Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Weak argument Gio, not well thought out.
Big tobacco spent $7 million to study XXII patents
and said no way after 1 year.
I am sure British Tobacco knows better than us.
Enjoy the day.
Thanks for this, well thought out.
they already had a big tobacco as a partner appx 5 years ago and they
pulled out...
now with mgmt receiving unbelieable salaries and bonus's the company continues to lose $$$$$ they dont car emuch as they will simply increase the OS again an d keep printing shares..
they are at almost 200 million now..
capital raise is coming soon
Ya but Big Tobacco is not smart enough to buy it:0))))
REALLY WOW
A Trail of Stock Manipulation by the CEO and an Alternative Tobacco Story that is almost Two Decades Long
Joseph Pandolfino, Jr. is the Chairman and CEO of the company. He’s the largest owner of stock, holding 6 million shares (roughly a 10% stake in the company).
On April 6, 1992, Pandolfino incorporated Tobacco Alternative Inc., a marketer of herbal cigarettes and the predecessor to XXII. At the time of Tobacco Alternative’s founding, Pandolfino was a graduate student at SUNY Buffalo and already the subject of an SEC case regarding a fraudulent stock promotion he orchestrated in April, 1991.
The SEC charged Pandolfino with manipulating the prices of two stocks by mailing anonymous letters with false information. The case was settled with Pandolfino neither admitting nor denying the charges and accepting a fine equal to the amount he profited in the scheme. He also agreed to refrain from such activities in the future. This was sourced from the SEC News Digest from 1992.
You can read the electronic copy of this document, still available at the SEC’s website, listed as (source 2):
Paullee
Do you know How many shares are in a unit?
Is Joe still the largest shareholder?
Is Joe still involved?
Joseph Pandolfino XXII stock SEC Form 4 insiders trading
Joseph has made over 8 trades of the 22nd Century Inc stock since 2014, according to the Form 4 filled with the SEC. Most recently Joseph exercised 1,273 units of XXII stock worth $2,769 on 22 January 2016.
The largest trade Joseph's ever made was exercising 112,000 units of 22nd Century Inc stock on 10 March 2014 worth over $67,200. On average, Joseph trades about 60,843 units every 76 days since 2014. As of 22 January 2016 Joseph still owns at least 5,581,897 units of 22nd Century Inc stock.
speaking about a dated story,
this is an entirely different company
Is Joe still on the BOD...this is not good!!!!
https://geoinvesting.com/22nd-century-group-a-lot-of-smoke-not-enough-fire/
yikes really!!!!
A Trail of Stock Manipulation by the CEO and an Alternative Tobacco Story that is almost Two Decades Long
Joseph Pandolfino, Jr. is the Chairman and CEO of the company. He’s the largest owner of stock, holding 6 million shares (roughly a 10% stake in the company).
On April 6, 1992, Pandolfino incorporated Tobacco Alternative Inc., a marketer of herbal cigarettes and the predecessor to XXII. At the time of Tobacco Alternative’s founding, Pandolfino was a graduate student at SUNY Buffalo and already the subject of an SEC case regarding a fraudulent stock promotion he orchestrated in April, 1991.
The SEC charged Pandolfino with manipulating the prices of two stocks by mailing anonymous letters with false information. The case was settled with Pandolfino neither admitting nor denying the charges and accepting a fine equal to the amount he profited in the scheme. He also agreed to refrain from such activities in the future. This was sourced from the SEC News Digest from 1992.
You can read the electronic copy of this document, still available at the SEC’s website, listed as (source 2):
From there, Mr. Pandolfino went on to “Tobacco Alternative, Inc.” We believe Pandolfino has been peddling the “Tobacco Alternative” concept since 1994. We have obtained what appears to be a mailer for “Tobacco Alternative, Inc.” from around the same time period:
The location on the letterhead leads us to what appears to be 1 of 6 apartment buildings located in Buffalo, New York:
Keep this in mind….The 1st FDA Tobacco MRTP by Swedish Match(ZYN) just sold for $16.2 Billion to Philip Morris. This occurred 2 1/2 years after MRTP was granted. XXII was the 3rd FDA MRTP and it was approved just over 6 months ago. Sadly, one thing Big Tobacco has proven over the years is patience and the willingness to play the waiting game. They won’t change until they are absolutely forced to. Make no mistake, this Menthol Ban will most likely occur under the current Biden Administration timeline. However, the Low Nicotine Mandate will most likely get pushed into the next Presidency. When this Menthol Ban occurs, BT will be forced to react seeing as though Menthol is approx 36% of the US cigarette market.
