CI "Fake" Cigars?

[MattyMatt]

I think it is safe to say that not only did we beat this horse to death but also dismembered the carcas and buried the pieces at the four corners of the earth.

[Billb1960]

Speaking of Star Wars

[UncleFesterESQ]

Speaking of Star Wars

Favorite Tweet about that event: "The tears of one hundred million nerds will heal Harrison Ford"

[Skeat5353]

Every town needs a police chief...

[jpalamar]

I have nothing productive to say that hasn't been said already so I leave you with this....

[Skeat5353]

Hey Sean. I'm not looking to begin some long diatribe on the current marketing practices in the cigar industry. I think the market is fine the way it is. We get good cigars at affordable prices. I guess the 60-Minutes journalist in me (wannabe, lol) is looking to uncover every single form of corruption and fraud. Honestly, I like CI, regardless of their marketing practices. And, honestly, I don't put too much stock in Bryan Glynn's opinion about cigars. Like I said, I find it unbelievable that he has 10,000+ Youtube subscribers and a good reputation among industry insiders. Maybe this whole thing is over some personal grudge we don't even know about. Who knows?

I will concede that my use of the word 'fraudulent' is a bit heavy-handed and presumptuous on my part. What marketing execs do to sell their product is well within the laws and regulations of commerce. I do not want any more Federal oversight than the next guy. But I think there's something to be said for 'Lemon Laws.' Otherwise we'd still be buying crappy used cars for top-dollar. Now I don't know if 'Lemon Laws' in the used car industry can be applied to cigar industry marketing practices. Probably not. And it doesn't matter to me if such laws were in place, at this point, because now I know better and, like I said, I feel the industry is fine the way it is for my purposes. But keep in mind that for years sleezy car salesmen used the Caveat Emptor clause in sales to fleece and swindle consumers.

After reading Ropey's post, I kinda extrapolated (even perhaps exaggerated) a deeply unethical practice within the industry. But your point is very valid. Morally unethical practices are an entirely different thing than fraudulent. Ropey is correct in saying these marketing practices happen in a gray area of federal regulation. When you go to the gas station, there are always three grades of octane you can buy. It's still the same product, technically speaking. It's gasoline. Most luxury engines burn fuel more efficiently at higher octane levels, so therefore it's a federal requirement that each grade is indicated and priced accordingly. There's probably other reasons for those grades and I won't pretend to know them. I don't.

Why not have the same standards for tobacco? Because clearly there are different 'grades' of the tobacco used to make cigars, and they are priced accordingly. Any way, I think I've exhausted this thread. I am not trying to indict the whole marketing machine of the cigar industry. I think it's fine the way it is. Is there room for improvement? I think there is.

You are also correct in calling the word 'premium' subjective. 'Premium' covers a wide spectrum of cigars with varying qualities. But returning to my gasoline analogy, if all grades were 'premium,' then at the pump I'd be buying regular fuel under a premium classification. So in that instance, the word 'premium' is not subjective at all. It's comparable. But like I said, the subjective use of the word 'premium' allows cigar marketers a broad spectrum. You're right, though. By no means fraudulent. Morally unethical, maybe. I think that's a personal judgment that really depends on the moral lens through which you view the world in general. But you are right: 'Fraudulence' is too heavy a word and too heavy an accusation.

I leave this thread with one simple question. Heck, it might even be interesting to have a poll on this. Is the following cigar really 'Premium'?

http://www.cigarsinternational.com/s...-box/#p-150816

Yes or no?

I say, 'No.' If you took a blind test with the cigar above and, say, a Padron '26, it would be easy to determine which cigar had genuine, premium tobacco. In fact, if a 100 testers took the same blind test, I bet 100% of them would identify which cigar had better quality tobacco in it.

[Billb1960]

They seem to have some decent reviews:

http://kohnhed.com/2013/11/10/kismet...-cigar-review/

http://www.blindmanspuff.com/blind-c...d-kismet-fate/

http://cigarfederation.com/profiles/...kismet-destiny

[Skeat5353]

They seem to have some decent reviews:

http://kohnhed.com/2013/11/10/kismet...-cigar-review/

http://www.blindmanspuff.com/blind-c...d-kismet-fate/

http://cigarfederation.com/profiles/...kismet-destiny

For the sake of honesty, I actually just bought the sampler. LOL! They look pretty decent. I never admitted anywhere that I was not a sucker.

[MattyMatt]

[wabashcr]

Oh look. Katman declared it a flavor bomb. He said the same thing in the Los Blancos Premiere Selection review I linked to earlier in this thread. I actually enjoy his reviews, but he likes a lot of stuff I would never touch. I guess that's kinda my issue with CI buying brands and contracting them out at lower quality. There are reviews out there that make people think they're good cigars, and people may think they're getting a great deal, only to find out they've paid for crap.

I just bought a box of Ave Marias on cbid last night for $60. That's $3 a stick, and even though I believe these have been CI smokes from the get go, if I get my box and find out they're not the same as all the others I've come to enjoy, I'll be pretty pissed off. I think they're fantastic morning smokes, and at $3 each, they're an incredible value.