U.S. market off limits

[ElReyDel757]

Cuba's tobacco industry saw losses of 129,595,346 USD from April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016.

http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2016-10-12/us-market-off-limits

[Lezanstar]

The Cuban government blames the US for lost sales? You don't say...

[Corylax18]

Hahaha. Correct title: "We're Inept, heres why its the US' Fault" 

I wonder which of those issues is the one plaguing the Monte 80th?

What supplies exactly would they be procuring from the US for cheaper than they currently are? When was the last time anybody touted doing business with/in America because it's cheap?  

[BarryNY]

22 minutes ago, Corylax18 said:

What supplies exactly would they be procuring from the US for cheaper than they currently are? When was the last time anybody touted doing business with/in America because it's cheap?  

According to the article - it looks like they have to receive their supplies and/or equipment replacement parts (appears that this stuff must come from the USA) from a third party intermediary which would then add a mark-up plus the cost for additional shipping.....

[NSXCIGAR]

I'm not sure the article is claiming Tabacuba showed a loss of $119M. I think it's a bit lost in translation, but I think they're claiming they "lost" $119M they could have had with the US market available. I think they're using the term "saw losses" a bit loosely. There's no way Tabacuba lost $119M in 2015. Maybe in 1980 during a near-total crop loss, but not in 2015. 

[clutch5150]

Other negative affects extend to other countries also not trading with Cuba like they should due to the embargo not wanting to cross with the US.  This embargo needs to end, the people of Cuba are REALLY suffering.  Making 25-30 CUC/Dollars a month with measly food portions, terrible living conditions in many areas, poor sewage is just a tip of the iceberg. I met one cardiologist and a nuclear physicists while I was there last week and they made a whopping 48 CUC a month!  Regardless, they are some of the proudest people I've met, love their country and love the US and it's people.

In the world of CC's, even if the embargo ended today, with the newest FDA silly rulings on tobacco, qualifying each cigar brand would cost millions to Cuba. Let's also not forget all the copyright infringements with top CC names here in the US that keeps going back and forth in court with appeal after appeal.  How on earth would the real CC names vs. all the copy names currently that bomb the US market work out?  Talk about opening a can or worms....

[BarryNY]

I though the "real" names were actually all the non CC brands...........those brand owners all fled Cuba?

It's the CC that have a trademark problem - not the other way around.

I wrote a marketing solution if they ever end the embargo that addresses the FDA and the trademark issue:

"The quick, easy and relatively cheap entryway into the USA (if embargo lifted) would be to introduce a "new" CC brand to avoid any issues with trademarks which I think (unless they are willing to fork out some really big bucks (in the B's range) could take years and years tied up in Federal court.... 

In my past life I was an executive in importing/marketing luxury fine spirits into the USA (Remy Martin Cognac).  My strategy if I was marketing CC to the USA for the first time legally after so many years would be to create a blend that the USA "wants" and then supply the full range of vitolas under a single KNOWN brand name/logo like "Habanos"...They own this name and the FDA costs would be manageable.  Over time they would release special editions and differing blends but immediately they could potentially capture a huge market share if the product quality delivered."

 

[PapaDisco]

Cuba trades with every other nation on earth except the U.S.  The only place the U.S. embargo manages to trump them is on international banking, but otherwise everyone else in the world sells them whatever they want.

The failure of Cuba's economy is one of central planning.  Having a pile of gringo tourists coming to visit can prop that mess of an economy up, but it will still be cursed with all the faults and failures of central planning.

[SCgarman]

1 hour ago, PapaDisco said:

Cuba trades with every other nation on earth except the U.S.  The only place the U.S. embargo manages to trump them is on international banking, but otherwise everyone else in the world sells them whatever they want.

The failure of Cuba's economy is one of central planning.  Having a pile of gringo tourists coming to visit can prop that mess of an economy up, but it will still be cursed with all the faults and failures of central planning.

This statement sums it up perfectly. What more can be said?

[GasGuy82]

What say as part of the final negotiations to end the embargo, the Cubans argue that the embargo did them irrepairable harm and that all of their brands and vitolas prior to a specific date would have been grandfathered in. In exchange for dropping their grievances as far as the cost of the embargo to Cuba, they negotiate an end around to the FDA rules and voila, 95% of their portfolio magically becomes grandfathered in the US. Qualifying the remaining vitolas post cut off date would be far cheaper and less time consuming.

in addition, a good number of the vitolas and most of the brands were sold here at one point (pre embargo).