Mish said back in October(when he was told by the FDA they were getting their MRTP shortly) that Big Tobacco CO’s had reached out to them. BT told them they would start to talk to them when:
1.) They have their MRTP
2.) They have run a successful pilot with #’s that were worthy
3.) They proved they could and would launch this product Nationwide and that the product could sell Nationwide
We currently have the first 2 scenarios checked off. My guess is sometime around 2 years from now in 2024 the Menthol Ban will become official. Once BT sees this will become a certainty and that it will absolutely get done under the Biden Admin with the Biden FDA folks in charge, they will be forced to make a move. Look for either Altria or Japan Tobacco International(JTI) to be a buyer. Could be just VLN or the entire company at that point with the break thru’s being made on cannabis, hemp, hops. Can’t imagine anything less than $10 Bill($50 a share) for the entire organization at that point or $5 Bill for just VLN($30 a share). Those #’s are based on current outstanding shares.
Ladies and Gentlemen-KNOW WHAT YOU HOLD! Continue your patience, and don’t stare at this everyday. $3-6 is not what you should be waiting for here. You will see those #’s sooner than later. Hang on for the much, much bigger prize. KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE PRIZE. GLTA
US bans Juul but young vapers are already switching to newer products
Analysis: Juul is only the fourth most popular e-cigarette with adolescents, who are opting for disposable alternatives
‘You can vape things like melatonin or vitamins’ says one expert. ‘Newer products present a whole new level of risk.’
Katharine Gammon
Sun 26 Jun 2022 01.00 EDT
This week, the US effectively banned Juul after the Food and Drug Administration ordered the e-cigarette maker to remove its popular products from the marketplace.
Experts have hailed the move as significant. But they are also concerned that such efforts are failing to keep up with a fast-moving vaping industry – one where young people leap quickly from one product to another.
Teens and vaping: ‘We would have had a nicotine-free generation’
The FDA ban caps years of controversy for Juul, whose discreet vapes have been accused of helping hook an entire new generation on nicotine. In 2020 the FDA ordered mint- and juice-flavored e-cigarette pods off the shelves, hitting many of Juul’s products. This week’s escalation came because regulators said Juul failed to provide sufficient evidence to assess their toxicity and hazards of their tobacco and menthol-flavored e-cigarettes, leaving the FDA unable to “assess the potential toxicological risks of using the Juul products”.
Juul, meanwhile, has argued its vapes help regular smokers quit cigarettes, and has said it will fight back. On Friday, an appeals court temporarily put the ban on hold while Juul appeals.
The ban is still momentous, says Lauren Czaplicki, a researcher at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, because it’s one of the first marketing denials for a brand with substantial market share in the US and for a menthol-flavored product. She points out that other brands like Vuse, Logic and NJOY have received market authorization for various tobacco flavored e-cigarette products and systems, but Juul was denied.
Research shows that bans of flavored cigarettes do make a difference – a 2020 study by George Mason University analyzed a 2009 FDA flavored cigarette ban, and found it reduced smoking by underage youth by 43% and young adults by 27%.
“It is likely that the FDA’s marketing denial will have an impact,” says Czaplicki. “Juul is still a popular product among young people who do use e-cigarettes, and Juul has a certain level of brand recognition and cultural cachet among youth that may be susceptible to nicotine use.”
But while Juul still commands a dominant share of the USA recent federal survey found Juul was only the fourth most popular product among middle and high school students: the disposable e-cigarette Puff Bar came in first, with Vuse and Smok the second and third most popular.[S market, its popularity among young people has waned over the last few years, says Dr Devika Rao, a pediatric pulmonologist at UT Southwestern.
“We know from data that Juul is not the most commonly used,” says Rao. “Adolescents today are favoring disposable vapes, devices you can purchase online or in a store.” They cost as little as $10 each for a single-use device and do not fall under the 2020 flavor ban, even though they use the same technology as Juul.
Adolescents often switch from product to product, creating a Whac-a-Mole prevention strategy, says Monica M Zorilla, a researcher at Stanford. When the FDA prioritized enforcement against flavored e-cigarette devices like Juul in 2020, it exempted disposable e-cigarettes and menthol-flavored e-cigarette products, says Zorilla. A Stanford study found that adolescents then moved to those e-cigarettes that were exempt. “Youth went from pod-based [like Juul] to disposables like Puff Bar,” Zorilla says. “As a youth said to me, ‘anything with fruit’ is popular among their peers. This was in part due to the enforcement and in part because the disposables continued to have many flavors.”
