[article] "Counterfeit Cigars Anger Manufacturers"

I read that a little while ago. The quantity of the seizure is amazing.
 
as stated in the article

"Americans smoked about 5.1 billion large cigars in 2005 and spent about $3.2 billion on all cigars. Of those, about 321 million were classified as premium"


so that means that there is alot of crap being smoked.
.05% of all cigars consumed were premium. (unless my math is wrong... I have been known to be wrong from tiome to time)

I know that this isnt an "exclusive club" but it kinda feels that way when you look at those numbers.

and not to get to far off topic....

how would someone be able to identify a genuine from a fake? any tips hints clues or rules of thumb?

...im almost 100% sure id get fooled
 
kuzi16 said:
how would someone be able to identify a genuine from a fake? any tips hints clues or rules of thumb?

...im almost 100% sure id get fooled

The only 100% known rule is taste - you have to know.
There are often tell tale signs, construction, bands, packaging & on
but they are getting better & better and craeting fakes - taste is the only 100% for sure method.
 
kuzi16 said:
"Americans smoked about 5.1 billion large cigars in 2005 and spent about $3.2 billion on all cigars. Of those, about 321 million were classified as premium"

so that means that there is alot of crap being smoked. .05% of all cigars consumed were premium. (unless my math is wrong...
321,000,000 / 5,100,000,000 is 6.3%.

The article discusses a bit on how to spot the fakes but the final tell tail is taste. If it tastes like a dog rocket it's probably a fake.
 
wow... my mental math was WAY off... 6.3% still feels kinda exclusive.






in a way
 
O negative blood represents about 6% of the population, and is the "universal donor" type. I have O negative blood. Have to keep changing phone numbers because they call me constantly to come give blood. Not that I mind giving blood, but I never get any other calls because of all the needle-holding-nurses looking for me.

6% is pretty "exclusive" sometimes.