stirring the pot local B&M vs big internet

[Da Klugs]

Originally Posted by Da Klugs

If you go back to the original post.... there could be validity in it.

Say for example a cigar Mfg like Torano who makes cigars for others is commissioned to make a "line" for one of the on line guys. Figure the price may come into play there. Lesser value materials used because of the price point demanded. Always wondered what the relationship in the wholesale price was ... Labor vs material costs.

Conversely, the concept of "brand" is pretty important to most manufacturers. Their name is on the darn things. To purposely make a product that varies in quality by where you buy it does not make much sense and is hard to believe from a business owners perspective. Different cigar name band etc sure, but not the identical cigar.

Most cigars are not purchased directly from the manufacturers but through distributors. These distributors are typically the ones setting price points and determining physically which cigars go where.

Maybe the OP just prefers the flavors over humidification provides in most B&M's vs cigars from a home humidor.

Originally Posted by Legend

My whole point was for a discussion on it. I've been open as far as what the outcome could be, I had my opinion and supported it, but recognized that it was not a provable premise. Certain other posters preferred to fight instead of discuss. To discuss you need to be open to the fact that your opinion may not be correct or you will just fight. My point on the above post was that Seangar in particular has chosen to fight on this matter and not discuss. If that's all you're gonna do post the opinion and move on.

But it seems you only want to discuss the portions you are comfortable with.

Lets start here:

Say for example a cigar Mfg like Torano who makes cigars for others is commissioned to make a "line" for one of the on line guys. Figure the price may come into play there. Lesser value materials used because of the price point demanded.

Are you willing to accept as fact that cigar manufacturers do make house brand and special release cigars for large customers.. typically the on line guys? They also produce "bundles" for the on line guys to make samplers from. Seen and bought them at Cigars International, Rocky Patel vintage 1992 and 1990 bundles for $ 40. Interesting, you can tell the difference by shape when new as the bundles are very pressed. Boxes on the shelf were over a hundred. Hell many cigar brands have little if any manufacturing capacity and are made to "spec" so to speak. If so, to an extent your original point is made in that there may be different/greater or lessor quality in these cigars. However, they are not identical to the normal lines in representation.

Conversely, the concept of "brand" is pretty important to most manufacturers. Their name is on the darn things. To purposely make a product that varies in quality by where you buy it does not make much sense and is hard to believe from a business owners perspective. Different cigar name band etc sure, but not the identical cigar.

This is where your argument, however interesting, seems to lack substantive motivation for the manufacturer or any proof except for opinion on your part.

Maybe the OP just prefers the flavors over humidification provides in most B&M's vs cigars from a home humidor.

Now to the opinion. Seriously and conversely, cigars do not travel well. It may take months for them to acclimate and open up after the traumas of travel. On the flip side, B&M's have a bad rep in terms of stability and correctness of RH. Cigars may be of different ages/provenance and RH storage. If you really want to draw conclusions on potential differences you need to eliminate the potential discrepancies in age, storage conditions and prejudice based upon origin.

Get some cigars at release from both sources. Store them for 3 months in the same place, RH, temperature, etc. Have someone else deband them and put a blank on them A/B, 1/2. Do it for 5 cigars and see what personal observations you can make. Without this commonality the observation on preference is, to me, intriguing but meaningless.