Rao points out that social media marketing is clever – and insidious – enough so teens will switch vaping products before adults are even aware of them. She points out that the newest trend is so-called wellness vapes which are not even marketed as e-cigarettes. “You can vape things like melatonin or vitamins to feel better and fall asleep faster,” she says. These are really vaping devices disguised, and companies are not required to state the concentration or what is in these products. “Newer products present a whole new level of risk.”
Flum Float disposable vape flavored vaping e-cigarette products are displayed in a convenience store in El Segundo, California Photograph: Patrick T Fallon/AFP/Getty Images
More action is needed, says Czaplicki. She says the FDA should immediately issue an order to remove all vape products that are being sold without market authorization, from retail shelves and online. This would include Puff Bar. “Reducing the number and type of flavored, e-cigarette devices for sale in the US is likely to have a substantial impact on reducing youth vaping,” she says. “At the same time, it is unlikely to reduce the usefulness of tobacco flavored e-cigarettes from helping adult smokers completely quit smoking.”
Vaping is exposing a new generation to nicotine addiction, says Rao – and researchers are still figuring out how to treat nicotine addiction in kids rather than adults.
These products are often perceived as less harmful than smoking, but they still come with risk because adolescents are wired to become addicted to substances. Rao, who cares for patients at Children’s medical center in Dallas, explains that Juul had figured out how to make the nicotine more potent to give a more potent hit to the brain – allowing for a greater sense of pleasure from using the vape.
“It may take just a few hits of a vape before they are addicted, and it affects things like school performance, athletic performance, and can lead to severe consequences like lung injury,” says Rao. Studies also show that vaping leads to an increase in heart rate and blood pressure.
She says that the rates of vaping declined for two years during the pandemic, but doctors are now concerned that re-establishing of social networks and easing restrictions mean that those rates could again rise.
“When I talk to my patients, they are either vaping or all their friends are vaping and they may be feeling pressure to start using these products,” says Rao. “Parents and educators need to have these conversations about the harm they can have.”
DJ Altria Stock Is Sliding After the FDAs One-Two Punch -- Barrons.com
12:16 PM ET 6/22/22 | Dow Jones
By Bill Alpert
The bad news has been building up around Altria Group, the tobacco giant known for Marlboro and other cigarette brands.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced plans to limit nicotine levels in cigarettes. Then Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported the agency will refuse to allow the vape products of Juul Labs to stay on the U.S. market. No announcement by the FDA on Juul has appeared.
Altria (ticker: MO) had invested $12.8 billion in Juul at the end of 2018. After several write-downs, the investment's carrying value was down to $1.7 billion as this year began. If the FDA does bar Juul from the market, Altria's write-off of the remainder of its holdings could exceed 90 cents a share, pretax.
Wednesday morning, Altria stock slid 9% to $41.81 on the heels of regulatory news. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up a fraction. The tobacco maker's shares have sunk from a May height of $57, as analysts grew worried about inflation's pinch on smokers' spending, and about plans by Philip Morris International (PM) to sell smokeless tobacco products in the U.S.
"We believe tobacco harm reduction is a better path forward," said Altria, in a statement. "The focus should be less on taking products away from adult smokers and more on providing them a robust marketplace of reduced harm FDA-authorized smoke-free products. Today marks the start of a long-term process, which must be science-based and account for potentially serious unintended consequences."
Juul didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
An FDA limit on nicotine levels in cigarettes, if adopted, would seem good news for the little firm 22nd Century Group (XXII), which has lost money -- up until now -- selling low-nicotine tobacco products. Shares of 22nd Century leapt after the FDA disclosed its nicotine-limiting plans, rising 27% to $2.06.
Cowen tobacco analyst Vivien Azer wrote that she'd not anticipated a blanket denial by the FDA of Juul products. "This [report] clearly comes as a surprise to the market, and to us, as we had thought that JUUL could get limited approvals," she wrote in a Wednesday note. Her rating on Altria is a Hold.
Under the FDA's authority to regulate tobacco products, vape producers like Juul have had to apply for permission to continue marketing their products. The agency has until September to allow or deny those applications. It issued a blanket denial for the products of Blu, whose vapes can remain on the market while that company appeals. An appeal of an FDA marketing denial can take a year or more, said Azer.
Tuesday's announcement of the FDA's plan to limit nicotine in cigarettes was less of a surprise. The agency has been discussing the health benefits of limiting nicotine levels for five years, wrote Azer. Annual sales of cigarettes in the U.S. total $80 billion.
At Altria, cigarettes and cigars still account for about 85% of the $21 billion in revenue that analysts expect this year. Tobacco remains a very profitable business, and forecasts for Altria's 2022 earnings are nearly $9 billion, or $4.86 a share, according to FactSet.
