• Australia

But tobacco is a weirdly resilient industry. Consumption is shrinking in developed countries but still rising in poorer ones, thanks partly to their growing populations. As GDP rises, smokers trade up to more expensive brands. The number of cigarettes smoked globally will shrink by 9% between 2015 and 2050, predicts Euromonitor International, a market research firm. But tobacco firms are adept at wringing fatter profits from stagnant markets.

Addicted customers and high taxes make it relatively easy to raise prices (a big rise for producers translates into a small uptick for consumers). Tobacco s stigma keeps potential competitors at bay. BAT aims to raise its earnings per share annually by high single digits and often does better than that, partly by using its spare cash to buy back shares, points out Rae Maile of J.P. Morgan Cazenove. Philip Morris International, BAT s bigger rival, has retired a quarter of its shares since 2008.

Big Tobacco can hardly complain that plain packs will dent demand. It insists that branding is all about market share, not recruiting new smokers. Really? The World Health Organisation reckons that a blanket advertising and promotion ban would cut puffing by 7%.

Kingsley Wheaton, BAT s head of regulation, says the injury lies elsewhere. For one thing, Australia s law amounts to an expropriation of intellectual property, which ought to worry other industries such as food and liquor. Australia s High Court rejected that claim, but the World Trade Organisation is considering it.

The second claim is that plain packs will drive smokers into the black market, which would be the fourth biggest manufacturer if it were a company. Mr Maile sees this as the main threat to the business. Plain packs will encourage counterfeiters to produce knock offs of many brands rather than just a few, he thinks. And that, the cigarette makers gleefully point out, will cut government revenue.

They are nothing if not ingenious when regulators banned light they struck back with smooth . Plain packs will not end the duel. BAT will go back to the core of our product by upgrading flavour and other inherent qualities rather than investing in promotional pizzazz, says Mr Wheaton. After all, fine wines do not sport flashy labels.

Plain packs may chime with a global back to basics mood. Some analysts think they could even help brands in their endless quest for differentiation. Faced with rows of identical boxes Aussies will ask for their favourites by name. New brands will find it hard to break in. Incumbents may find the new regime rather cosy.

Public backs plans to remove branding from cigarette packets

Covina discount cigarettes – covina, ca

Almost two thirds of people support moves to sell cigarettes in plain packaging, suggesting tobacco companies will soon lose the battle to protect their brands’ identities.

The government will publish a consultation on Monday examining plans to strip all branding from cigarette packs sold in England. The move has been welcomed by health groups.

“Pack designs are used to promote brand imagery, and also distract attention from health warnings,” said Professor John Britton, director of the UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies. “Putting tobacco into plain packs creates no problem for existing users who want to continue to buy the product, but protects children and young people from becoming familiar with and perhaps identifying with specific brands.”

Branded cigarette packs are considered vital to the profits of the tobacco firms, which are mounting a ferocious lobbying campaign to defend their right to differentiate their products.

But an independent YouGov survey of 10,000 adults, conducted for Action on Smoking and Health, suggests 62% of people support plain packaging while only 11% oppose it. The survey found that only 6% believe the tobacco industry can be trusted to “tell the truth”.

Ash also claims around eight out of 10 people support smoke free legislation, with the majority of the public in favour of further restrictions on smoking in public and on tobacco promotion.

Deborah Arnott, chief executive of Ash, said the poll showed the cigarette companies were fighting a losing battle. “Big Tobacco has the money for a fight, but money can’t buy legitimacy,” Arnott said. “Now that even a business friendly government like ours can say they want the tobacco industry to have no business in the UK there’s nowhere left to turn. This is the endgame for Big Tobacco.”

A spokesman for the British Medical Association said plain packaging was key to the strategy for reducing levels of smoking in the UK. “As doctors we see first hand the devastating effects of tobacco addiction, and therefore we support moves to reduce the number of people taking up this deadly habit,” the spokesman said.

But a backlash against the proposals is already mobilising.

“It would appear that Andrew Lansley the health secretary has made up his mind before the consultation has even been launched on Monday,” said Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ group Forest. “We do think that the total process is a total farce.”

The Association of Convenience Stores, which represents corner shops, has vowed to fight the proposal. “We do not believe that government should impose such a measure at a time when the recently enacted tobacco display ban is still to be implemented in England, Wales and Northern Ireland,” said James Lowman, its chief executive. “The confusion that this would create would create further regulatory burdens on thousands of businesses.”

Tobacco firms argue that they have a right to defend their intellectual property rights.

“Our trademarks are protected by law and we have a fundamental right to differentiate our brands from those of our competitors,” said a spokesman for Imperial Tobacco, which manufactures the Lambert & Butler and Embassy brands.

The spokesman warned that generic packaging would increase “the already high level of counterfeit product available in the UK”.

Australia is the only country so far to pledge to introduce plain packaging.