very, very early days,” Calantzopoulos said.

Overall, Philip Morris predicts that worldwide, cigarette smoking declines between 2% and 2.5% annually. Analysts are closely watching the tobacco industry as competitors race to come up with the next big thing in tobacco products.

“It’s not clear which product or which category will ultimately win,” said Rupert Wilson, an industry analyst. “Someone will eventually bring a product out that’s a quantum leap.”

3 Key Markets for Philip Morris International

The tobacco company does business around the world, but some of its markets are more important than others.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/09/26/3-key-markets-for-philip-morris-international.aspx

Cigarette maker Philip Morris International (NYSE:PM) has built a truly global business, serving customers on six continents. Yet some of the nations in which Philip Morris sells its cigarettes and other tobacco products are more important to the company’s overall success than others, and investors need to watch those markets particularly closely to make sure that they catch any potential changes that could help or hurt the company. Below, we’ll look at three key markets for Philip Morris to see how they’ve fared recently.

1. Indonesia

Indonesia has one of the largest overall cigarette markets of any country that Philip Morris serves, and unlike many areas of the world, that market is growing. In the second quarter of 2016, Philip Morris estimated the size of the total cigarette market at 83.6 billion units, up 5 billion in just the past year. For its part, Philip Morris shipped more than 28.5 billion units to Indonesia during the quarter, claiming about a third of the overall market with brands like Sampoerna and Dji Sam Soe. In particular, Philip Morris has had success with what it calls the Whites segment, claiming four-fifths of the market in that category. The key Machine-Made Kretek market, which makes up about three-fourths of Indonesia’s total market, has been less successful for Philip Morris, but the company still claims about 30% of that segment.

Indonesia has suffered from a sluggish economic environment lately, and Philip Morris has seen its market share fall by a full percentage point over the past year. Gains in the size of the market were largely due to the timing of the Ramadan period compared to last year’s second quarter, and Philip Morris expects long-term trends to be closer to flat. Nevertheless, Indonesia’s sheer size will make it an important market for Philip Morris to target going forward.

2. Russia

Russia also has a strong culture of smoking, and its size makes it an essential element of Philip Morris International’s overall strategic vision. The Russian cigarette market sold about 72.1 billion units in the second quarter, and Philip Morris was responsible for 20.5 billion of them, climbing market share of 27%.

Oddly enough, though, Russia is one area in which the Marlboro brand has been almost inconsequential. Marlboro has a market share of just 1.4%, compared to 8% for Bond Street and 3.9% for Parliament. Other brands, which include L&M, Chesterfield, Optima, and Next/Dubliss, were collectively responsible for more than half of Philip Morris sales in Russia.

Troubling for Philip Morris is that the Russian cigarette market is shrinking quickly, posting a nearly 7% year-over-year drop compared to last year’s second quarter. The price increases that Philip Morris has implemented to try to offset falling volume have resulted in a hit to market share, and the company will have to balance competitive pressure against its desire for higher profit in order to get the most from the nation.

3. Italy

By contrast, Philip Morris’ markets in the European Union are relatively small. Yet the EU is an essential component of Philip Morris’ success because of the company’s ability to squeeze higher profit margin from many countries there.
As an example, in the second quarter, Philip Morris’ sales in the EU and in Asia were roughly the same, but EU operating company income of $1.07 billion was more than $320 million higher than the corresponding figure in Asia.

Within the EU, Italy stands out. The Italian cigarette market sold only about 18.7 billion units in the second quarter, but Philip Morris was responsible for more than half of them, at 10.1 billion. Marlboro had market share of nearly a fourth all by itself, and the Chesterfield and Philip Morris brands were responsible for another 20 percentage points of share.

The good news for Philip Morris in Italy is that efforts to reduce the level of illegal trade in cigarettes has paid off somewhat. With the new PMI Impact campaign, Philip Morris hopes to engage a broader set of interested parties to fight smuggling, and the likely result is potential further gains in legitimate sales volumes of its tobacco products. Investors should watch results in Italy closely for additional signs of success on the illicit trade front.