The FDA has yet to propose the specific rules for limiting nicotine, and the effective date is far off. The industry is still fighting the agency's ban on menthol cigarettes, while continuing to sell the products. Azer estimates that the menthol fight could take five years to resolve. A limit on nicotine levels could take a decade, she wrote.
Write to Bill Alpert at william.alpert@barrons.com
> Dow Jones Newswires
June 22, 2022 12:16 ET (16:16 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Looking mighty fine here. I'd smoke a very low nicotine cigar to this price action. :)
XXII
The nicotine mandate will take years .
Perhaps 10 of them as BT will pull out all of the stops.
Lawsuits Lawsuits Lawsuits and more lawsuits.
It could take at least a year for the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cigarettes, to issue a proposed rule, experts say. After that, the FDA would have to sift through comments from the public before issuing a final rule.
Opposition could delay or derail the effort — especially if the regulation was not completed before Biden left office. A president elected in 2024 could tell the FDA to stop work on an unfinished rule. The tobacco industry, which is sure to be fiercely opposed to such a drastic change in its products, could challenge a final regulation in court.
From: Paullees post:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=169205872
Biden administration says it plans to cut nicotine in cigarettes
A new list of planned regulations shows the FDA is drafting a proposed requirement for minimal nicotine.
By Laurie McGinley
Updated June 21, 2022 at 5:09 p.m. EDT|Published June 21, 2022 at 10:55 a.m. EDT
The Biden administration's decision to pursue a policy to lower nicotine levels marks the first step in a lengthy process. (Eduardo Munoz/AFP/Getty Images)
Listen
9 min
Comment
Add to your saved stories
Save
Gift Article
Share
The Biden administration said Tuesday it plans to develop a proposed rule requiring tobacco companies to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes sold in the United States to minimally or nonaddictive levels, an effort, that if successful, could have an unprecedented effect in slashing smoking-related deaths and threaten a politically powerful industry.
The initiative was included in the administration’s “unified agenda,” a compilation of planned federal regulatory actions released twice a year. The spring agenda was released Tuesday.
The administration said the FDA intends to develop a proposed tobacco product standard “that would establish a maximum nicotine level in cigarettes and certain finished tobacco products.”
Such a step, the administration said, would reduce addictiveness to certain tobacco products and give addicted users a greater ability to quit, and it would help prevent young people from becoming regular smokers.
“The proposed product standard is anticipated to benefit the population as a whole while also advancing health equity by addressing disparities associated with cigarette smoking, dependence, and cessation,” the administration said.
The policy would fit with a major goal of the White House — to cut cancer deaths. As part of the White House’s retooled cancer moonshot announced this year, President Biden promised to reduce cancer death rates by 50 percent over 25 years. About 480,000 Americans die of smoking-related causes each year, and tobacco use remains the No. 1 cause of preventable death in the United States.
The decision to pursue a policy to lower nicotine levels marks the first step in a lengthy process, and success is not assured. It could take at least a year for the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cigarettes, to issue a proposed rule, experts say. After that, the FDA would have to sift through comments from the public before issuing a final rule.
Opposition could delay or derail the effort — especially if the regulation was not completed before Biden left office. A president elected in 2024 could tell the FDA to stop work on an unfinished rule. The tobacco industry, which is sure to be fiercely opposed to such a drastic change in its products, could challenge a final regulation in court.
The FDA has supported reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes for years but has never secured the necessary upper-level support, including from the Obama White House. The Trump administration’s first FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, said he wanted to lower nicotine levels as part of a broader tobacco policy, and the agency took an early step in 2018 by publishing an information-gathering notice. The plan to move forward was listed on the Trump administration’s regulatory agenda.
But the idea never had full-throated White House backing, according to those familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter. The effort was shelved after Gottlieb left the administration in spring 2019. Given the twists and turns of this issue, the Biden administration will be under pressure from advocates to indicate it is serious about getting a nicotine-lowering requirement across the finish line.
Supporters say slashing nicotine, the addictive ingredient in cigarettes, would be a milestone in public health that would save millions of lives over generations. In another significant move to reduce smoking-related deaths, the FDA in April proposed banning menthol cigarettes, the only flavored cigarettes still permitted.
The Wall Street Journal first reported that the administration was planning to pursue the nicotine-reduction policy.
Mitch Zeller, who recently retired as director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products and is a longtime advocate of reducing nicotine in cigarettes, acknowledged it could take years for such a requirement to take effect.
“The most important, game-changing policies take a long time, but it is worth the wait because, at the end of the day, the only cigarettes that will be available won’t be capable of addicting future generations of kids,” Zeller said.
Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, an antismoking group, said slashing nicotine levels “would produce the greatest drop in cancer rates and make the biggest difference” of any public health measure under discussion by the administration.
Guy Bentley, director of consumer freedom at the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank, criticized the plan.
“In practical terms, the proposal would ban most cigarettes currently sold in America,” Bentley said. “Combined with the Biden administration’s proposed ban on menthol cigarettes, this would amount to an effort similar to the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s” — and would ultimately fail, he said.
Bentley said rather than cutting nicotine levels in cigarettes, the administration should promote safer alternatives such as e-cigarettes. The FDA is reviewing thousands of applications from e-cigarette manufacturers to determine which should be allowed to remain on the market.
In early 2021, the FDA pitched the nicotine-reduction strategy in talks on tobacco issues with the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services. At the time, the White House gave the FDA the go-ahead to pursue a policy banning menthol cigarettes, but senior officials put off a decision on reducing nicotine levels, according to people familiar with the issue who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal deliberations.
Backers say the idea is a natural fit with the White House cancer moonshot because it would slash cancer deaths and does not require a big outlay of government money given that the FDA has been working on the issue for years.
“There’s a long arc to major policymaking, and the Biden administration’s commitment to advance that effort will mean it gets done,” Gottlieb, the former FDA commissioner, said. The combination of reduced nicotine levels and appropriate regulation of other sources of nicotine for addicted adult smokers, such as e-cigarettes, could be “one of the most impactful public health efforts in modern times,” he said.
A push to make cigarettes less addictive aims to drastically reduce deaths linked to smoking. (Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images)
Nicotine, a chemical that occurs naturally in the tobacco plant, does not cause cancer. But its highly addictive properties make it hard for people to quit using cigarettes, whose smoke contains harmful constituents that can cause lung cancer and heart disease.
Myers, of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, predicted an FDA requirement to slash nicotine in cigarettes would trigger “the greatest reaction from the tobacco industry of any action ever taken by the government. It is an existential threat despite claims [by cigarette companies] that they support a smoke-free future.”
The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gave the FDA the authority to regulate cigarettes, including cutting nicotine to minimally and nonaddictive levels. Under the law, the FDA may not ban cigarettes or reduce nicotine levels to zero. But it is permitted to set product standards that dictate components, ingredients, additives and nicotine yields for cigarettes, if those standards are needed to protect the public health.
Reynolds American, one of the nation’s biggest tobacco companies, did not respond immediately to requests for comment. Altria said it would comment after the administration announces any nicotine-reduction plans.
In the past, Altria has said that, if limits are put on nicotine levels in cigarettes, the FDA must ensure that adult smokers have greater access to noncombustible alternatives and accurate information about switching to them. The company also has argued that reducing nicotine in cigarettes would be devastating for tobacco retailers, endangering hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Other opponents of such a policy will probably argue, as they have in the past, that reducing nicotine to nonaddictive levels is a de facto ban on cigarettes, prohibited by law, and that science does not support such a move. They also are likely to say that slashing nicotine would boost demand for products on the black market.
Zeller countered that the science supporting slashing nicotine levels is well-established. He said researchers have determined the levels at which nicotine is minimally addictive or nonaddictive. And he said they also have concluded that reducing nicotine should occur in “one fell swoop” because a gradual decrease would encourage smokers to smoke more to compensate to get the same amount of nicotine.
In its 2018 notice, the FDA said lowering nicotine levels to minimally or nonaddictive levels “could give addicted users the choice and ability to quit more easily, and it could help to prevent experimenters (mainly youth) from initiating regular use and becoming regular smokers.”
An agency-funded study published in 2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine found that lowering nicotine levels could save more than 8 million lives by the end of the century. The number probably is a little lower now because the percentage of adult smokers has declined in recent years from the 15 percent rate used in the study to about 12 to 13 percent.
You mean todays price appreciation has nothing to do with the nicotine mandate ?
You top ticked it .... lol
you are a great indicator.
you are aware of the obvious.....
LOL
I was not short perhaps this afternoon or tommorow.
This is why XXII is going up:
FDA to ban Juul e-cigarettes in the US: report
By Ariel Zilber
June 22, 2022 10:20am Updated
The Food and Drug Administration is reportedly set to bar Juul from selling its e-cigarettes in the United States.
The Food and Drug Administration is reportedly set to bar Juul from selling its e-cigarettes in the United States.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
MORE ON:
JUUL
How Juul founders’ dream to disrupt Big Tobacco left teens hooked on vaping
Juul trying to recoup millions from brazen entrepreneurs
Counterfeit Juul e-cigarette manufacturer busted in China
E-cigarette maker Juul slashes valuation to $10 billion
The Food and Drug Administration is set to ban Juul e-cigarettes from being sold in the United States, according to a report.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that the FDA could announce the decision as soon as Wednesday.
