Do you agree with plain cigarette packaging?

Packaging obviously doesn't matter - that's why the manufacturers spend hundreds of millions on brand identity and marketing; they just like throwing their money away...

[Gavin78]

plus different cigs have different tastes from what I gather from those that do smoke so packaging and make obviously does come into account?

Originally Posted by Stephen

I don't see how changing to plain packaging will affect people buying them though as all shops have to have cigs completely covered up now. well in Scotland anyway, don't know about the rest of the UK.

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Plain packets are stupid all the decades I smoked I never cared about the packaging not once did I purchase by telling the checkout operator "I'll have 20 of the one with red stripes vertically on the packet". This is all about those who want smoking gone thinking they have achieved something but in practical terms I doubt it will affect a single smoker. Images are great except that people know smoker's and rarely see the cancer mouth in life I grew up in a family of smoker's a few of them died from smoking related illness and never had any overt signs.

Packaging matters a lot .On a subconscious level you are influenced by the colour and design of the packet ,wording on the packet like 'mild' , 'smooth' or 'special' leads to a false idea of less harm being done ,even describing cigarettes as low tar leads people to think they are somehow safer but in fact smokers of low tar cigarettes die at the same rate as smokers of regular tar cigarettes.
Even though cigarettes have been put behind doors in shops so they cannot be seen the brightly coloured packets are designed on purpose to attract attention and be identified with certain brands ,different shading on the packets for 'lite' cigarettes for example gives people the idea that the cigarettes are safer .If you still don't believe that packaging matters read this

Lambert & Butler – case study
In a presentation to an industry conference in 2006, Imperial Tobacco’s Global Brand
Director, Geoff Good, acknowledged that the tobacco advertising ban in the UK had
“effectively banned us from promoting all tobacco products” and noted that “In this
challenging environment, the marketing team have to become more creative” adding: “We
therefore decided to look at pack design.”
Focusing on the UK’s most popular cigarette brand, Lambert & Butler, Imperial developed
a new version of the Lambert & Butler brand to mark its 25th anniversary in the UK market.
The “Celebration” packs were launched in November 2004 as a 4-month special edition,
replacing the original pack until February 2005. According to Good: “The effect was very
positive. Already the no.1 brand, our share grew by over 0.4% during this period – that
might not sound a lot – but it was worth over £60 million in additional turnover and a
significant profit improvement.”
Good concludes: “Often in marketing, it is difficult to isolate the effects of individual parts
of the mix. But in this case, because the UK had become a dark market, the pack design
was the only part of the mix that was changed, and therefore we knew the cause and
effect.”

http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_1024.pdf

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by martyh

Packaging matters a lot .On a subconscious level you are influenced by the colour and design of the packet ,wording on the packet like 'mild' , 'smooth' or 'special' leads to a false idea of less harm being done ,even describing cigarettes as low tar leads people to think they are somehow safer but in fact smokers of low tar cigarettes die at the same rate as smokers of regular tar cigarettes.
Even though cigarettes have been put behind doors in shops so they cannot be seen the brightly coloured packets are designed on purpose to attract attention and be identified with certain brands ,different shading on the packets for 'lite' cigarettes for example gives people the idea that the cigarettes are safer .If you still don't believe that packaging matters read this



http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_1024.pdf

What is the point of quoting an old report that is totally immaterial? Tobacco products are now behind closed doors in shops and stores so a smoker will go in and request their favourite brand whatever it is. Or do you think a smoker is going to change their mind once the door is opened?

The "Plain" packets will still contain the brand name.

Total waste of time and money and as said more to do with attempting to stop illegal imports than anything else.

Originally Posted by pip08456

What is the point of quoting an old report that is totally immaterial? Tobacco products are now behind closed doors in shops and stores so a smoker will go in and request their favourite brand whatever it is. Or do you think a smoker is going to change their mind once the door is opened?

The "Plain" packets will still contain the brand name.

Total waste of time and money and as said more to do with attempting to stop illegal imports than anything else.

In case you hadn't noticed i quoted a case study from Lambert and Butler to highlight the fact that packaging does matter a great deal as proven by the makers and still very much relevant .

Tobacco products may well be behind closed doors but not once they have been sold

http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_1024.pdf

MYTH 2: We don’t need standardised packaging; packs are already hidden from sight in shops
FACT: Since April 2015 it has been illegal to display tobacco products at the point of
sale in all shops. However, once outside glitzy packaging continues to work as the industry’s
‘silent salesman’ advertising brands and promoting smoking to children. Tobacco packs have
been described as ‘badge products’ that become ‘mobile advertising for the brand’.9

Total waste of time and money and as said more to do with attempting to stop illegal imports than anything else

Nothing at all to do with stopping illegal imports .The manufacturers said that plain packaging would lead to an increase of illegal imports but this argument was dismissed because the current packaging is already counterfeited ,hence the covert markings placed on packets

MYTH 1: Tobacco smuggling will increase because standard packs are easily counterfeited
FACT: Existing packs are no obstacle to counterfeiting. However, the tobacco industry
has repeatedly argued that plain or standardised packaging would be much easier to
counterfeit than branded cigarettes. There is no evidence to support this. The Australian
Government’s Post-Implementation Review of Tobacco Plain Packaging reported that studies
have found “no change in smokers’ reported use of unbranded illicit tobacco, no evidence of
increases in use of contraband cigarettes... and no increase in purchases of tobacco from
informal sellers”.7
Tobacco packs are already easily counterfeited which is why the industry puts covert markings
on all tobacco packs to distinguish between authentic and counterfeit packs. Standard packs
will have all the health warnings and other markings required on current packs, including
covert marking – so they will be no easier to counterfeit.8
In addition the revised Tobacco
Products Directive will introduce EU-wide tracking and tracing to combat illicit trade.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by martyh

In case you hadn't noticed i quoted a case study from Lambert and Butler to highlight the fact that packaging does matter a great deal as proven by the makers and still very much relevant .