Philip Morris wants to serve the whole world, and it will continue to reach out to customers everywhere it can find them. These three countries will be especially important for Philip Morris in its efforts to capture as much growth as possible going forward.

10 stocks we like better than Philip Morris International

When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*

David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Philip Morris International wasn’t one of them! That’s right — they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.

Dan Caplinger has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy

What Philip Morris International Is Doing to Fight Smuggling

The tobacco company takes a big hit from illegal trade every year and is looking to do something about it.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/09/16/what-philip-morris-international-is-doing-to-fight.aspx

The tobacco industry around the world is huge, with millions of smokers consistently looking for ways to get the cigarettes they want. However, many governments tax cigarettes heavily, and whenever there’s a financial incentive to cut corners and circumvent taxation of a high-value product, smugglers will emerge to conduct illegal trade activity. Philip Morris International (NYSE:PM) has historically been a huge victim of illegal trade, estimating that if it could cut the illegal tobacco trade by just a single percentage point, it would equate to a $120 million boost to its operating income if it could capture its fair share of the resulting increase in sales volume. Although the company has always worked to try to eliminate smuggling, Philip Morris took a bigger step forward earlier this year, and its efforts have already started to produce some promising proposals.

Philip Morris and its antismuggling efforts

For a long time, Philip Morris has centered its efforts to fight illicit trade on controlling sales of products to its direct customers. By ensuring a clean supply chain to bring Philip Morris products from manufacturing facilities to the retail outlets that then sell them to smokers, the tobacco giant worked to keep its grip on its cigarettes while they were in its control.

However, expectations among government regulators were broader than that, and they expressed a desire to have Philip Morris exercise more oversight even when its products had left its direct control. Improvements in technology helped Philip Morris be more effective in tracking and preventing illegal trade. Pack authentication practices have rolled out in more than 90 countries, and Philip Morris has trained more than 11,000 law enforcement officials on smuggling issues. By the end of 2017, the company expects it will cover 80% of its total cigarette production with pack-tracking capabilities.

PMI Impact: The latest move from Philip Morris

But at its core, Philip Morris believes that it can’t do the job alone, and it will need help from all corners in order to put an end to the smuggling problem worldwide. The tobacco giant has memoranda of understanding with governments in more than 20 countries, but it wants to bring even more stakeholders into the mix.

That’s why earlier this year, Philip Morris launched its PMI Impact initiative. The move seeks to bring together various public, private, and nongovernmental organizations to come up with new projects that can fight illegal trade and the crime that often accompanies it. Philip Morris pledged $100 million toward PMI Impact, and it believes that the initiative will not only facilitate the development of good ideas and coordinate the implementation of those ideas but also produce a broader understanding of the factors that lead to corruption, organized crime, and money laundering associated with cigarette smuggling.

Earlier this week, PMI Impact received its initial round of project proposals. More than 200 projects from 170 different organizations came in, including many from government agencies, research institutes, universities, nongovernmental organizations, and private entities. More than 40 countries were represented, with the majority in Europe and North America. That makes sense, given the first round’s emphasis on fighting illegal trade and related crime in the European Union. PMI Impact expects to make final decisions by the middle of 2017.

Future rounds of funding will address different themes. In general, each project must address one or more of PMI Impact’s primary focus areas, which include research to increase the knowledge base surrounding illegal activity, education and awareness of consumers and the general public of the problem of illegal trade, and action toward solving the problems more permanently.

Philip Morris knows that no single effort will be enough to eliminate the problem of smuggling. Yet when it looks at the economic impact of illegal trade on its own business along with the broader impact on the communities it serves, Philip Morris believes that it’s in everyone’s best interest to limit smuggling as much as possible and reduce the related crime that often accompanies illegal trade activity.