Plain packets hurt competition - Philip Morris

Email
Print

Plain packets hurt competition - Philip Morris

3News NZ

Chris Bishop from tobacco giant Philip Morris

Chris Bishop from tobacco giant Philip Morris

The push for plain packaging for tobacco products is now in its final stages of public consultation.

But the Government may just have a fight on its hands.

Tobacco giant Philip Morris is opposing the plans, saying they will hurt the company’s ability to compete in the marketplace by removing branding.

Philip Morris spokesperson Chris Bishop talked to Firstline’s Rachel Smalley – watch the interview.

3 News

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

31/07/2012 12:11:17 a.m.

The Plan wrote:

@ALCOHOL CAUSE VIOLENCE: You have heard of multi tasking right? Or how about working in parallel? I suspect we don't see 5000 alcohol related fatalities. Perhaps, you need a better argument.

27/07/2012 12:51:10 p.m.

alcohol cause violence wrote:

Alcohol causes more of harm to society. families violence, ER hospitals waiting times, driving accidents and violence in general. All could be reduced if MPs gave a dam. Alcohol should have the demerit points scheme!

25/07/2012 8:19:13 p.m.

The Plan wrote:

PM may be missing something. Lots of smokers want to quit. they hate the addiction. They hate the health effects that at risk of from it. So they may not get the large response they are looking for.

24/07/2012 9:18:06 p.m.

Shaun wrote:

@ Tyrone. The point is that the packaging is targeted at specific groups, with the intent of stimulating demand. For him to claim "there's no evidence it will work" is really just a deceptive attempt to allow this scenario to remain.

24/07/2012 8:06:54 p.m.

Shaun wrote:

@ Mike. Nowhere in your post is there acknowledgement this is an addictive substance that 600k NZers struggle with, nor any mention of the role of the industry in producing these illnesses knowingly. You are placing primary responsibility on addicted smokers, and letting the industry get away with murder. Their response is evidence that this will be an effective move to prevent youth from starting. Plus the marketing/advertising efforts of legitimate businesses (who really should call the tobacco industry out for their immoral conduct) is evidence also that these strategies not just encourage brand-switching, but attract new customers. The t. industry's claims are nothing but deception, and attempts to hook new smokers.

24/07/2012 7:55:52 p.m.

The Plan wrote:

"Plain packets hurt competition" - Philip Morris Great! You sold me on this when can we have plain packaging, Let's get started ASAP. You the flaming torches, I'll bring pitch-forks. Together we can share PM what think of their psychopathic business practices. PM is the company who said the the Czech Republic that tobacco related deaths in older people was a good thing because of strain on economic resource needed to feed cloth and house them if they kept living. After they had to change there name to Altria because the scandal stunk up the PM brand it was like telling people you carry ebola.

24/07/2012 6:33:14 p.m.

Tyrone wrote:

So the point Shaun is that if a rebellion factor exists, it likely comes from smoking itself and not from the packaging that the companies use. No-one's particularly badass for smoking Malboro over Dunhill, right?

24/07/2012 5:24:56 p.m.

Think of the children wrote:

He's just lucky Peter Dunne is not requiring him to furnish proof of the safety of the stuff he is selling- maybe that wouldn't be a bad idea as Kronic doesn't seem to be as addictive as Chris Bishop's product.

24/07/2012 4:11:17 p.m.

Mike wrote:

With the introduction of 'Smoking Kills' and disgusting pictures of smokers on the packs it had a small reduction in smokers and that effect has warn off. Smoker buying just dont see the words or the pictures any more.

Plain packaging will have even less effect and is a waste of time. We also have issues on identifiable product - remove the packaging any can't really see who's product it is. If have a product recall, who could identify it? But then a recall unlikely as why recall a product that speeds up people dying?

I dont support plain packaging. A total ban would be more legal than forcing plain packaging on anyone.

I would like to see the current tax on cigarettes removed and replaced with a user pays ACC/Health part charge for the damage smoking causes. We have studies that estimate how much smoking costs NZ in ACC/Health so use those to justify the charges, and put the charges on the pack so smokers can see how much it costs. Over time the ACC/Health charge can rise to pay more of the user part-charges.

An average smoker if they didn't smoke and put their money into a house would have in todays value about a $1.4 mil home. Put that info on the packs. Which do smokers want? a lifetime filthy habbit with poorer health, or an expensive $1.4 mil home! Smokers choice!

I would like to see more smoke free zones, including protection of children from inhaling in their homes.

24/07/2012 2:35:26 p.m.

trayonce wrote:

All this guy is worrying about it the decrease in his multi million dollar annual pay package ! he has not once mentioned anything about how this is a positive turn over for all those smokers out there(including myself:( ) who may decide its time to STOP as we soon wont know what we will be smoking....

this is a very goood idea i say, especially for NZ who has struggled over the many decades to decrease the numbers of smokers especially within our Maori Culture... in saying this it all comes down to PERSONAL CHOICE weather your a smoker or not however it doesnt help when we have people like this guy running the ship and couldnt care less of anything but how this is going to effect his business/pocket...!!
this guy needs to get a grip & back up before we smack him up!