The agency had been investigating Juul for the past two years while the company sought approval to continue selling its nicotine pods.
Juul landed in hot water some four years ago when their flavored e-cigarettes, which were touted at the time as a carcinogenic-free and healthier alternative to traditional cigarettes, were being blamed for a surge in youth vaping.
The company tried to appease federal regulators by banning their sweet and fruit-flavored products.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed in the US against the company, which was accused of targeting underage smokers with their flavored products.
Since its e-cigs and other similar vaping products came to market, scores of people have died and thousands have been hospitalized nationwide for various lung ailments that medical and health officials blame on vaping.
Juul's brand if nicotine pods has been blamed for fueling an epidemic in youth vaping.
Juul’s brand if nicotine pods has been blamed for fueling an epidemic in youth vaping.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
Health advocacy groups like the American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics have lobbied the FDA to bar Juul from selling its products.
Juul burst onto the scene shortly after its founding in 2015. The next year, it sold 2.2 million devices. In 2017, it sold 16.2 million devices.
By 2018, the company was valued at $15 billion. That same year, it had a market share of 75%.
In December 2018, Altria, one of the world’s largest cigarette manufacturers and the maker of popular brands including Marlboro, paid $12.8 billion for a 35% stake in Juul, which was generating an annual revenue of around $2 billion.
Since then, Juul has lost considerable market share as lawsuits have piled up and more Americans have been made aware of the dangers of vaping.
In October 2019, Altria wrote down $4.5 billion of the investment it made in Juul. The next year, Altria slashed Juul’s valuation to $10 billion.
By March of last year, the valuation was slashed to $4.3 billion. Earlier this year, it was cut again to $1.6 billion.
==========================
Yes you are correct Shorting XXII was very profiable:0)))
Short squeeze, a-hole, enjoy your misery, I know the rest of us will. Oh, right, you're a stock market genius who made a fortune shorting this at its high.
Short squeeze, a-hole, enjoy your misery, I know the rest of us will. Oh, right, you're a stock market genius who made a fortune shorting this at its high.
Golly Paullee
That there ain't going to happen:
It could take at least a year for the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cigarettes, to issue a proposed rule, experts say. After that, the FDA would have to sift through comments from the public before issuing a final rule.
Opposition could delay or derail the effort — especially if the regulation was not completed before Biden left office. A president elected in 2024 could tell the FDA to stop work on an unfinished rule. The tobacco industry, which is sure to be fiercely opposed to such a drastic change in its products, could challenge a final regulation in court.
Biden administration says it plans to cut nicotine in cigarettes
A new list of planned regulations shows the FDA is drafting a proposed requirement for minimal nicotine.
By Laurie McGinley
Updated June 21, 2022 at 5:09 p.m. EDT|Published June 21, 2022 at 10:55 a.m. EDT
The Biden administration's decision to pursue a policy to lower nicotine levels marks the first step in a lengthy process. (Eduardo Munoz/AFP/Getty Images)
Listen
9 min
Comment
Add to your saved stories
Save
Gift Article
Share
The Biden administration said Tuesday it plans to develop a proposed rule requiring tobacco companies to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes sold in the United States to minimally or nonaddictive levels, an effort, that if successful, could have an unprecedented effect in slashing smoking-related deaths and threaten a politically powerful industry.
The initiative was included in the administration’s “unified agenda,” a compilation of planned federal regulatory actions released twice a year. The spring agenda was released Tuesday.
The administration said the FDA intends to develop a proposed tobacco product standard “that would establish a maximum nicotine level in cigarettes and certain finished tobacco products.”
Such a step, the administration said, would reduce addictiveness to certain tobacco products and give addicted users a greater ability to quit, and it would help prevent young people from becoming regular smokers.
“The proposed product standard is anticipated to benefit the population as a whole while also advancing health equity by addressing disparities associated with cigarette smoking, dependence, and cessation,” the administration said.
The policy would fit with a major goal of the White House — to cut cancer deaths. As part of the White House’s retooled cancer moonshot announced this year, President Biden promised to reduce cancer death rates by 50 percent over 25 years. About 480,000 Americans die of smoking-related causes each year, and tobacco use remains the No. 1 cause of preventable death in the United States.
The decision to pursue a policy to lower nicotine levels marks the first step in a lengthy process, and success is not assured. It could take at least a year for the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cigarettes, to issue a proposed rule, experts say. After that, the FDA would have to sift through comments from the public before issuing a final rule.
