Tobacco price boards as a promotional strategy—a longitudinal observational study in Australian retailers

Bayly, Megan; Scollo, Michelle; White, Sarah L.; Lindorff, Kylie; Wakefield, Melanie

doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053753

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While uptake of menthol capsules among Australian adults has been low up to 2014,23 more than half of past-month teenage smokers reported having smoked a menthol capsule cigarette in 2014 24. In the absence of traditional advertising channels, tobacco companies also appear to be increasingly using the brand itself (umbrella branding) and one of the few remaining opportunities to communicate product offerings to consumers—price boards in retailers 6. In fact, these lists of tobacco products and prices have been a key resource for our product monitoring activities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, we have conducted two large retail audit studies: one national study from May 2012 to August 20135 and one in the city of Melbourne from November 2013 to November 2015,6 in which details of tobacco products and prices were collected from price boards displayed in retailers. From these activities, we have continued to monitor the product offerings on the Australian tobacco market.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tobacco product developments in the Australian market in the 4 years following plain packaging

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aimed to identify continued and emerging trends in the Australian tobacco market following plain packaging implementation, over a period of substantial increases in tobacco taxes. Since 2012, our surveillance activities (including review of trade product and price lists, ingredient reports submitted by tobacco companies to government and monitoring of the retail environment) found several trends in the factory-made cigarette market. These include the continued release of extra-long and slim cigarettes and packs with bonus cigarettes, particularly in the mainstream and premium market segments; new menthol capsule products; other novel flavourings in cigarettes; filter innovations including recessed and firm filters; continued use of evocative and descriptive product names; the proliferation of the new super-value market segment; and umbrella branding, where new products are introduced within established brand families. Several similar trends were also observed within the smoking tobacco market. While not all of these trends were new to the Australian market at the time of plain packaging implementation, their continued and increased use is notable. Plain packaging legislation could be strengthened to standardise cigarette and pack size, restrict brand and variant names, and ban features such as menthol capsules and filters innovations that provide novelty value or that may provide false reassurance to smokers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tobacco product developments in the Australian market in the 4 years following plain packaging

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Tobacco companies appear to increase the distribution of consumer-directed price promotions after the implementation of tax increases 6,22,23 ; younger, heavy, and "premium" brand smokers are more likely to respond. 20,[24][25][26] Existing studies have noted the need for research on how the tobacco companies use promotions and their effects on tobacco use 16,20 because the intended effects of tax increases may be undercut by recently expanded tobacco industry promotional strategies, including the development of new alternative tobacco products. 8,18,27 Studies of other products for which there is relatively inelastic demand, such as gasoline, find that price promotions have been used to mask tax increases that would otherwise change purchasing behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tobacco Industry Promotions and Pricing After Tax Increases: An Analysis of Internal Industry Documents

Apollonio

Glantz

2019

Nicotine &Amp; Tobacco Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Increasing tobacco taxes, and through them, prices, is an effective public health strategy to decrease tobacco use. The tobacco industry has developed multiple promotional strategies to undercut these effects; this study assessed promotions directed to wholesalers and retailers and manufacturer price changes that blunt the effects of tax and price increases. Methods We reviewed tobacco industry documents and contemporaneous research literature dated 1987 to 2016 to identify the nature, extent, and effectiveness of tobacco industry promotions and price changes used after state-level tobacco tax increases. Results Tobacco companies have created promotions to reduce the effectiveness of tobacco tax increases by encouraging established users to purchase tobacco in lower-tax jurisdictions and sometimes lowering manufacturer pricing to “undershift” smaller tax increases, so that tobacco prices increased by less than the amount of the tax. Conclusions Policymakers should address industry efforts to undercut an effective public health intervention through regulating minimum prices, limiting tobacco industry promotions, and by enacting tax increases that are large, immediate, and result in price increases. Implications Tobacco companies view excise tax increases on tobacco products as a critical business threat. To keep users from quitting or reducing tobacco use in response to tax increases, they have shifted manufacturer pricing and developed specific promotions that encourage customers to shop for lower-taxed products. Health authorities should address tobacco industry efforts to undercut the effects of taxes by regulating prices and promotions and passing large and immediate tax increases.

show abstract

“…However, among those exposed, the proportion of those purchasing at special price was highest in AU (64.9% vs 52.3%–31.0% in the other countries). This higher utilisation rate among those exposed to special price offers in AU likely reflects that price boards were being directly used by some smokers to find less-expensive brands in a response to the ongoing, substantial increases in cigarette taxes and prices in AU,7 suggesting that price offers in AU should be restricted to increase the impact of tax policy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Price offers at the POS are allowed and common in the USA. In AU, price offers can be made using large price boards (1.5×1.5 m) at the POS,7 whereas CA and EN ban price offers but allow the display of prices, using smaller price boards (29.7x42 cm) in the case of EN.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-country comparison of cigarette and vaping product marketing exposure and use: findings from 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo compare exposure to and use of certain cigarette and vaping product marketing among adult smokers and vapers in four countries with contrasting regulations—Australia (AU), Canada, England and the USA.Data sourcesAdult smokers and vapers (n=12 294) from the 2016 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (4CV1).AnalysisSelf-reported exposure to cigarette and vaping product advertising through point-of-sale, websites/social media, emails/texts, as well as exposure to and use of price offers were assessed for country differences using logistic regression models adjusted for multiple covariates.ResultsReported exposure to cigarette advertising exposure at point-of-sale was higher in the USA (52.1%) than in AU, Canada and England (10.5%–18.5%). Exposure to cigarette advertising on websites/social media and emails/texts was low overall (1.5%–10.4%). Reported exposure to vaping ads at point-of-sale was higher in England (49.3%) and USA (45.9%) than in Canada (32.5%), but vaping ad exposure on websites/social media in Canada (15.1%) was similar with England (18.4%) and the USA (12.1%). Exposure to vaping ads via emails/texts was low overall (3.1%–9.9%). Exposure to, and use of, cigarette price offers was highest in the USA (34.0 % and 17.8 %, respectively), but the use rate among those exposed was highest in AU (64.9%). Exposure to, and use of, price offers for vaping products was higher in the USA (42.3 % and 21.7 %) than in AU, Canada and England (25.9%–31.5 % and 7.4%–10.3 %).ConclusionsPatterns of cigarette and vaping product marketing exposure generally reflected country-specific policies, except for online vaping ads. Implications for research and policy are discussed.

show abstract

Tobacco price boards as a promotional strategy—a longitudinal observational study in Australian retailers

Abstract: Price boards promote tobacco products in ways that undermine the effectiveness of tax policy as a means of discouraging consumption. Communication to consumers about prices should be restricted to information sheets provided to adult smokers on request at the point of sale.

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

Tobacco product developments in the Australian market in the 4 years following plain packaging

Tobacco product developments in the Australian market in the 4 years following plain packaging

Tobacco Industry Promotions and Pricing After Tax Increases: An Analysis of Internal Industry Documents

Cross-country comparison of cigarette and vaping product marketing exposure and use: findings from 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About