Tobacco products may well be behind closed doors but not once they have been sold

http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_1024.pdf





Nothing at all to do with stopping illegal imports .The manufacturers said that plain packaging would lead to an increase of illegal imports but this argument was dismissed because the current packaging is already counterfeited ,hence the covert markings placed on packets

Would you like to requote the year of the said case study? As sales of tobacco products have changed drastically since then it would appear to me totally irrelevant unless I am missing something.

Well I never bothered about packaging and speaking to a few smoker's and former smoker's today it wasn't a factor for them either biggest thing that determined choice was taste and nothing else. I'm sure some are influenced by packaging but doubt the figures are that high to make this anything more then a gimmick.

Originally Posted by pip08456

Would you like to requote the year of the said case study? As sales of tobacco products have changed drastically since then it would appear to me totally irrelevant unless I am missing something.

How about a study from 3 years ago?

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/12/e003732.full

Objectives This study examined the perceptions of cigarette packaging and the potential impact of plain packaging regulations. The hypothesis was that the branded cigarette packages would be rated more positively than the corresponding plain packs with and without descriptors....

...Results Plain with and without descriptors packs were rated less positively than the branded packs on appeal (index score 1.63/1.61 vs 2.42, p<0.001), taste (index score 1.21/1.12 vs 1.70, p<0.001) and as less harmful (index score 1.0.34/0.36 vs 0.82, p<0.001) among females. Among males, the difference between the plain with and without descriptors versus branded condition was significant for appeal (index score 2.08/1.92 vs 2.58, p<0.005) and between the plain without descriptors versus branded condition for taste (index score 1.18 vs 1.70, p<0.00). The pack comparison task showed that the packs with descriptors suggesting a lower content of harmful substances, together with lighter colours, were more positively rated in the branded compared with the plain condition on dimensions less harmful (β −0.77, 95% CI −0.97 to −0.56), would rather try (β −0.32, 95% CI −0.50 to −0.14) and easier to quit (β −0.58, 95% CI −0.76 to −0.39).

Conclusions The results indicate that a shift from branded to plain cigarette packaging could lead to a reduction in positive perceptions of cigarettes among young people.

In conclusion, the results of this study point to how packages communicate messages that allow consumers to identify with and differentiate between cigarette brands, and thus are essential in the processes branding works through.26 The results indicate further that a shift from branded to plain cigarette packaging could lead to a reduction in positive perceptions of cigarettes among adolescents, also in a context where marketing of tobacco as well as extensive use of innovative pack design to attract the consumers is already highly regulated.

If packaging and marketing don't make any difference, why do tobacco companies spend $9.5 bllion per year (just in USA) on them?

Originally Posted by pip08456

Would you like to requote the year of the said case study? As sales of tobacco products have changed drastically since then it would appear to me totally irrelevant unless I am missing something.

The year is irrelevant i quoted the passage to illustrate the importance of packaging design for sales of cigarettes for the benefit of those who are convinced that packaging design does not matter .Standardised packaging will remove all marketing tools used by the manufacturer ,including wording ,colour and quantity.The only difference between brands will be the name of the brand and even that will be in standardised font ,the reason why the government are doing this is because as increased legislation reduces the opportunities for marketing the packaging design becomes more important as highlighted by the quote from Lambert and Butler

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:18 ----------

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Well I never bothered about packaging and speaking to a few smoker's and former smoker's today it wasn't a factor for them either biggest thing that determined choice was taste and nothing else. I'm sure some are influenced by packaging but doubt the figures are that high to make this anything more then a gimmick.

Teenage smokers do though ,all the studies show that the wording on the package is very important ,if you tell someone who has just started smoking or is under peer pressure to start that the cigarettes are 'lite' , 'smooth' or 'low tar' the belief is that they are somehow better which as we all know is complete rubbish

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

Teenage smokers do though ,all the studies show that the wording on the package is very important ,if you tell someone who has just started smoking or is under peer pressure to start that the cigarettes are 'lite' , 'smooth' or 'low tar' the belief is that they are somehow better which as we all know is complete rubbish

Nike should make cigarettes. they'd make a klilling with the kids.

All the kids I see these days are not smoking they are using e-cigarettes and all seem to be more interested in blowing big clouds which I don't support but if it has to be one or the other I guess e-cigarettes are better.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I have never heard so much crap about the Government NOT getting any money in Tax. total rubbish.

I will be told next that they don't get Tax on petrol etc.

I was told from TWO shopkeepers that when they sell cigrattes, the Government gets a lot of tax out of it. Is this why they put the price of cigrattes. As the more cigarettes they sell, the MORE tax THE GOVERNMENTS GETS.

On Petrol sales, the Government get a staggering 80% in tax.

That's why when you go to a Garage shops, they charge so much money on the product, as they don't get any money on Petrol

[Stephen]

Well Arthur if you look at the rate of tax on cigarettes then you will see the reason why they are so costly.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Nike should make cigarettes. they'd make a klilling with the kids.

A small sweatband with the Nike tick on each one would make them appear healthy too.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Packaging obviously doesn't matter - that's why the manufacturers spend hundreds of millions on brand identity and marketing; they just like throwing their money away...

Do you honestly think a young person wanders into a shop with the thought of 'Do you know, today, I think I'll start smoking. Now then, which packet do i like the look of best? No, that one is too blue. I know this silver packet with red on is much more my style'

Underage smoking starts in the most case due to peer pressure from other people, when i started smoking i didn't give two hoots what the packaging was like, it was having a cig in my gob with the cool kids.

Only when i was an established smoker did brand loyalty/packaging come into play.