Opposition could delay or derail the effort — especially if the regulation was not completed before Biden left office. A president elected in 2024 could tell the FDA to stop work on an unfinished rule. The tobacco industry, which is sure to be fiercely opposed to such a drastic change in its products, could challenge a final regulation in court.
The FDA has supported reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes for years but has never secured the necessary upper-level support, including from the Obama White House. The Trump administration’s first FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, said he wanted to lower nicotine levels as part of a broader tobacco policy, and the agency took an early step in 2018 by publishing an information-gathering notice. The plan to move forward was listed on the Trump administration’s regulatory agenda.
But the idea never had full-throated White House backing, according to those familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter. The effort was shelved after Gottlieb left the administration in spring 2019. Given the twists and turns of this issue, the Biden administration will be under pressure from advocates to indicate it is serious about getting a nicotine-lowering requirement across the finish line.
Supporters say slashing nicotine, the addictive ingredient in cigarettes, would be a milestone in public health that would save millions of lives over generations. In another significant move to reduce smoking-related deaths, the FDA in April proposed banning menthol cigarettes, the only flavored cigarettes still permitted.
The Wall Street Journal first reported that the administration was planning to pursue the nicotine-reduction policy.
Mitch Zeller, who recently retired as director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products and is a longtime advocate of reducing nicotine in cigarettes, acknowledged it could take years for such a requirement to take effect.
“The most important, game-changing policies take a long time, but it is worth the wait because, at the end of the day, the only cigarettes that will be available won’t be capable of addicting future generations of kids,” Zeller said.
Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, an antismoking group, said slashing nicotine levels “would produce the greatest drop in cancer rates and make the biggest difference” of any public health measure under discussion by the administration.
Guy Bentley, director of consumer freedom at the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank, criticized the plan.
“In practical terms, the proposal would ban most cigarettes currently sold in America,” Bentley said. “Combined with the Biden administration’s proposed ban on menthol cigarettes, this would amount to an effort similar to the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s” — and would ultimately fail, he said.
Bentley said rather than cutting nicotine levels in cigarettes, the administration should promote safer alternatives such as e-cigarettes. The FDA is reviewing thousands of applications from e-cigarette manufacturers to determine which should be allowed to remain on the market.
In early 2021, the FDA pitched the nicotine-reduction strategy in talks on tobacco issues with the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services. At the time, the White House gave the FDA the go-ahead to pursue a policy banning menthol cigarettes, but senior officials put off a decision on reducing nicotine levels, according to people familiar with the issue who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal deliberations.
Backers say the idea is a natural fit with the White House cancer moonshot because it would slash cancer deaths and does not require a big outlay of government money given that the FDA has been working on the issue for years.
“There’s a long arc to major policymaking, and the Biden administration’s commitment to advance that effort will mean it gets done,” Gottlieb, the former FDA commissioner, said. The combination of reduced nicotine levels and appropriate regulation of other sources of nicotine for addicted adult smokers, such as e-cigarettes, could be “one of the most impactful public health efforts in modern times,” he said.
A push to make cigarettes less addictive aims to drastically reduce deaths linked to smoking. (Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images)
Nicotine, a chemical that occurs naturally in the tobacco plant, does not cause cancer. But its highly addictive properties make it hard for people to quit using cigarettes, whose smoke contains harmful constituents that can cause lung cancer and heart disease.
Myers, of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, predicted an FDA requirement to slash nicotine in cigarettes would trigger “the greatest reaction from the tobacco industry of any action ever taken by the government. It is an existential threat despite claims [by cigarette companies] that they support a smoke-free future.”
The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gave the FDA the authority to regulate cigarettes, including cutting nicotine to minimally and nonaddictive levels. Under the law, the FDA may not ban cigarettes or reduce nicotine levels to zero. But it is permitted to set product standards that dictate components, ingredients, additives and nicotine yields for cigarettes, if those standards are needed to protect the public health.
Reynolds American, one of the nation’s biggest tobacco companies, did not respond immediately to requests for comment. Altria said it would comment after the administration announces any nicotine-reduction plans.
In the past, Altria has said that, if limits are put on nicotine levels in cigarettes, the FDA must ensure that adult smokers have greater access to noncombustible alternatives and accurate information about switching to them. The company also has argued that reducing nicotine in cigarettes would be devastating for tobacco retailers, endangering hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Other opponents of such a policy will probably argue, as they have in the past, that reducing nicotine to nonaddictive levels is a de facto ban on cigarettes, prohibited by law, and that science does not support such a move. They also are likely to say that slashing nicotine would boost demand for products on the black market.
