10.7 Trends in products and packaging

Innovations in design have become increasingly important to the tobacco industry as other avenues of promotion have closed and concerns about health have become stronger among customers and those exposed to tobacco smoke. This section takes a look at some recent developments observed in the Australian and international marketplace.

10.7.1 Flavoured cigarettes

It has long been industry practice to add ingredients to alter the flavour of tobacco. For example, menthol variants of many brands have been available for decades. Menthol additives improve the palatability of inhaled smoke by providing sensations of coolness and smoothness.1 A 2011 supplement issue of the journal, Tobacco Control, was dedicated to research exploring the role of menthol in smoking initiation, tobacco marketing, nicotine dependence, sensory experience, potential disease-inducing effects and smoking cessation.2 Internationally, several brands have now introduced menthol capsules that allow users to control the degree of mentholation of their cigarette by squeezing a gel bead inside the filter (see Figure 10.7.1 for an example).

10.7.1.png

Figure 10.7.1
Camel Crush cigarette with a squeezable menthol bead in the filter

Flavourings have also been used to compensate for variations in quality of tobacco leaf,3 and for perceived loss of body and flavour in lower tar cigarettes.4 Flavourings mask unpleasant tastes and sensations associated with smoking cigarettes, making them of greater appeal to novice users.5 Flavours may be added to the tobacco, the paper cigarette tube, the filter and the packaging in order to impart a pleasant smell.6

In 2008, citing concerns over flavoured cigarettes appealing to young people, the Australian Health Ministers agreed to ban the sale and investigate banning the importation of flavoured cigarettes across Australia.7 All states and territories have acted (or have plans to act) and have applied a ban to overtly 'fruity or lolly' flavoured cigarettes only. This ban does not apply to menthol cigarettes, nor does it apply to the long list of flavours that are added to almost all cigarettes/cigars on the market.

In Australia the three tobacco companies, Philip Morris, British American Tobacco Australia and Imperial Tobacco Australia voluntarily provide an annual list of ingredients that can be found in tobacco products. The voluntary agreement was signed by the tobacco companies and the former Minister for Health and Aged Care, Dr Michael Wooldridge, in 2000.8 Under the agreement the companies provide annual reports to the government regarding the ingredients of cigarettes.9 The data are posted unmodified on the department's website.i

The British American Tobacco Australia report alone lists 89 different flavours that are added to tobacco products. These ingredients range from the sweet and fruity—apricot extract, honey, prune juice—to the rich and soothing—cocoa extract, coffee extract and vanillin—and many chemical flavour compounds in between—trimethyl pyrazine, phenylcarbinol and isobutyraldehyde.10

At its fourth session in November 2010, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) Conference of the Parties adopted partial guidelines for implementation of Articles 9, regulation of the contents of tobacco products and 10, regulation of tobacco product disclosures. Two key recommendations in the guidelines included:

  1. Parties should regulate, by prohibiting or restricting, ingredients that may be used to increase palatability in tobacco products
  2. Parties should require that manufacturers and importers of tobacco products disclose to governmental authorities information on the ingredients used in the manufacture of their tobacco products at specified intervals, by product type and for each brand within a brand family.11

The guidelines further emphasise the role of flavourings in tobacco use initiation and continuation:

'The harsh and irritating character of tobacco smoke provides a significant barrier to experimentation and initial use. Tobacco industry documents have shown that significant effort has been put into mitigating these unfavourable characteristics. Harshness can be reduced in a variety of ways including: adding various ingredients, eliminating substances with known irritant properties, balancing irritation alongside other significant sensory effects, or altering the chemical properties of tobacco product emissions by adding or removing specific substances. Some tobacco products contain added sugars and sweeteners. High sugar content improves the palatability of tobacco products to tobacco users. Masking tobacco smoke harshness with flavours contributes to promoting and sustaining tobacco use.'12

In the US a staggering range of flavourings have been introduced, including fruit (e.g. orange, mandarin, lime, cherry, coconut, strawberry and apple), confectionary (toffee, truffle, vanilla, chocolate, honey, fudge and marshmallow), spices (cinnamon, mint, spearmint, wintergreen, coffee and herbs) and flavours reminiscent of cocktails or liquors (e.g. margarita, amaretto, rum, cognac and bourbon). The products are stylishly packaged6 and the cigarettes themselves may also be coloured, patterned and decoratively filter tipped.13, 14 Flavoured varieties have also been made available on a seasonal or themed basis.14

Studies on the popularity of mainstream flavoured brands in the US (such as those produced by the major tobacco companies RJ Reynolds and Brown & Williamson) have shown that they are used primarily by younger people.14 The recent proliferation of flavoured brands has been attributed to the tobacco industry's need to attract new smokers in an increasingly challenging regulatory environment.6, 14 In 2007, a campaign to engage with smokers through online media to help design tobacco packaging that reflected the personality of four flavoured cigarettes provided further evidence of the marketing potential offered by adding flavours to tobacco products.15

10.7.2 Shorter or wider cigarettes: 'quickies'

Limited opportunities to smoke due to the introduction of smoking restrictions in many environments has prompted the development of a shorter cigarette, which allows quicker smoking (seven puffs instead of the more usual 10) while still aiming to deliver a satisfying dose of nicotine. One company to cater for this market is Philip Morris, with Marlboro Intense, which has been launched in Turkey.16

Philip Morris has also developed Marlboro Wides, a thicker but shorter than usual cigarette, which is packaged in a box with a flip top opening from side to side instead of front to back.16

Very small, thin cigarettes such as Dunhill Essence (Figure 10.7.2) are sold in Australia in very small, attractive packets that are cheaper than standard packs of 20 or 25s, easy to conceal and very quick to smoke.

