Why are Tins so Much More Expensive Than Jar Tobacco?
- Thread starter zonomo
- Start date
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
A combination of packaging and labelling, as well as the labour to actually pack into the tin. don't forget that the blender then has to ship to the distributer/B&M so their costs are dramatically increased as well. Mostly I would say labour costs, think about a 1lb bag of tobacco and then how long it would take to pack 8 2oz tins to make the same amount. Then weigh the finished products sided by side and shipping rates are based by weight.
.............Yeah, what brdavidson and rothnh said.
Also, something to consider is that while you pay more for a tin, that extra cost also gives you a nice little vessel that makes aging tobacco a piece of cake if that is the route that you decide to go. The manufacturer vaccum seals the tins air tight and all you have to do is throw it in a shelf in the closet and forget about it for a while. If you buy in bulk, you really should make sure that you have some kind of vessel to store the tobacco in so that it ages properly which is an extra hit to your wallet right there. Paying more for a tin and already having an aging vessel as opposed to buying a bulk bag and then having to buy jars to store the tobacco in (assuming you dont have any already) probably averages out the cost in the long run. That being said, there are some blends that I love that I can only get in tins, and some that I can only get in bulk.
Also, something to consider is that while you pay more for a tin, that extra cost also gives you a nice little vessel that makes aging tobacco a piece of cake if that is the route that you decide to go. The manufacturer vaccum seals the tins air tight and all you have to do is throw it in a shelf in the closet and forget about it for a while. If you buy in bulk, you really should make sure that you have some kind of vessel to store the tobacco in so that it ages properly which is an extra hit to your wallet right there. Paying more for a tin and already having an aging vessel as opposed to buying a bulk bag and then having to buy jars to store the tobacco in (assuming you dont have any already) probably averages out the cost in the long run. That being said, there are some blends that I love that I can only get in tins, and some that I can only get in bulk.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the blend. Some blenders make their blends both bulk and tinned - Sam Gawaith is an excellent example. MacBaren is another.
But if you compare, say, Smoker's Pride to G.L. Pease, the tobacco in the GLP blends is much higher quality.
If I had to venture a guess, I would guess that the issue of bulk vs tins comes down to a couple of different factors. One would be that there are some manufacturers, such as the Peter Stokkebye line of tobaccos, that choose not to offer their tobaccos in tins because they either don't have the resources to tin their tobacco and choose not to pay the extra money to do it or they just dont want to deal with the hassle. The other reason that a company would offer both tins and bulk, like, say, MacBaren tobaccos, is that they want to give their customers the option of having the tins handy if they want to consume small amounts, but they also offer bulk of some of their more popular blends because people tend to buy large quantities of those blends at one time. As you assumed, I really dont think its a matter of quality, its more a matter of marketing decision and strategy in conjunction with wanting to meet customers needs.
Most of my favorites come in tins which I am happy for. I prefer to age in tins as the type of jars I use are expensive and take up a lot of room. In regards to the quality of bulks compared to tins, the SG bulks I stock seem the same as the tins. The Hamborger Veermaster bulk I found to be not very good at all and I only buy it in tins now. When I buy flakes, I don't want to see lots of shake and broken flakes which is what I received with the Veemaster bulk.
I believe thatcI read in an interview with Russ O. that he offers tins vs bulk because of customer demand. If he makes a bulk, then people want tin versions for convenience. If he makes a tin only release, people demand bulk because it's cheaper.
So, tin vs bulk of the same blend is no difference in quality. It's just whichever packaging you prefer it be delivered in.
Some say tins taste/age different than bulk. Some just like the price or convenience. Roth nailed the price discrepancy.
So, tin vs bulk of the same blend is no difference in quality. It's just whichever packaging you prefer it be delivered in.
Some say tins taste/age different than bulk. Some just like the price or convenience. Roth nailed the price discrepancy.
One of the ways I keep the flakes from sagging and breaking apart is by taking the long block cut of flake and storing it a mason jar but laying it flat. This keeps the flakes intact, well at least so far.