[ElReyDel757]

Bottom line: End this regressive, unfair, unhumanitarian embargo now.  Central economic planning with pieces of capitalism can work, but the government system is another argument entirely.  It is not related at all to the embargo.  Does the US trade with communist China, or Vietnam?  

[earthson]

3 hours ago, BarryNY said:

I though the "real" names were actually all the non CC brands...........those brand owners all fled Cuba?

It's the CC that have a trademark problem - not the other way around.

 

 

CC trademarks predate the non-CC garbage, and by quite a few years in most cases.

Seems the US allowed a trademark out of spite, rather than out of any sound legal footing.

[BarryNY]

I think you may have that wrong:

1.  In July 1935, Alonso Menéndez purchased the Particulares Factory, makers of the popular Particulares brand and the lesser-known Byron. Immediately after its acquisition, he created a new brand named Montecristo

2.  After the Cuban Revolution and the nationalization of the cigar industry in Cuba in 1961, Menéndez and García fled to the Canary Islands where they re-established the brand, but were later forced to quit due to trademark disputes with Cubatabaco

3.  In the mid-1970s, the operation was moved to La Romana in the Dominican Republic and released for the US market, where Cuba's rights to the brand weren't recognized due to the embargo.

So, the way I read this is that the REAL brand owner Menendez fled Cuba and tried to re-establish HIS brand screw the nationalization efforts.  Obviously, his fledgling business at the time was no match to fight branding issues with a sovereign Commie state and they had to stop production.

#3 says it all.  The USA "protected" their pre-revolution ownership rights... and allowed them to market their brand in the USA.

[PapaDisco]

1 hour ago, ElReyDel757 said:

Bottom line: End this regressive, unfair, unhumanitarian embargo now.  Central economic planning with pieces of capitalism can work, but the government system is another argument entirely.  It is not related at all to the embargo.  Does the US trade with communist China, or Vietnam?  

China is a perfect example of "Constructive Engagement" gone wrong and perhaps the best argument for continuing the embargo with Cuba.  With China the U.S. hand was forced by 1970 economics and the cost of maintaining a Cold War on two fronts: the USSR and communist China.  Nixon and Kissinger gambled that opening up to China would prevent a rapprochement between Mao and the Soviets (they despised one another up until then) which it did, as well as giving China an economic incentive to liberalize into a democracy, which it didn't.  If fact, political transformation in China is farther away than ever; propped up by the wealth it has imported by becoming the world's factory floor.  The oligarchs and political elites in China have gotten rich and they've done it on the backs of their poorest citizens providing cheap labor.  The same will happen with Cuba.

History's lesson thus far is simple: Containment eventually worked, constructive engagement did not.

[Ken Gargett]

7 minutes ago, BarryNY said:

I think you may have that wrong:

1.  In July 1935, Alonso Menéndez purchased the Particulares Factory, makers of the popular Particulares brand and the lesser-known Byron. Immediately after its acquisition, he created a new brand named Montecristo

2.  After the Cuban Revolution and the nationalization of the cigar industry in Cuba in 1961, Menéndez and García fled to the Canary Islands where they re-established the brand, but were later forced to quit due to trademark disputes with Cubatabaco

3.  In the mid-1970s, the operation was moved to La Romana in the Dominican Republic and released for the US market, where Cuba's rights to the brand weren't recognized due to the embargo.

So, the way I read this is that the REAL brand owner Menendez fled Cuba and tried to re-establish HIS brand screw the nationalization efforts.  Obviously, his fledgling business at the time was no match to fight branding issues with a sovereign Commie state and they had to stop production.

#3 says it all.  The USA "protected" their pre-revolution ownership rights... and allowed them to market their brand in the USA.

with the greatest respect, claiming that this is the usa protecting ownership rights and allowing them to market in the states is, i'd suggest, a bit of a simplistic view of what is an extremely complex and longrunning dispute. i'm no fan of govt nationalising private operations but in this case, it was in response to some fairly severe provocation - which in turn....

your source is wikipedia? or if something else then wikipedia has taken the same quotes. mind you, i often use it as well, but it is not always truly accurate.

you say "HIS brand". i'd love to know the actual corporate situation but i very much doubt it was just "HIS" by the time he fled. as far back as the 30s, he had a partner, garcia and they had formed a corporation. love to know shareholders at the time of the embargo. this was very much distant from the one man versus the state battle you seem to suggest. you also seem to suggest that the reason they were forced to cease production in the canary islands was simply some form of bullying - the "fledgling business no match for the 'commie sovereign state'" (nothing emotive there). i thought they lost a trademark dispute in court. a very different thing - if i am wrong, i'd be genuinely interested in the details from anyone who does know what exactly happened.

the same source goes on to say that subsequent to the canary islands, they moved to the Dominican Republic where they produced cigars for the American market and that they are now owned by Altadis SA (who i think now also own 50% of Cubatabaco, with whom the dispute over trademarks was, back in the 60s). this is hardly 'protecting their rights', as though they are some form of avenging angel. the embargo was preventing the cubans from selling in the states, but i guess one's view of this depends on one's view of the embargo. which, as i said, is anything but a simple situation.