/images/content/ch10industry/10.7.2.png

Figure 10.7.2
Dunhill Essence 20s compared to a standard pack of Dunhill 25s

10.7.3 Smokeless tobacco and 'snus'

Smokeless tobacco, also known as chewing tobacco, spit tobacco and oral tobacco, is popular in countries such as the US, India and Sweden. Smokeless products are often promoted to the youth market and to women in societies where overt smoking is not socially acceptable.17 In Australia, sale of smokeless tobacco products intended for oral use was banned through issue of a Consumer Protection Notice under the Trade Practices Act in 199118 however customs regulations allow individuals to import small quantities of smokeless tobacco for personal use19ii provided that all customs duties are paid upon receipt. Despite the Commonwealth ban and similar provisions under tobacco control legislation in each state and territoryiii, a 2004 study of South Asian shops in Sydney found that 50 of the 53 shops surveyed (94%) sold smokeless tobacco: 31 (62%) of these kept it under the counter, 14 (28%) had it on display behind the counter, and five (10%) had it on shelves accessible to consumers. No shopkeeper advised that sale of the products was illegal.20

A particular type of smokeless tobacco product known as 'snus' is widely used in Scandinavia. Although addictive, snus is less harmful than other forms of tobacco use, and it may also be useful as an aid in cessation.21 Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds are promoting snus-style smokeless tobacco products in test markets in the US.22 British American Tobacco are also promoting their own snus brands in South Africa, Japan and Canada.23 Whether snus may have a wider role in reducing harm caused by smoking is a matter of vigorous debate.24-29 For discussion, see Chapter 12, Attachment 3. The health consequences of using snus are discussed in Chapter 3, Section 33.

In the US, a company called Star Scientific30 has developed another variation on traditional oral tobacco products.31 Ariva is presented in the form of a compressed capsule of tobacco designed to dissolve in the mouth, thereby eliminating the need for spitting or disposing of the spent product. Ariva is intended for 'adult smokers who increasingly find themselves in situations where they can't smoke—for example, mothers who choose not to expose their children to second-hand smoke, travellers who fly on long plane trips, or restaurant patrons...'.31

10.7.4 Countering concerns about secondhand smoke

A range of products claiming to mask, reduce or eliminate secondhand smoke has been developed since the rise in concern about environmental tobacco smoke during the 1980s. (Some of these products have also claimed to offer health benefits to the user—see Section 10.7.5).

Lemon and vanilla-scented cigarettes were test marketed in the US and Germany in the late 1980s, the fragrant smoke intended 'to overcome most of the objections non-smokers have about the smell of burning tobacco'.32 In 1992, Philip Morris investigated marketing a new 'reduced odour' cigarette, declaring that the long-term goal of its research and development activities was to develop a completely odourless cigarette.33

RJ Reynolds experimented in the US in the mid-1990s with Salem Preferred,34 which was claimed to mask and change the odour of cigarette smoke (while not actually reducing its quantity.35) A variation on this, Salem Pianissimo, was launched by RJ Reynolds in Japan in 1995, claiming to be 'the clean cigarette', offering 'less lingering smell' and 'less sidestream smoke'. Following the success of Salem Pianissimo, RJ Reynolds launched four more brands in Japan that claimed similar attributes, announcing that 'these cigarettes were designed to encourage peaceful coexistence among smokers and non-smokers'. Since then, other manufacturers have also launched 'cleaner' cigarettes.35

Entirely new ways of consuming tobacco have also been devised with the intention of reducing sidestream smoke. RJ Reynolds tested Premier in the US briefly in 1989.36 Premier, which delivered nicotine to the user by heating rather than burning the tobacco, was withdrawn soon after not, only because smokers disliked the flavour, but, ironically, because it had an unpleasant and pervasive aroma that tended to spread well beyond the smoker.32 RJ Reynolds has since launched another non-combustion, low emission product, Eclipse (see Section 10.7.5 below). Emissions testing of so called 'electrically heated cigarette smoking systems' do show reductions in the particulates commonly found in secondhand smoke; however levels are not reduced to zero, nor can the leap be made that such levels would be deemed safe for non-smokers.37, 38

In 2004, Philip Morris developed a product called the Heatbar, a battery-powered plastic device, about the size of a mobile phone, which heats rather than burns tobacco. Smokers insert their usual cigarette into the device. Inhaling the warmed tobacco delivers a flavoured aerosol to the user, while purportedly producing 90% less sidestream smoke than a normal cigarette. The Heatbar has undergone limited market testing in Switzerland and Australia16 but does not appear to have impressed younger smokers.39 Despite the device being approved for sale in Australia,40 there is no evidence that demand for such a product has eventuated.

10.7.5 Electronic cigarettes

Electronic cigarettes (also known as e-cigarettes) are essentially a nicotine delivery system that was devised to potentially overcome indoor smoking bans and to provide an alternative for smokers concerned about continued smoking of traditional cigarettes. They are battery-operated devices that vaporise cartridges of liquid nicotine and look very similar to traditional cigarettes except they are plastic and have a small LED light on the end. The retail sale of electronic cigarettes containing nicotine is illegal in Australia, although nicotine-free models can be freely sold. Electronic cigarettes have not been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration41 and according to the Therapeutic Goods Administration website, 'they should not be considered a safe product, nor a suitable aid to quitting smoking'.42 Determined e-cigarettes buyers can go online and make a purchase from hundreds of websites and eBay sellers. The devices are expensive, costing upwards of $120, plus the nicotine cartridges must be continually re-ordered.43

There is very limited published medical research on the safety and efficacy of electronic cigarettes as an alternative to smoking or as a smoking cessation aid. One small study completed in New Zealand with 40 adult smokers who smoked at least 10 cigarettes per day found that the Ruyan electronic cigarette alleviated desire to smoke after overnight abstinence, was well tolerated and had a nicotine absorption profile similar to the Nicorette inhalator. The authors of this study note that electronic cigarettes still need to be evaluated for longer-term safety, potential for long-term use and efficacy as a cessation aid.44

In the US, the Food and Drug Administration45 has banned electronic cigarette manufacturers and retailers from marketing these products as therapeutic devices. Electronic cigarettes can however be sold freely in the US provided they make no such claims. The Food and Drug Administration has stated that it intends to develop a strategy to regulate this emerging class of products as tobacco products under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.46

Similar to the ongoing debate about the harm reduction potential of snus, much controversy surrounds the use and promotion of electronic cigarettes. Avid users of electronic cigarettes, known as Vapers,47 argue that as electronic cigarettes emit far fewer harmful emissions than traditional cigarettes they should be promoted as a safe alternative to smoking. Opponents point out that little is known about the actual health effects of these products and that they are often promoted as an alternative to smoking when smoking is not permitted rather than a total smoking cessation device.48 A research agenda has been proposed to help address these concerns, with general agreement being that more concrete evidence is needed before health agencies can confidently endorse these products.49

10.7.6 Potentially reduced exposure products

Industry efforts to produce a 'safer' cigarette go back many decades. While publicly maintaining that their products did not cause disease or death among their users, the tobacco companies experimented with various forms of filters, ventilation systems, and modifications to the tobacco leaf itself in an effort to reduce harmful emissions from tobacco smoke.iv Of these, products claiming to deliver lower levels of tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide were the major focus from the 1970s onwards, even though the tobacco companies were well aware that these product modifications delivered little or no real health benefits to smokers53-56 Cigarettes promoted as being 'light', 'ultra light' and 'mild' came to dominate the market during the 1980s and 1990s; these descriptors are now banned in Australia (see Chapter 12 for detailed discussion). It is now a matter of record that 'smoking cigarettes with lower machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine provides no clear benefit to health'(p25).57

Other modifications to the standard cigarette designed to reduce smokers' exposure to the harmful contents of cigarette smoke have since been developed. These 'potentially reduced exposure products' (PREPs) generally claim to emit reduced levels of nicotine or carcinogens due to the use of additives, different techniques in leaf blending and processing, using genetically modified leaf, by the application of new filtration methods, or through heating rather than burning the tobacco.58 In the US, several products of this nature have been introduced with very limited commercial success, with most products removed from retail sale after being tested in a few markets.16, 36, 55, 59-61

The implications of PREPs use are of considerable concern to health interests. There is evidence that consumers may overestimate the possible risk reduction associated with using PREPs.55 This and other research raises concerns that PREPs might attract (and addict) new users, discourage quitting, result in rebound usage of standard cigarettes at a level even higher than before, or induce successful quitters to return to what they perceive to be a safe form of tobacco use.55, 60 By leading consumers to believe that they are safer, PREPs could also reassure young smokers that there is no need to quit, since there are safer alternatives to switch to in the future.62

A more viable alternative to industry led development of PREPs is for governments to regulate the contents and product attributes of tobacco products. The WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation has been established to advise the World Health Organization 'about scientifically sound recommendations to Member States addressing the most effective and evidence-based means in order to fill regulatory gaps in tobacco control and achieve a coordinated regulatory framework for tobacco products'.62 Membership of the WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation is drawn from scientists in the fields of product regulation and laboratory analysis of tobacco contents, emissions, and design features. This group has released three reports on the scientific basis of tobacco product regulation.62,63,64 The study group has made several recommendations on the topics of smokeless tobacco products and their health effects, and implications for harm reduction and research needs; 65 'fire safer' cigarettes and approaches to reduced ignition propensity; mandated lowering of toxicants in cigarette smoke, such as tobacco specific nitrosamines and other constituents; and cigarette machine smoking regimens.62,63,64

10.7.7 Roll-your-own tobacco

The decision to use roll-your-own is generally made by consumers seeking a more economical way of smoking. More information about market and brand share of roll-your-own can be found in Section 10.6.2. In light of price and tax increases, in recent years the roll-your-own market has grown in Australia. Roll-your-own cigarettes comprise loose tobacco either manually rolled into a cigarette paper and sealed shut with saliva or assembled with a simple machine using a readymade paper tube, with or without the addition of a filter.

In Australia the growing market for roll-your-own has led to several innovations. Slimmer filters allow a packet of tobacco to last longer, by making more, smaller cigarettes. Roll-your-own accessories sales show there has been a noticeable trend towards slimmer and smaller filter variants.66 Loose tobacco closer in characteristic to the tobacco used in readymade cigarettes has been produced to accommodate smokers switching from factory-made cigarettes to roll-your-owns. Smaller pouch sizes accommodate price-conscious smokers.67

Packaging has been redesigned and updated to attract attention, and popular cigarette brands such as Peter Jackson and Longbeach have been launched in a roll-your-own variant. The availability of different styles and sizes of cigarette papers and filters has been increased to encourage roll-your-own smokers to express their personal style.68

Overseas, innovations have included smaller, cheaper cigarette papers,22 and techniques to expand the tobacco have allowed the smoker to make more cigarettes with the same weight of tobacco.69 In Germany, Philip Morris has marketed its 'tobacco block system', in which tobacco is sold in compressed blocks. A special machine is used that inserts tobacco from the block into a readymade cigarette cylinder. The tobacco block system has been introduced as a way of exploiting the tax differential between roll-your-own tobacco and manufactured cigarettes.16

10.7.8 Organic, 'green' and additive-free cigarettes

In recent years a variety of 'green' attributes have been claimed for particular tobacco products, responding to growing consumer awareness of environmental concerns. With no hint of irony, these include references to purity, naturalness and the lack of additives, as well as claims for the farming practices employed in the production of the leaf—such as allusions to organic growing conditions, reforestation programs, use of renewable energy sources like wind power70 and ethical sourcing from farmers.71 This trend has been especially marked in the US, where70 consumer concerns have led to the marketing of organic, '100% additive free natural' brands such as American Spirit72 and 1st-Nation.71 In 2011, American Spirit ran advertisements in US magazines claiming to be 'eco-friendly', reflecting the growing consumer demand for green products.73 See Figure 10.7.3.

10.7.3.png

Figure 10.7.3
American Spirit magazine ad (US 2011)

Source: Koch 201173

There is also evidence that these types of descriptors tend to offer the consumer reassurance, since 'natural' commonly connotes beneficial attributes.70 Although some manufacturers are careful not to claim health attributes for their products,72, it is significant that US tobacco companies have sought to retain the right to use the descriptor 'natural' on their cigarettes sold outside the US.70

At the time of writing no brands from Australian manufactures claim to be organic or additive free, although at least two imported brands, American Spirit74 and Manitou Organic Green75 are available, as well as a small range of herbal cigarettes.

10.7.9 Packaging trends

Restrictions on tobacco advertising in Australia and other countries have made product packaging an increasingly important vehicle for brand identity and positioning.76-78 In Australia, Winfield cigarette packs directly allude to their former advertising campaigns by carrying inside the flip top '...anyhow have a Winfield', the slogan made famous by actor Paul Hogan in advertisements outlawed in the 1980s.79

New trends in pack design included limited edition designer packages,v cigarette packs that emulate sleek mobile telephone design,16 and splittable packs which become two smaller packs, similar in dimensions to an iPod.81

For further information on packaging trends in Australia, see Chapter 11, Section 11.10.

10.7.10 Reduced fire risk cigarettes

Lit cigarettes have been a leading cause of fires and death and injury due to fires.82 In Australia, smoking is conservatively estimated to be the direct cause of at least 4574 fires annually;83 and almost one in every four deaths due to fire is attributable to fires caused by smoking84 (see also Chapter 3, Section 19). The role of smoking-related materials in causing fires has led to the introduction of 'reduced fire risk' cigarettes, otherwise known as 'reduced ignition propensity' cigarettes, in Canada and in most states of the US.85

Reduced fire risk cigarettes self extinguish when not being actively smoked.83, 86 Other methods of smoking (such as pipes, cigars and hand-rolled cigarettes) have always required active inhalation from the smoker to keep the tobacco burning.87 Ordinary cigarettes remain alight because of the addition of 'burn accelerants'. These additives keep the cigarette burning at a constant rate and help hold the burning tip and ash together.88

The tobacco manufacturers have long had the technology to produce cigarettes with reduced fire risk.89, 90

The most commonly used method involves making alterations to paper in which the cigarette is wrapped.91 The addition of two or three thin bands of less porous paper works as 'speed bumps'—when the tip of the cigarette burns down to one of the bands, the change in the paper restricts oxygen supply to the burning tobacco and makes the cigarette go out. Other ways of reducing ignition propensity include using expanded tobacco, adjusting the size of the cigarette, or making other changes to wrapping papers.87, 91 However reduced fire risk technology is not effective in all cases. Tests on cigarettes for sale in the state of New York, where reduced fire risk regulations came into force in 2004, have shown that about 1 in 10 reduced fire risk cigarettes still burned for its full length.91 It is therefore important not to regard or promote reduced fire risk cigarettes as completely 'fire-safe'—but they are less likely to cause a fire than other cigarettes.

As noted above, reduced fire risk requirements have now been mandated or are filed for legislation in most states of the US, and throughout Canada as well.85vi In November 2007, member states of the European Union voted to begin the process of regulating for reduced fire risk cigarettes, and the government of the UK has made a separate announcement that it intends to introduce regulations independently and to a more rapid timetable.92

In March 2007, Standards Australia, recognised by Australian governments as Australia's peak standards body,vii finalised a standard for testing reduced fire risk cigarettes. The Determination of the Extinction Propensity of Cigarettes (AS 4830-2007) was developed in collaboration with the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), the three tobacco companies operating in Australia, and other stakeholders. The standard tests the likelihood of combustion if a burning cigarette is placed in contact with material similar to that of household furniture. 93

In June 2008 the Product Safety Policy Section of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission released a regulation impact statement considering workable options for introducing reduced fire risk regulation in Australia under the auspices of the Trade Practices Act 1974.88 In the interests of protecting consumers and simplifying compliance, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has recommended 'establishing explicit government regulation by declaring a mandatory minimum standard for reduced fire risk cigarettes' (p15).88

The tobacco industry has a history of opposing the introduction of reduced fire risk cigarettes. See Section 10.18.2.

10.7.11 Specialty products

In the US, restricted opportunities to smoke have led to increased emphasis on specialty products designed to enhance the experience. While people may be smoking less, they are tending to smoke more selectively.22, 94 This has boosted the luxury, premium end of the market. Top of the range cigarettes may be hand finished, using special papers and filters, and presented in luxury tins or boxes. Holographic cigarette papers, which 'provide a scintillating light show', have been adopted by one manufacturer.94 The demographic groups likely to be attracted to these premium products are typified as the young, more affluent, adventurous, sophisticated, better informed and sociable smoker, or established smokers who are cutting back on tobacco use but treating themselves to quality products.94

As part of this trend, cigar use has also increased in popularity, and the market has expanded to accommodate a broader range of sizes, styles and flavourings.22 Smaller cigars are intended to appeal to 'time-poor' smokers. Sweeter and more aromatic tobaccos, which enhance flavour and improve the smell of secondhand smoke, are making cigars more appealing to female users.95 Another major feature that is driving cigar success is the individual foil packaging and bar codes that allow the cigars to be sold individually.96

In the cigar category, there has also been a move towards 'smaller is better' and the sales of smaller cigarillos continue to grow. Pack sizes are also becoming smaller. Another emerging cigar trend is for flavoured cigars, which retailers claim are especially popular with the female consumers and smokers making the transition from cigarettes to cigars. Five of the top 10 cigars sold in Australia in 2010 were flavoured.66

According to an industry report, cigars are popular across all social and cultural boundaries.97 The key advantage that convenience and impulse outlets have in selling cigars is that they are often purchased outside of regular shop trading hours for a special occasion.96 Not to have cigars as part of the products available at convenience retail 'is like taking Mars Bars off the confectionary shelf', according to a manager at Swedish Match, an importer of cigars into Australia.98

10.7.12 Accessories

Accessories and gimmicks used in support of tobacco use are an important means by which tobacco companies can keep their products and brands interesting to the consumer. Items such as cigarette cases, cigar cutters, humidors (for cigar storage), crystals (intended to keep cigars fresh), glass pipes, hookahs, cigarette lighters and odour neutralisers in the form of candles and incense are all trends in the US. According to a North American tobacco accessories distributor, 'It's like the fashion business. It's very difficult to predict. That's why you have to keep refreshing your assortment'.99

Accessories are also important in the roll-your-own market. In 2010, when Swedish Match launched Bali Shag roll-your-own tobacco in Australia it also introduced a special tobacco rolling mat as a promotional strategy to enhance awareness of Bali Shag in the retail trade.100


 

 

ii No more than 1.5kg of chewing tobacco and snuffs intended for oral use is permitted under customs legislation.

iii See, for instance s15 of Tobacco Act 1987 (Vic). no. 81 Available from: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ta198773/

iv From the 1970s onwards, tobacco companies patented many inventions to lower the quantities of toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke, but they were not adopted at the time. To incorporate them into standard cigarette design and promote a 'safer cigarette' would be tantamount to admitting that tobacco use was dangerous, something which no tobacco company openly declared before 1999. There is no proof that any of these inventions would have produced a 'safer' cigarette. For further information about changes to cigarette design and technology, refer to The US Surgeon General's report for 1981, The Changing Cigarette.50–52

v Such as the limited edition Dunhill My Mixture range launched in an 'innovative 20s spring-box format' during late 2007.80

vi The tobacco industry engaged in many years of lobbying against reduced fire risk requirements in the USA, the primary reason most likely being fear of litigation. See Section 10.17.2 for discussion.

vii http://www.standards.org.au/default.asp

Recent news and research

For recent news items and research on this topic, click here (Last updated October 2016)    

 

References

1. Ahijevych K and Garrett B. Menthol pharmacology and its potential impact on cigarette smoking behavior. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 2004;6(suppl.1):i17-28. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14982706

2. Anderson SJ, Glantz SA, Klausner K, Lee YO, McCandless PM, Salgado MV, et al. Menthol cigarettes. Tobacco Control 2001;20(suppl. 2):ii1-56. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/Suppl_2.toc

3. Heyzer E. Best raw materials not essential for tobacco products market success. World Tobacco 1988; March:41-3.

4. Hirschhorn N, Bialous S and Shatenstein S. Philip Morris' new scientific initiative: an analysis. Tobacco Control 2001;10(3):247–52. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/3/247

5. Connolly G. Sweet and spicy flavours: new brands for minorities and youth. Tobacco Control 2004;13(3):211-12. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/13/3/211

6. Carpenter C, Wayne G, Pauly J, Koh H and Connolly G. New cigarette brands with flavors that appeal to youth: tobacco marketing strategies. Health Affairs 2005;24(6):1601-10. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16284034

7. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Australian Health Ministers' Conference. Flavoured cigarettes [Media release] . Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2008 [viewed 18 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/mr-yr08-dept-dept180408.htm

8. Commonwealth of Australia. Voluntary agreement for the disclosure of the ingredients of cigarettes. Canberra: Department of Health and Aged Care, 2000, [viewed 19 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/417E95914EBD1E5DCA25774D000FF086/$File/agreement.pdf

9. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Tobacco. Australian cigarette ingredient disclosure. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, 2011, [viewed 19 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/tobacco-ingred

10. British American Tobacco Australia Ltd. Australia ingredients report 1 March 2009 - 1 March 2010. 2010, [viewed 21 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/643F3FB35E9EFBE7CA256F190004A474/$File/bata10.pdf

11. FCTC/COP4(10). Partial guidelines for implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (Regulation of the contents of tobacco products and Regulation of tobacco product disclosures). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010. Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/Decisions9and10.pdf

12. FCTC/COP4(10). Partial guidelines for implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (Regulation of the contents of tobacco products and Regulation of tobacco product disclosures). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010. Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/Decisions9and10.pdf

13. Yamine E. Flavoured cigarettes face ban. The Daily Telegraph, (Sydney) 13 August 2007: Available from: http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049 22231977-5006009,00.html

14. Lewis MJ and Wackowski O. Dealing with an innovative industry: a look at flavored cigarettes promoted by mainstream brands. American Journal of Public Health 2006;96(2):244-51. Available from: http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/96/2/244

15. Freeman B and Chapman S. Open source marketing: Camel cigarette brand marketing in the 'Web 2.0' world. Tobacco Control 2009;18(3):212. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/18/3/212.full

16. O'Connell V. Philip Morris readies aggressive global push. The Wall Street Journal Online, 2008:29 Jan. Available from: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120156034185223519.html?mod=hpp_us_pageone

17. World Health Organization. Regulation urgently needed to control growing list of deadly tobacco products [Media Release, 30 May 2006] . Geneva: World Health Organization, 2007, [viewed 20 June 2007] . Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr28/en/

18. 1991. Consumer Protection Notice No 10 of 1991 - Permanent Ban on Goods, Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) now Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). Available from: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2010L03294.

19. Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (Cth). no. 90 Available from: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/F1996B03651

20. Sachdev P and Chapman S. Availability of smokeless tobacco products in south Asian grocery shops in Sydney. Medical Journal of Australia 2004;183(6):334. Available from: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/183_06_190905/letters_190905_fm-1.html

21. Foulds J, Ramstrom L, Burke M and Fagerstrom K. Effect of smokeless tobacco (snus) on smoking and public health in Sweden. Tobacco Control 2003;12:349-59. Available from: http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/4/349

22. White L. Turning the tobacco tide. Distribution channels. Fairfax, Virginia: American Wholesale Marketers Association, 2008, [viewed 20 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.awmanet.org/dc/dc_cover0308.html

23. British American Tobacco plc. Company Website. London: British American Tobacco plc,, 2008, [viewed 17 January 2008] . Available from: http://www.bat.com/group/sites/uk__3mnfen.nsf/vwPagesWebLive/DO52AD6H?opendocument&SKN=1&TMP=1

24. Bates C, Fagerstrom K, Jarvis MJ, Kunze M, McNeill A and Ramstrom L. European Union policy on smokeless tobacco: a statement in favour of evidence based regulation for public health. Tobacco Control 2003;12(4):360-7. Available from: http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/4/360

25. World Health Organization Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Products Regulation. Recommendation on smokeless tobacco products. Geneva: WHO, 2002. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/brisbane_2002_smokeless/en/

26. Gray N. Mixed feelings on snus. The Lancet 2005;366(9490):966-7. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16168760

27. Broadstock M. Systematic review of the health effects of modified smokeless tobacco products. New Zealand Health Technology Assessment (NZHTA) report. Christchurch: Department of Public Health and General Practice, Christchurch School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2007. Available from: http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publications/smokeless_tobacco.pdf

28. Foulds J and Kozlowski L. Snus—what should the public health response be? The Lancet 2007;369(9578):1976-8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17498796

29. Gartner CE, Hall WD, Chapman S and Freeman B. Should the health community promote smokeless tobacco (snus) as a harm reduction measure? PLoS Med 2007;4(7):e185. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0040185

30. Star Scientific Inc. Company website. Petersburg (VA): Star Scientific, 2004, [viewed 20 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.starscientific.com/maintemplate/index.html

31. Star Scientific announces test market of Ariva smokeless tobacco 'cigalettes'; test markets initiated in Dallas, Texas and Richmond,VA [Media release] . San Francisco: 14 Nov 2001 [viewed 30 May 2008] . Available from: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2001_Nov_14/ai_80043187/pg_1

32. United States: RJR still backing high-tech products. Tobacco Reporter 1989;May:7.

33. Philip Morris. Project Trace advertising brief. San Francisco: Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, University of California, 1992, [viewed 27 May 2008] . Available from: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oby90b00

34. RJR to test cigarettes that have less odour. The Wall Street Journal Asia, (Hong Kong) 1995:23 Mar. 8

35. Assunta M and Chapman S. A 'clean cigarette' for a clean nation: a case study of Salem Pianissimo in Japan. Tobacco Control 2004;13(suppl. 2):ii58-62. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/13/suppl_2/ii58

36. Wayne GF. Potential reduced exposure products (PREPs) in industry trial testimony. Tobacco Control 2006;15(suppl. 4):iv90-7. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/15/suppl_4/iv90.pdf

37. Frost-Pineda K, Zedler B, Liang Q and Roethig H. Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) evaluation of a third-generation electrically heated cigarette smoking system (EHCSS). Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 2008;52(2):118–21. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18639603

38. Tricker A, Schorp M, Urban H, Leyden D, Hagedorn H, Engl J, et al. Comparison of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) concentrations generated by an electrically heated cigarette smoking system and a conventional cigarette. Inhalation Toxicology 2008;21(1):62–77. Available from: http://informahealthcare.com/doi/full/10.1080/08958370802207334

39. Houston C. The bluff puff, but it's not the full quit. The Age (Melbourne) 2 June 2008 Available from: http://www.theage.com.au/national/the-bluff-puff-but-its-not-the-full-quit-20080601-2kjp.html

40. Houston C. Revealed: tobacco giant's secret new weapon in the age of smoking bans. The Age, (Melbourne, Australia) 2007:27 Jun. Available from: http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/tobacco-giants-secret-new-weapon/2007/06/26/1182623909034.html

41. Sauter E, Westgate S and Templemire J. Skin necrosis in cigarette smokers receiving partial breast irradiation: two case reports. Cases Journal 2008;1(1):230. Available from: http://www.casesjournal.com/content/pdf/1757-1626-1-230.pdf

42. Therapeutic Goods Administration. Electronic cigarettes. Canberra: TGA, Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, 2011, [viewed 28 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.tga.gov.au/consumers/ecigarettes.htm

43. Freeman B. E-cigarettes aren't a solution — they're part of the problem. The Conversation, 2011:12 Apr. Available from: http://theconversation.edu.au/e-cigarettes-arent-a-solution-theyre-part-of-the-problem-423

44. Bullen C, McRobbie H, Thornley S, Glover M, Lin R and Laugesen M. Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette) on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user preferences and nicotine delivery: randomised cross-over trial. Tobacco Control 2010;19(2):98-103. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/98.abstract

45. Novotny TE, Hardin SN, Hovda LR, Novotny DJ, McLean MK and Khan S. Tobacco and cigarette butt consumption in humans and animals. Tobacco Control 2011;20(suppl. 1):i17-20. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/Suppl_1/i17.abstract

46. US Food and Drug Administration. Electronic cigarettes. Silver Spring, Maryland: US Department of Health & Human Services, 2011, [viewed 31 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/publichealthfocus/ucm172906.htm

47. Vapers Forum. 2011, [viewed 31 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.vapersforum.com/

48. Noel JK, Rees VW and Connolly GN. Electronic cigarettes: a new 'tobacco' industry? Tobacco Control 2011;20(1):81. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/1/81.short

49. Etter J-F, Bullen C, Flouris AD, Laugesen M and Eissenberg T. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: a research agenda. Tobacco Control 2011;20(3):243-8. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/3/243.abstract

50. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking: the changing cigarette: a report of the Surgeon General. Washington DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of Smoking and Health, 1981. Available from: http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/NN/B/B/S/N/segments.html

51. Baker R. Smoke generation inside a burning cigarette: modifying combustion to develop cigarettes that may be less hazardous to health. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2006;32:373-85.

52. Boyd D. Platinum group metals in the potential limitation of tobacco related diseases. Platinum Metals Rev 2000;44:120-4.

53. Gray N. Reflections on the saga of tar content: why did we measure the wrong thing? Tobacco Control 2000;9(1):90-4. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/9/1/90.pdf

54. King W, Carter SM, Borland R, Chapman S and Gray N. The Australian tar derby: the origins and fate of a low tar harm reduction programme. Tobacco Control 2003;12(suppl.3):iii61-70. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/12/suppl_3/iii61

55. Shiffman S, Pillitteri JL, Burton SL and Di Marino ME. Smoker and ex-smoker reactions to cigarettes claiming reduced risk. Tobacco Control 2004;13(1):78-84. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/13/1/78.pdf

56. Kozlowski LT, Dreschel NA, Stellman SD, Wilkenfeld J, Weiss EB and Goldberg ME. An extremely compensatible cigarette by design: documentary evidence on industry awareness and reactions to the Barclay filter design cheating the tar testing system. Tobacco Control 2005;14(1):64-70. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/14/1/64

57. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking. A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, 2004. Available from: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/smokingconsequences/

58. World Health Organisation and Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Regulation (SACTob). Statement of principles guiding the evaluation of new, or modified tobacco products. Geneva: WHO, 2003. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/brisbane_2002_modified/en/index.html

59. Liggett Vector Brands Inc. Company website. Mebane (NC): Vector Tobacco Inc, 2006, [viewed 20 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.liggettvectorbrands.com/

60. Caraballo RS, Pederson LL and Gupta N. New tobacco products: do smokers like them? Tobacco Control 2006;15(1):39-44. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/39

61. Vector Group Limited. Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007. Washington DC: Securities and Exchange Commission, 2008, [viewed 20 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/59440/000095014408001553/g12033e10vk.htm

62. WHO Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Regulation (SACTob). Statement of principles guiding the evaluation of new, or modified tobacco products. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/brisbane_2002_modified/en/index.html

63. WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation. Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation. WHO Technical Report Series, no. 945. Geneva: World Health Organizaton, 2007. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/tsr/en/index.html

64. WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation. Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation. WHO Technical Report Series, no. 951. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2008. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/publications/tsr_951/en/index.html

65. WHO Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Products Regulation. Recommendation on smokeless tobacco products. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/brisbane_2002_smokeless/en/

66. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. RYO & cigar sales continue to defy the odds. Balmain, New South Wales: Berg Bennett, 2010, [viewed 15 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.c-store.com.au/magazine/article.php?id=544

67. Anon. Tobacco on the loose. Australian Convenience Store News 2005;Nov/Dec Available from: http://www.c-store.net.au/magazine/article_view.php?id=53

68. Anon. Rising to the challenge. Australian Convenience Store News. Mar/Apr 2007, [viewed 3 June 2008] . Available from: http://c-store.net.au/magazine/article_view.php?id=121

69. Calantzopoulos A. Remarks by Andre Calantzopoulos, Chief Executive Officer Philip Morris International Inc. JP Morgan Global Tobacco Conference, London, United Kingdom, June 29, 2007. Lausanne: Philip Morris International Inc, 2007, [viewed 12 February 2008] . Available from: http://www.altria.com/media/press_release/03_02_pr_2007_06_29_01.asp

70. McDaniel PA and Malone RE. 'I always thought they were all pure tobacco': American smokers' perceptions of 'natural' cigarettes and tobacco industry advertising strategies. Tobacco Control 2007;16(6):e7. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/6/e7

71. Am Trading. Corporate website. Akwesasne, New York: Amtrading, 2008, [viewed 19 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.amtrading.us/main.html

72. Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company. Corporate website. Winston-Salem, North Carolina: Reynolds American Inc, 2008, [viewed 15 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.nascigs.com/

73. Koch W. Eco-friendly cigarette ads make tobacco foes fume. USA Today, 2011:26 Jul. Available from: http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/2011-07-26-green-cigarette-ads_n.htm

74. The NSW Retail Tobacco Traders' Association. Tobacco prices. Cigarettes. The Australian Retail Tobacconist 2007;67(Oct-Nov):3-8.

75. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. Recommended retail prices for tobacco products and accessories. 2010, [viewed 15 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.c-store.com.au/industry/tobacco-pricing.pdf

76. Slade J. The pack as advertisement. Tobacco Control 1997;6(3):169-70. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/6/3/169.pdf

77. Wakefield M, Morley C and Horan J. The cigarette pack as image: new evidence from tobacco industry documents. Tobacco Control 2002;11(suppl. 1):i73-80. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/11/suppl_1/i73.pdf

78. Scheffels J. A difference that makes a difference: young adult smokers' accounts of cigarette brands and package design. Tobacco Control 2008;17:118-22. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18303087

79. Simpson D. Australia: BAT corporate social irresponsibility. Tobacco Control 2006;15(4):275. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/15/4/275

80. The NSW Retail Tobacco Traders' Association. Dunhill My Mixture. The Australian Retail Tobacconist 2007;67(Oct-Nov):6-7.

81. Chapman S. Australia: British American Tobacco 'addresses' youth smoking. Tobacco Control 2007;16(1):2-a-3. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/16/1/2-a

82. Leistikow B, Martin D and Milano C. Fire injuries, disasters, and costs from cigarettes and cigarette lights: a global overview. Preventive Medicine 2000;31(2 Pt 1):91-9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10938207

83. Chapman S and Balmain A. Time to legislate for fire-safe cigarettes in Australia [Editorial] . Medical Journal of Australia 2004;181(6):292-3. Available from: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/181_06_200904/cha10373_fm.html

84. Collins D and Lapsley H. The costs of tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug abuse to Australian society in 2004-05. P3 2625. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2008. Available from: http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/mono64/$File/mono64.pdf

85. Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes. Coalition website. Quincy Massachusetts: National Fire Protection Association 2008, [viewed 4 June 2008] . Available from: http://www.firesafecigarettes.org/categoryList.asp?categoryID=9&URL=Home%20-%20The%20Coalition%20for%20Fire%20Safe%20Cigarettes

86. Chapman S. Where there's smoke, there's fire. Tobacco Control 1999;8(1):12-13. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/45.pdf

87. Laugesen M, Duncanson M, Fraser T, McClellan V, Linehan B and Shirley R. Hand rolling cigarette papers as the reference point for regulating cigarette fire safety. Tobacco Control 2003;12(4):406-10. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/12/4/406.pdf

88. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Product Safety Policy Section. The regulation of reduced fire risk cigarettes under the Trade Practices Act 1974. Regulation impact statement June 2008. Canberra: ACCC, 2008, [viewed 18 August 2008] . Available from: http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml?itemId=807543&nodeId=aac0bdf39e1ba1d76a42e81eedf77ab1&fn=Reduced%20fire%20risk%20cigarettes%E2%80%94regulation%20impact%20statement%E2%80%94July%202008.doc

89. McGuire A. How the tobacco industry continues to keep the home fires burning. Tobacco Control 1999;8(1):67-9. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/8/1.toc

90. Gunja M, Ferris Wayne G, Landman A, Connolly G and McGuire A. The case for fire safe cigarettes made through industry documents. Tobacco Control 2002;11(4):346–53. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/11/4/346

91. Connolly GN, Alpert HR, Rees V, Carpenter C, Wayne GF, Vallone D, et al. Effect of the New York State cigarette fire safety standard on ignition propensity, smoke constituents, and the consumer market. Tobacco Control 2005;14(5):321-7. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/14/5/321

92. Arnott D and Berteletti F. Europe: agreement on reducing cigarette fires. Tobacco Control 2008;17(1):4-5. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/17/1.toc

93. Standards Australia. Standard for reduced fire risk cigarettes released [Media release] . Sydney: Standards Australia, 9 March 2007, [viewed 30 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.standards.org.au/downloads/070307_Low_fire_risk_cigarettes_Standard_released.pdf

94. Scott D. Luxury cigarettes. Targetting cigarettes' big spenders. Smokeshop Online.2002. Feb-Mar Available from: http://www.gosmokeshop.com/0202/cover.htm

95. Australian Convenience Store News. Tobacco on the loose. Balmain, New South Wales: Berg Bennett, 2005, [viewed 31 August 2008] . Available from: http://www.c-store.net.au/magazine/article_view.php?id=53

96. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. Break out the cigars. Balmain, New South Wales: Berg Bennett, 2009, [viewed 31 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.c-store.com.au/magazine/article.php?id=484

97. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. Nielsen convenience and impulse report. Macquarie Park, NSW: Nielsen, 2010, [viewed 1 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.c-store.com.au/industry/acn/Nielsen_Report_10.pdf

98. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. Brand matters - the importance of brand loyalty in the tobacco category. Australian Convenience Store News. Balmain, New South Wales: Berg Bennett, 2008, [viewed 31 August 2008] . Available from: http://c-store.net.au/magazine/view_article.php?id=169

99. Anon. New products key at Tobacco Plus Expo. Convenience Store News. New York: Nielsen Business Media Inc, 2008, [viewed 26 May 2008] . Available from: http://www.csnews.com/csn/cat_management/tobacco/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003795490

100. Convenience & Impulse Retailing. Endless challenge. Tobacco faces up to its biggest battle yet. 2010, [viewed 31 July 2011] . Available from: http://www.c-store.com.au/magazine/article.php?id=525

      Previous Chapter Next Chapter