Juul is not an alternative to Big Tobacco. It is just another member of the club, facing the same kind of existential regulatory pressure as the other major participants in the industry. And as mentioned by others, Altria owns a third of the company.

Possibly not for long: https://www.barrons.com/articles/altria-group-must-unwind-it...

Your comment indicates just how successful Juul's marketing has been. You didn't know that Altria Group, Inc. owns a large stake of Juul.

There is a lot of ignorance around, and PR/Advertising works, so I understand why you'd think that of me.

But consider the counter case for a moment.

Altria didn't pay 13bn dollars, for just 35% of a company that is barely 5 years because they were confident did they? Hedging your bet is a sign of fear. And you generally still want the main bet to pay off. Altria would do better if Juul were banned, they'd lose 13bn but the rest of their portfolio would go up by considerably more than that.

When you have billions of dollars hedging is standard operating procedure, not a sign of fear. Anyone in control of that kind of money who isn't hedging their main source of revenue should be fired.

He means they have to move because they ARE big tobacco who, if they don't lobby the government, will be gone.

Juul is owned by big tobacco (Philip Morris).

That was the point of the parent poster. It's better to create a limp competitor from within than leave an empty vacuum for an outsider.

Exactly. From what I understand, they're trying to get all vape products heavily taxed like cigarettes (which states are chomping at the bit to do because of declining revenue from that sector)-- they can simply sell their stuff at break-even or a loss for a while until all competition is dead. Voila! A new monopoly is born.

But juul is big tobacco?

Altria owns a 35 percent stake in them, so their interests are definitely aligned.

Juul is a huge opportunity for big tobacco.

It’s a way to get the kids hooked and make them life long customers.