 

[BarryNY]

Not to beat a dead horse but it appears the same circumstances hold true for RYJ too:

1.  The Romeo y Julieta marque was established in 1875 by Inocencio Alvarez and Manin Garcia. However, the brand truly bloomed after it was acquired by Jose "Pepin" Rodriguez Fernandez, former head of the Cabañas factory in Havana, and his firm, Rodríguez, Argüelles y Cia, in 1903.

2.  After Rodriguez's death in 1954 (he was 88 years old), the revolution, and the subsequent nationalization of the tobacco industry, the brand was moved to La Romana in the Dominican Republic, where production of a Romeo y Julieta cigar for the American market continues today under the direction of Altadis SA. The Cuban government nationalized the brand and still produces and distributes it worldwide as one of its top-selling global brands.

So, it looks like the family moved the original brand out of Cuba and set up shop in the DR.  Again - the family owned this brand name first not the Cuban gov't.

[Ken Gargett]

11 minutes ago, PapaDisco said:

History's lesson thus far is simple: Containment eventually worked, constructive engagement did not.

i'm certainly in favour of united international action in certain circumstances - apartheid in south africa is a good example - but who makes these decisions? this was a unilateral decision byn the states, hardly a united international response. in the case of cuba, the (simple) reason for the original embargo was that the country had the hide to have a revolution and toss out the preferred american dictator. someone mentioned spite above. it does seem that the embargo has been held in place for little more than spite for more than five decades. worth mentioning that the usa was one of the last countries to get on board with the sanctions in south africa, so claims of human rights and the interests of the people in oppressed countries are claims that can, occasionally, seem a smidge thin.

it is a dangerous thing to set yourself up as the world's arbiter and policeman - effectively a former of national dictator.

[ElReyDel757]

35 minutes ago, PapaDisco said:

China is a perfect example of "Constructive Engagement" gone wrong and perhaps the best argument for continuing the embargo with Cuba.  With China the U.S. hand was forced by 1970 economics and the cost of maintaining a Cold War on two fronts: the USSR and communist China.  Nixon and Kissinger gambled that opening up to China would prevent a rapprochement between Mao and the Soviets (they despised one another up until then) which it did, as well as giving China an economic incentive to liberalize into a democracy, which it didn't.  If fact, political transformation in China is farther away than ever; propped up by the wealth it has imported by becoming the world's factory floor.  The oligarchs and political elites in China have gotten rich and they've done it on the backs of their poorest citizens providing cheap labor.  The same will happen with Cuba.

History's lesson thus far is simple: Containment eventually worked, constructive engagement did not.

I disagree, containment has not worked for Cuba.  At least in China, there have been multiple leaders, albeit from the same party, but as we know, the Castros are still in charge after all these years.  The only thing that has "worked" is keeping ordinary Cubans destitute.

[Guest Robusto 107]

5 hours ago, BarryNY said:

According to the article - it looks like they have to receive their supplies and/or equipment replacement parts (appears that this stuff must come from the USA) from a third party intermediary which would then add a mark-up plus the cost for additional shipping.....

Friendly reminding, come from USA buy may not made in USA. Just like everybody's Iphone.

I wonder where is the figure for 2012, 2012,2011 and so on? It is not the first year of blockage but why it just pop up now? "Maybe i miss those figures and pls update me". No matter it is a translation problem or being deceived, I think the reality they just wanna say "Cuba earn less as expected" if they can have a considerable market share in US. Now their official channels charge premium price especially in UK and APAC with cost mark up taxes mark up, need some jokes such as EMS, 1st priority picks in HF and PCC to help justification, this is actually a very  good margin business.

[PapaDisco]

True to all that Ken.  Back in the 50's-60's-70's when these things were getting decided there were all kinds of reasons mixed together for these decisions (Cuba embargo, supporting the French in Indochina, subverting elections in Iran, propping up a dictator here and there) but the predominant backdrop was a World War still fresh in everyone's minds and an openly belligerent set of communist governments around the world.  In that period no one was a purist when it came to geopolitics, nor could they afford to be, suffice to say that after WWII I think there was a universal belief that future wars had to be avoided at all costs.  Preemption without war, in the age of nuclear armaments.

In general, the modern conversation seems to have reduced that complexity to a simplistic theme of America dictating things to the world, but with all it's flaws in implementation, the intent was, I believe, one of dealing with a more complex set of issues and a much greater set of stakes than the world had faced before.

The world followed the lead of the U.S. and the U.K. on the USSR and China.  It didn't (after a time) with the Cuban embargo because, I imagine, the rest of the world felt that Cuba was too small to matter.  An embargo enforced by 1 is pretty irrelevant.  Looking at the Soviet example, containment did succeed, but it's important to note that there was a bit of luck involved: luck in that Mikhail Gorbachev was at the right place and time (imagine if it had been Putin instead?).  So until the Castro's go, it's likely that Cuba, embargo or not, hasn't any chance of a better life or a transformation.

[canadianbeaver]

Since cigar lovers anywhere can find the exact ones they want at the price they need if they work at it, like me paying a good bit less then on land here, and the members of this very thread are here, the point is made.

My biggest concern is the day the green light goes on for Cuban sales in USA the brand names merge and the quality goes down the toilet. To make the quantity of cigar tobacco meet the population demand, there might even be an alteration of blend to expand available quantity.

Gadzooks save me FOH! At any price!

xo

CB

[Jimmy_jack]

I read the article to say Cuba has lost potential profits due to the embargo. Not actual loss of money on hand/investments. Something I find interesting but don't see brought up often is the ability to ship bulk raw Cuban tobacco off the island to other manufacturers. I'm not sure the Cuban Govt would allow it. 

Imagine other great brands such as Fuente, Padron, Davidoff, Tatuaje and the like blending with Cuban tobaccos. I think there would be some great flavors. 

[Morgan]

5 hours ago, PapaDisco said:

Cuba trades with every other nation on earth except the U.S.  The only place the U.S. embargo manages to trump them is on international banking, but otherwise everyone else in the world sells them whatever they want.

The failure of Cuba's economy is one of central planning.  Having a pile of gringo tourists coming to visit can prop that mess of an economy up, but it will still be cursed with all the faults and failures of central planning.

While Cuba's central planning may not be ideal central planning can work just look at China, they beat us on every trade agreement and when their economy only grows at 7% its considered disastrous Oh wouldn't we love those disastrous 7% growth

[Morgan]

2 hours ago, earthson said:

 

CC trademarks predate the non-CC garbage, and by quite a few years in most cases.

Seems the US allowed a trademark out of spite, rather than out of any sound legal footing.

 

2 hours ago, BarryNY said:

I think you may have that wrong:

1.  In July 1935, Alonso Menéndez purchased the Particulares Factory, makers of the popular Particulares brand and the lesser-known Byron. Immediately after its acquisition, he created a new brand named Montecristo

2.  After the Cuban Revolution and the nationalization of the cigar industry in Cuba in 1961, Menéndez and García fled to the Canary Islands where they re-established the brand, but were later forced to quit due to trademark disputes with Cubatabaco

3.  In the mid-1970s, the operation was moved to La Romana in the Dominican Republic and released for the US market, where Cuba's rights to the brand weren't recognized due to the embargo.

So, the way I read this is that the REAL brand owner Menendez fled Cuba and tried to re-establish HIS brand screw the nationalization efforts.  Obviously, his fledgling business at the time was no match to fight branding issues with a sovereign Commie state and they had to stop production.

#3 says it all.  The USA "protected" their pre-revolution ownership rights... and allowed them to market their brand in the USA.

As far as the Cohiba brand trademark for USA pitting Cubatobaco vs General Cigar Co. The final ruling has been handed down in favor of Cubatobaco who will now have General Cigar Co Cohiba trademark vacated and that will be the end of General Cigar Co Cohiba trademark in USA and Cubatobaco will be allowed to have their Cohiba trademark registered in USA

As far as Montecristo trademark its clear that Altadis owns this trademark in USA and since Altadis is also a partner in Cubatobaco I don't think anyone can lay any opposition to Altadis Montecristo trademark

[Guest Robusto 107]

Sorry maybe a bit offtopic. I smoke cigar but not good in knowing the history of Habanos trading history. Can somebody tell me how much UK play in the market since embargo to nowadays? Somebody told me that why Habanos can export to European under US embargo was becos of UK involvement. However, what I can find in literature is British Imperial acquired Altadis since 2008? Anybody can help? Thanks a lot.