> I'm curious what leads you to believe this?

All the available sales data, such as this: http://www.journalnow.com/blu-ecigs-brand-has-lost-market-sh...

According to Nielsen data as of May 16, Vuse has a 35.7 percent U.S. market share as measured by all distribution channels for e-cigs. Vuse is available at more than 100,000 retail outlets nationwide.

Blu eCigs was second in market share at 22.7 percent, while Logic was third at 13.8 percent. Logic was bought recently by Japan Tobacco.

There is a lot of data missing from independent vape shops, yes. But the numbers we have indicate Big Tobacco is moving near a billion dollars worth of e-cigs a year.

> Anyone serious about using an ecig uses the larger 650 (minimum) mah batteries with detachable ~atomizers (because nothing smaller than that performs adequately) and those are manufactured almost exclusively by independent Chinese companies and sold via independent websites and retail stores.

People serious about coffee buy their own beans sourced from great growers, get a grinder, etc etc. Nevertheless, the vast majority of the millions of people who buy coffee get it from places like McDonald's and Starbucks and instant coffee containers.

And at any rate, parts and liquids sourced from independent Chinese companies and sold via independent websites sounds exactly like the kind of thing that should be regulated and inspected.

> Nielsen data focuses primarily on convenience-store sales. Data includes vaporizers, or open vapor products, but those are more frequently bought at vape shops and tobacco outlet stores.

> Nevertheless, the vast majority of the millions of people who buy coffee get it from places like McDonald's and Starbucks and instant coffee containers.

I suppose one might think this is a valid comparison, but it simply is not. Try this: for the next few weeks when you're out and about, pay attention to the types of ecigs people are using in public, I guarantee you it isn't the tiny Blu or Vuse disposables; I see at least 25 people a day using ecigs in the wild, and I have literally never seen anyone using one of these disposables that is being reported on in that statistic.

Or if you are genuinely curious in discovering the correct answer to this question:

https://www.reddit.com/r/electronic_cigarette

https://www.reddit.com/r/electronic_cigarette/search?q=vuse&...

https://www.reddit.com/r/electronic_cigarette/search?q=blu&r...

Possible you live in a bubble. (Or more than possible. I mean, you're treating Reddit as representative.) I've seen a couple of custom-assembled vapes out and about, and a hell of a lot of gas station disposables.

Anecdote vs. anecdote. Until manufacturers of non-disposable units start publishing their sales numbers, this is just spinning tires in the mud.

> a hell of a lot of gas station disposables.

Based on the virtually unanimous opinion on reddit (or any other ecig forum for that matter) that disposables suck, as well as never seeing them in public, I find that "a little" hard to believe.

Using e-cig forums as a measure of e-cig marketshare is like using headphone forums as a measure of headphone marketshare.

Most people don't have Sennheisers.

But my totally scientific survey of the Head-Fi forums says you're wrong!

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. One key difference that comes to mind: people that buy a pair of Sennheisers doesn't typically run out and try and convert all of his friends and relatives who are using Beats, whereas with ecigs it is quite common (maybe because in this case it involves, you know, life or death).

seconding your anecdote. I use an ecig myself, and I live next to a college campus -- I'd probably say I see about five people a day using them. I have never seen someone using one of the cig-like disposable types.

> I use an ecig myself, and I live next to a college campus

And college campuses (and the areas around them) are totally a representative cross-section of the general; population on all things, including mechanisms of tobacco consumption, right?

Do you have reason to think they wouldn't be representative?

Your tone makes it sound like you're kind of hostile to the very idea, do you have some personal attachment to the matter?

> Do you have reason to think they wouldn't be representative?

The fact that they are demonstrably not representative of the general population by age, income, education, or, really, just about any other variable that has been studied makes it very unlikely that they'd be, except coincidentally, representative as far as purchasing patterns for any particular good for which a variety of options exists (unless its a good purchases nearly exclusively by college students, but that's clearly not the case here.)

No doubt. After all, it plainly doesn't suit your prejudice on the matter.

My prejudice has no effect on reality though, does it? So what is the reality?

It's hard to take you seriously when your evidence is, "just look at all the people around you using real e-cigs not that cheap 7-11 crap."

Judging product popularity by visible usage is a dumb idea? So if you see lots of people driving Toyotas, and only rarely (or never) see someone driving a Ferrari, you wouldn't take seriously someone who speculated that Toyota unit sales are higher than Ferrari?

> try this: for the next few weeks when you're out and about, pay attention to the types of ecigs people are using in public

I suppose one might think this is a valid comparison, but it simply is not. Who you encounter isn't a representative sample of the population, its skewed by your own age, location, socioeconomic class, etc.