Zeller countered that the science supporting slashing nicotine levels is well-established. He said researchers have determined the levels at which nicotine is minimally addictive or nonaddictive. And he said they also have concluded that reducing nicotine should occur in “one fell swoop” because a gradual decrease would encourage smokers to smoke more to compensate to get the same amount of nicotine.
In its 2018 notice, the FDA said lowering nicotine levels to minimally or nonaddictive levels “could give addicted users the choice and ability to quit more easily, and it could help to prevent experimenters (mainly youth) from initiating regular use and becoming regular smokers.”
An agency-funded study published in 2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine found that lowering nicotine levels could save more than 8 million lives by the end of the century. The number probably is a little lower now because the percentage of adult smokers has declined in recent years from the 15 percent rate used in the study to about 12 to 13 percent.
“British scientists have demonstrated
that cigarettes can harm your children. Fair enough. Use an ashtray!”
Just a feeling, but I think FDA will be announcing the proposed reduced nicotine mandate soon.
The shareholder return on investment on XXII
Has SUCKED FOR 10 years or longer IMHO!
Who is this jeanius Zeller?
“The public-health return on investment on this is on an almost unimaginable scale,” said Mr. Zeller.
“The public-health return on investment on this is on an almost unimaginable scale,” said Mr. Zeller.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-science-behind-bidens-nicotine-plan-11655814600
Great another bloated salary employee and they never seem to translate to revenue. The keep on burning at least $5,000,000.00 a quarter and none of their deal ever work out.
Well they could sell another $50,000,000.00 in stock and screw the investors some more.
Good Luck Paullee
I certainly hope XXII sees $5.
Craig Hallum has a terrible track record.
They are salemen for Craig Hallum not their desperate clients
who pay the bills. IMHO;0)))
Craig-Hallum Initiates Coverage On 22nd Century Group with Buy Rating, Announces Price Target of $5
8:25 am ET June 15, 2022 (Benzinga) Print
Craig-Hallum analyst Alex Fuhrman initiates coverage on 22nd Century Group (NASDAQ:XXII) with a Buy rating and announces Price Target of $5.
Slogans are not a marketing strategy.
Selling through Gas stations and convenience
stores without a huge educational campaign are a non-starter.
Do you read reddit? What are they saying?
"Helps you smoke less" brought to you by the FDA.
Have a nice weekend
No problem
I will let you know:0)))
The truth is no problem.
What is problematic is over 60 cancer causing chemicals
excluding nicotine in XXII cigarettes.
That seems to me to be an impossible hurdle.
XXII is a prime candidate for lawsuits as attorneys do not change their spots.
Enjoy the weekend.
Will you stick around when this takes off ? You’ve been posting negative stuff here for years .
Strong sell here we go AGAIN
WSJ NEWS EXCLUSIVEBUSINESS
Biden Administration to Pursue Rule Requiring Less Nicotine in U.S. Cigarettes
FDA to draft and publish proposal, which likely wouldn’t take effect for several years
==============================================================
Here we go…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-administration-to-pursue-rule-requiring-lower-nicotine-levels-in-u-s-cigarettes-11654901902
© Copyright 2022
non stop dilution with this company....
pretty sad a CEO would do that isn't it?
Past CEO wow
Joseph Pandolfino, Jr. is the Chairman and CEO of the company. He’s the largest owner of stock, holding 6 million shares (roughly a 10% stake in the company).
On April 6, 1992, Pandolfino incorporated Tobacco Alternative Inc., a marketer of herbal cigarettes and the predecessor to XXII. At the time of Tobacco Alternative’s founding, Pandolfino was a graduate student at SUNY Buffalo and already the subject of an SEC case regarding a fraudulent stock promotion he orchestrated in April, 1991.
The SEC charged Pandolfino with manipulating the prices of two stocks by mailing anonymous letters with false information. The case was settled with Pandolfino neither admitting nor denying the charges and accepting a fine equal to the amount he profited in the scheme. He also agreed to refrain from such activities in the future. This was sourced from the SEC News Digest from 1992.
"we are taking an iterative approach"
that is what selling cancer causing sticks is.
iterative involving repetition
Great article; nice Q&A and great responses from Pritchard.
https://tobaccoreporter.com/2022/06/01/in-the-catbird-seat/
XXII New cancer sticks must taste like dog poo.
Oh for gosh sakes not another Big Addictive Tobacco Executive. Big Money for executives but not bag holders.
In MHO these guys are playing stockholders for suckers going on for over 10 years. IMHO
You mean like passing a joint?
What is VLV?
Thank you
Guaranteed that those who bought VLV are sharing with friends.
Followers
|
442
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
54983
|
Created
|
07/11/11
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |