America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Aren't you posting while at work too?

They've been around for years and years...13.5 or more at this point. They're called Pimp Stick and Def Sea. You may not like them, but for us they sell like hotcakes. Drew Estate makes cigars that are exclusive to many different companies, and have been for years.

Its simple really - they get to add another cigar to their sales and we get an exclusive. Many, many businesses do this - not just the cigar industry.

There isn't a person on the CBid team who runs out of here when CS closes for the evening. There's much to do and this team is dedicated. For me, last evening I was here until 6:30. Monday as well.

Besides, salaried people get no OT....

Again with the bread for breakfast thing. Pancakes, waffles, crepes, and hot cakes are for people without teeth. Get some eggs, meat, and hash browns.

Just a couple of things from someone that deals with the FTC and state consumer regs everyday on a day I am stuck in an airport killing time:

1) Licensing. Trish is absolutely right about how licensing of names is both legal and common, although her examples (such as t-shirts) are not the best. Many companies have licensed out their name that is put on products not made by them. Bell and Howell has not made consumer electronics for many many years but you still see the name showing up on cheap items from China or Korea. I have an old "Polaroid" flat-screen TV that was not made by Polaroid despite the name on it. Indeed a number of companies (including Polaroid) have as its main asset and source of income a brand name - that used to mean something - that it now simply licenses out.

Someone mentioned above that a manufacturer would not let their name be put on something that would give them a bad reputation. Eh, maybe. Depends. Many companies start out only licensing their name to products that they carefully review and approve, but boy is that easy money once it starts rolling in. The old "Polaroid" TV I have in the rec room actually was a good one and got good reviews back in the day as they apparently were careful about where they put their name. As the company approached bankruptcy, however, it started getting slapped on anything for the right price.

With cigars it would depend on how much the name-owner thinks that CI/Cbid sales would hurt its other sales. With Graycliff, for example, if they really only sell their "real" Graycliff cigars at the Hotel or thereabouts, licensing the name to someone else is not a very risky proposition since they are not really competing against themselves, and the relatively few people that would go through the Hotel for the purpose buying their cigars probably know the real story. Others might might have more to protect, but again once that "free" money starts rolling it, its pretty hard to say no.

So yes it is legal and common. I don't necessarily like it, but its buyer beware.

2) Out-of-date reviews. Here there is a real potential issue. The FTC and some states (such as California) have been looking into "Stale" reviews that are not actually reviewing the current version of the product sold. One point of emphasis on the FTC's website is that there needs to be a disclosure if the product is not the same as it was when the endorsements were given. A direct quote from the FTC's guidelines says: "If you’re using endorsements that are a few years old, it’s your obligation to make sure the claims still are accurate."

In this context it is likely that the same rules would apply to a rating from CA or wherever. If the product has changed, there should be an updated review/endorsement/rating OR there should be a full disclosure that the product is not the same.

California has reportedly gone after some companies that were highlighting - or pushing to the top of searches - "old" online reviews of products or services that had substantially changed since the review was first posted. Indeed, you see on a number of sites now disclaimers such as "this review was of an earlier version."

Cigars, of course, are not a camera or a car. They are (often) handmade products from natural materials that are going to change from year-to-year and batch to batch. . In that way they are similar to wine that is different every year. But wine is commonly dated, so you know if you are getting a 1997 or 2014 version of the same named product and the reviews and ratings usually make it clear what year wine is being talked about.

As "vintage dating" is not commonly done with the marketing of cigars, it actually makes it MORE important that, if the seller knows that the product has substantially changed, then the reviews and endorsements should either pertain to the current version or there is a disclaimer. I have seen a number of cigars with a sticker on the box or wrapper that says "Best Cigar of 2005" or some such thing. That is better than what CI/CBID does since it at least has a date on it, but you still don't usually know when THIS cigar you are buying was made.

This is not to say that an "old" review or rating is meaningless. Not every cigar is rated by every reviewer every year. Knowing that a manufacturer did a great job in 2012 could certainly be useful information on whether or not to purchase the company's 2014 product. But even then, have things changed? Is it made by the same company, in the same place, by the same people, using the same source of tobacco, with the same blend and same conditions? IF not, and if you KNOW its not, then you are risking getting into trouble by posting what you know are old, out-dated reviews and ratings.

The FTC has always looked at these types of cases on an individual basis so there is no "bright line" that is easy to point to, but clearly the further away from a rating or review the current product is, and the more changes there have been to manufacturing, ownership, blend, etc that have taken place since the rating or review, the more likely the FTC would say that deception is going on.

The most egregious example that seems to be pointed out above is the LaPerla "93 rating" was from quite a while ago on a cigar that the seller knows has changed substantially since the rating was given. I could certainly see this as being a basis for complaints. The funny thing for me is I actually really like the LaPerla (purple) for the price I can get it on C-Bid usually. Its a very good smoke IMO and well worth the $2/stick (and sometimes cheaper) I have gotten it on here. As much as I like it, however, I would not put it in a "CA 93" category. Its just not THAT cigar. I personally find the 93 rating to be misleading at this point and one that should be dropped from the advertisements and descriptions.

midmofan - thank you for that information. I sent it along to the folks who have created the lots and the descriptions. Much appreciate you taking the time to write all of that. Musta been a really, really long delay!

Excellent post....................................................but that last sentence??
I agree with it (and more) 100%, but be very careful with the phrasing of any follow-up posts............or you might end up in La Princessa's favorite dark place.............

I was there a while back, and it's dark............ I thought I heard some tapping on a metal door way down the hall.................kinda like Morse Code or something........unfortunately my hearing isn't the greatest these days........

one of the craziest things about the La Perla Morado is the new version isn't even the same size as the one with the 93 rating!

Sears appliances, many department store clothing lines...

From above:

"No cigar manufacturer is going to make internet only lots, and B&M only lots..."

Can't speak to cigar manufacturers, but with other products this kind of thing happens all the time. Most of the clothes you purchase from one of those so-called outlet malls are not "seconds" or "overstock items," they are specifically manufactured to be sold at the outlet mall. Despite the name on the door or the name on the label, they are of lower quality materials, workmanship and are often not even made by the "Name" but farmed out to factories that make other discount lines that slap the "Name" label on.

Here is a pretty good article on the outlet store issue: http://www.buzzfeed.com/sapna/customers-finally-aware-that-most-outlet-merchandise-is-now

Doesn't this run the risk of of hurting the reputation of the main brand? Probably it does at some level, but if you look on places like eBay you can see that many consumers know the difference between "black label" "blue label" and "red label" products or how many stars are below the name or whatever to find the REAL Polo shirt or 5th Avenue top. Many that don't know probably wouldn't care, they just want to be wearing something with the label on it.

Bottom line is that if a company can spend $2 on a product it sells for $15 as opposed to spending $20 on a product that sells for $25, well, your know what is likely to happen...

So, IF cigar manufacturers thought they could make $$$$$ selling lower quality items on the internet that are branded the same way and hard to tell from the "real" item, well, then you can assume that SOMEBODY is going to try to do it at some point. There are those that will be fooled, those that know the difference but don't care because its still a good deal.

Of course I am sure nobody here knows ANYONE that would buy a cigar just because of the band on it in order to impress everyone...

I'm guessing that many of the factory "2nds" you see are not really rejects that an inspector has pulled out of the main bin after holding each one up to the light but, rather, have been made specifically to be sold as "2nds" from the get-go. (BTW, really enjoying the "Nicaraguan 90+ 2nds" got here at a very nice price -- regardless of how they were made -- let them sit a few months and they are very nice smoke)

As the article points out, the FTC has not really gone after this kind of issue yet, but there is some pressure from some in congress to do so.

And I am in the lead for use of "shutter quotes" for this thread!

You mean people just like you just did.

Midmofan:
Golf ball manufacturers have been running 'seconds' lines for decades.
They cheat a bit on compression ratios to keep costs down, but that's it.