Shops to be banned from displaying tobacco products

[Myriad2112]

For smokers, non-smokers or shopkeeper, I can't see how this useless piece of legislation can benifit anyone. Is this just another example of barking mad big brother propaganda?

[Zeuhl]

Perhaps Birdie can explain why very savvy marketers spend billions a year on brand awareness, packaging design and point-of-sale advertising?

Some understanding of 'Anchoring' and Pavlov's Dog might be useful.

Personally, as an ex-smoker, I still experience a slight frisson whenever I see the Red Marlboro logo and packaging. I will be happy to see those prompts disappear for everyone; potential smokers, current smokers and ex-smokers.
.

[starone]

Cazzz -'out of sight out of mind' - How about the opposite - Absence makes the heart grow fonder!

[trionam]

I live in Ireland and it would be easier for a 17 year old to get cocaine than cigarettes they've already banned the display and advertising here,it makes no difference to me I dont smoke but you would have to wonder why they dont put the same effort in to closing down head shops and cracking down harder on illegal drugs.

[Zeuhl]

<<How about the opposite - Absence makes the heart grow fonder! >>

Yes - that's a massive aspect in retailing - the people who arrive at the checkout with a list of things they haven't seen and just realised they really want. Good grief!

Somehow I think that's greatly outweighed by all the things people buy that they didn't know they wanted until they saw it.

The key state for a smoker is the dread of 'running out' and therefore the behaviour of considering stocking up at any opportunity. Reducing those propmpts should reduce consumption for a start.
.

[Myriad2112]

I agree that marketing and advertising plays a major part in selling a brand but surely that is just marking one above another. If ALL the brands are plain you will just have to ask for the one you want, then when the cashier is bending over looking for said packet, the kids can take the oppertunity to steal all the chocolate.

[Sooper]

I cant see how this is gonna make any effect at all on smokers or smoking, seems a bit pointless to me. Im a smoker and i will just carry on getting my 50g of Cutters Choice each week as ive done for years. I doubt it will deter the kids either and it may actually have the reverse effect? As someone else pointed out drugs arent advertised or sold legally but they arent half popular especially with the young so this may make more rebellious teenagers decide to smoke?
I think the Government should be spending their time and money on more important issues rather than hiding away tobbaco products which in my opinion will do little.
I wonder what the next

[Zeuhl]

<<i will just carry on getting my 50g of Cutters Choice each week as ive done for years.>>

ageing roll-your-own-er?

I hardly think this is the target group for this excellent move towards marginalising smoking and turning cigarettes into an undistinguished, unbranded commodity

[WShee9]

Maybe im wrong,but i would say 80 per-cent of smokers/drinkers were productive members of society...what percentage of heroin or crack cocaine users are use to society...apart from a drain on all our taxes and resources?

[Zeuhl]

<<what percentage of heroin or crack cocaine users are use to society...apart from a drain on all our taxes and resources? >>

a small percentage of a very small number.

I don't see what bearing that has on the wisdom of this excellent legislation.

Unless you're proposing the legalisation of crack and heroin?
.

[cazzz1975]

well said eddie, spot on :)

[Mamyalynne]

The stopping of display will do very little if anything to deter smokers.

[joko]

it might sound silly and minor and pointless...but at least its something...they are trying to make this happen with baby steps i suppose
over time it might stop smoking be quite so popular

[Zeuhl]

Birdy thanks for your response

<<Birdy -Thanks for the response suggesting that I know nothing of advertisers' techniques nor of human psychology. >>

Well your response has gone some way to confirm that suggestion.

<<the taste and the overall sensation that a particular brand gives you is the reason you chose one brand over another>>

Ill informed generalisation

<<I personally know of no one who buys cigarettes based on the perceived 'image' of one brand or another. >>

You've measured that scientifically have you? Because the Brand marketers have and they have come to differfent conclusions

<<When you start to smoke, you do so because of peer pressure>>

Yes. And the most powerful form is to match the peer group's brand of choice - and the Anchor for the Brand is the logo and packaging

<<Once you get used to the sensation of smoking, the taste and the overall sensation that a particular brand gives you is the reason you chose one brand over another.>>

Maybe for you. Research suggests otherwise for others.

<<Once the cigarette is out of the packet, it's impossible (without very, very close inspection) to tell what brand of cigarette it is so it fails to become a 'brand statement' by the user as one cigarette looks identical to another. >>

When did you last see a smoker without their Branded packet close to hand? Smokers are seldom separated from their defining cigarette Brand.

The key state for a smoker is the dread of 'running out' and therefore the behaviour of considering stocking up at any opportunity. Reducing those prompts should reduce consumption for a start.”

<<I disagree. You're right in stating that no smoker wants to find himself without cigarettes but the idea that hiding the packets from view

[shiznit]

There are a few shops in my town that sell bongs, grinders, hydroponics units, seeds etc yet this new legislation is aimed at a legal taxable product, go figure

[owdhamer]

I have never smoked just could not see the point as i watched my father cough his head off and welcomed the ban on smoking in public places.I have never complained to or about smoking or smokers, after all its a free country,but how are going to replace the revenue raised by smokers if they decide its not worth the hassle

[Zeuhl]

cont/

<<I disagree. You're right in stating that no smoker wants to find himself without cigarettes but the idea that hiding the packets from view will somehow make him 'forget' he smokes and therefore reduce consumption is laughable.>>

No. What is laughable is your confusion between removing prompts and triggers and having smokers 'forget'.

<<Hiding commodities, particularly chemically addictive commodities, will not reduce the consumption levels. >>

Yes they will, because removing those powerful Brand prompts will reduce consumption by young people starting up, will reduce consumption by reducing 'jacket pocket stockpiling' by current smokers and reduce consumption by those cutting down or stopping.

Next you'll be trying to tell us that people only prefer branded goods over stores' own label because they have quantified evidence they are better.

I think not.
The sales statistics and consumer research studies established over the past 100 years that our expenditure on branding and advertising is based upon disagree with you.

And the principles of behavioural psychology disagree with you.
.