Craig
Craig
It costs more to tin tobacco (labor intensive) than to put it in a bag. That being said, a tin will keep tobacco at its tinned premium state much longer. And, there is another really big difference between "typical" OTC and tinned tobacco. That difference is "PG" (Propylene Glycol) which is a preservative sprayed on most if not all OTC blends to extend shelf life. C&D uses no PG in their tobacco and that is why they put it in a tin. That is, to preserve moiture without using PG. PG typically has one major drawback. It causes that "goopiness and gurgle" so many smokers complain about.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
By all accounts, every bulk flake that I have ever ordered (and granted I havent ordered a whole lot of them) has come to me pretty well intact. I ordered 4 ounces of Peter Stokkebye LNF a few months back and the bag was full of nothing but uniform, perfectly stacked, very neat looking flakes. Given what others have said about handling inconsistencies, results will definitely vary, and while I have gotten lucky (apparently), I can see how ordering flake in tins vs. bulk could be advantageous.
You are mostly paying the tax man for those prices. The B&M also has a mark up.
Most 50g tins are worth $10 on average.
Is the Orlik Golden Sliced in Sweden that costs $50 seven times better than the $7 Orlik Golden Sliced in America?
No way, they are exactly the same thing...
As for bulk, it should always be cheaper than tins.
Tinning equipment costs a lot of money - either on labour for C&D's hand canning operation or in capital costs for machinery in the case of big automated companies such as STG...
This is what Gray was alluding to - an article on the subject by Russ Ouelette:
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/put-that-in-your-pipe/packaging-a-tobacco-companys-dilemma/
As for Peter Stokkebye, if anyone has the resources to tin it is them. (STG) That line, however, is totally geared towards bulk and as you can see they are market leaders.
It is telling that PS Luxury Bullseye Flake is exactly the same thing as Orlik Bullseye Flake.
LBF is destined to be value oriented in the bulk-dominated American pipe tobacco market, whereas OBF is a tinned "premium" blend in the EU where there are no savings to be had by buying in bulk due to excessive taxation...
Roth makes a great point - buying in bulk can be good or bad depending on if you get the first of the batch, or the last of the batch. If you get a pile of less moist broken flakes, you can tell which one you are.
For that reason, I think that bulks are better for immediate smoking in many cases. They seem to get rougher handling than the tinned tobaccos.
Finally, as others mention, if you factor the price of mason jars into the equation then that is another hidden expense of the bulks that is already covered by the tinned blends.
Most 50g tins are worth $10 on average.
Is the Orlik Golden Sliced in Sweden that costs $50 seven times better than the $7 Orlik Golden Sliced in America?
No way, they are exactly the same thing...
As for bulk, it should always be cheaper than tins.
Tinning equipment costs a lot of money - either on labour for C&D's hand canning operation or in capital costs for machinery in the case of big automated companies such as STG...
This is what Gray was alluding to - an article on the subject by Russ Ouelette:
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/put-that-in-your-pipe/packaging-a-tobacco-companys-dilemma/
As for Peter Stokkebye, if anyone has the resources to tin it is them. (STG) That line, however, is totally geared towards bulk and as you can see they are market leaders.
It is telling that PS Luxury Bullseye Flake is exactly the same thing as Orlik Bullseye Flake.
LBF is destined to be value oriented in the bulk-dominated American pipe tobacco market, whereas OBF is a tinned "premium" blend in the EU where there are no savings to be had by buying in bulk due to excessive taxation...
Roth makes a great point - buying in bulk can be good or bad depending on if you get the first of the batch, or the last of the batch. If you get a pile of less moist broken flakes, you can tell which one you are.
For that reason, I think that bulks are better for immediate smoking in many cases. They seem to get rougher handling than the tinned tobaccos.
Finally, as others mention, if you factor the price of mason jars into the equation then that is another hidden expense of the bulks that is already covered by the tinned blends.
- Status