TobaccoReporter logo

Category: Press Releases

  • Tobacco distributors: after the debut in Catania, Vendix continues its journey at T2000 on Tour

    Tobacco distributors: after the debut in Catania, Vendix continues its journey at T2000 on Tour

    with the stage in Rome (6-7 June)

    The company, part of the FAS International group, will bring to the capital the latest generation of machines for the tobacco sector,

    focusing on touchscreens and retail tech technologies

    CEO Andrea Montanari: “Solutions designed to encourage purchases after closing time”

    Savignano sul Rubicone (FC), 25 May 2026 – After the official debut at T2000 in Tour di Catania, Vendix continues its path of accreditation and consolidation in the tobacco vending machine market by participating in the Rome stage of the Exhibition of products and services for tobacconists, scheduled for Friday 6 and Saturday 7 June in the spaces of the Nuova Fiera di Roma.

    The company based in Savignano sul Rubicone (FC), specialized in the production of customized vending machines for the pharmacy and tobacco sectors, was founded in 2025 as a newco generated by Microhard and FAS International, a company based in Schio (Vicenza) among the main players in the vending and retail tech market.

    After the Sicilian debut, the presence in Rome represents a new step in the commercial development path ofVendix, which in the capital will present its range of latest generation vending machines with touchscreens, variable in number of selections (from 18 to 80) and capacity (from 300 packages to 1,400), equipped with armored structure and vandal-proof components and available indoors and outdoors, with both wall and floor installation.

    Vendix solutions are designed to offer an intuitive and immediate shopping experience: touch interfaces and guided paths accompany the user quickly and easily during every phase of selection and payment. At the same time, solid structures and reliable components guarantee 24-hour service continuity and maximum operational safety even in high-traffic contexts.

    Thanks to retail tech technologies, Vendix’s models allow, in fact, the continuous sale of tobacco and other products, integrated payments both cashless and cash, integrated management of services such as bills and deadlines of the Public Administration, digital games and scratch cards, as well as the remote management of parameters and updates to check performance, flows and status of the machines in real time and without the need to physically go to the site, optimizing assortment and strategies. Remote monitoring features allow managers to operate easily and always have distributors under control.

    Vendix vending machines are aimed at tobacconists who want to expand sales opportunities beyond opening hours without sacrificing control, safety and quality of service. Behind Vendix’s offer there is a service-centric model that shifts the focus from the product to the solution, from the machine to the technological platform. Each phase, from installation to technical assistance through a network of qualified partners, up to the analysis of sales data, is designed to offer full control of operations, in relation to the context and needs of each store.

    “Today the tobacconist is much more than a point of sale: it is a garrison of services, a daily reference for the territory, an activity that must respond to customers who are increasingly accustomed to speed, digitization and continuous accessibility,” says Andrea Montanari, CEO of Vendix. Our solutions allow customers to buy easily, quickly and digitally even when the store is closed, intercepting new consumption opportunities and increasing turnover. A modern experience, in line with new shopping habits, which enhances the image of the tobacconist and makes it even more competitive. From installation to technical assistance through a network of qualified partners, up to the analysis of sales data, each phase is designed to offer full control of operations».

  • Nicotine salts and modern product performance~ How formulation choices influence delivery in vape and pouch products ~

    Nicotine salts and modern product performance~ How formulation choices influence delivery in vape and pouch products ~

    Nicotine formulation plays a decisive role in how vaping and oral nicotine products perform, how they feel to the user and how they are assessed by regulators. The growing use of nicotine salts, rather than freebase nicotine, reflects a shift toward formulations that deliver nicotine more efficiently while addressing issues of harshness, stability and user acceptability. Here, Paul Hardman, managing consultant at nicotine testing and regulatory consultancy Broughton, explains why nicotine salts have become central to modern product development.

    In vaping products, nicotine salts are primarily used to moderate the irritation associated with freebase nicotine. Protonating nicotine reduces its volatility, which limits nicotine loss from aerosol droplets before inhalation. This alters where absorption takes place, with less uptake in the mouth and upper airways and greater absorption in the lungs. Delivery at the alveoli, where surface area is high and blood is well oxygenated, supports faster systemic uptake and more rapid onset of effect.

    This mechanism allows nicotine salt vapour products to achieve pharmacokinetic profiles that are closer to those of combustible cigarettes than formulations based on freebase nicotine. While overall exposure still depends on factors such as nicotine concentration and device aerosol output, the resulting delivery profile can feel more familiar to adult smokers seeking alternatives to smoking.

    In oral nicotine pouches, the formulation challenge is different. Freebase nicotine can cause irritation when held against oral tissue, an effect that salts may reduce. At the same time, protonated nicotine crosses biological membranes less readily. This creates scope for formulators to control release characteristics through buffering systems and other formulation strategies, balancing comfort with effective nicotine delivery.

    Nicotine salts also introduce formulation and testing considerations. Lower pH values can increase the likelihood of interaction between e-liquids and device components, particularly metals. Under certain conditions, metal ions may leach into the product, with implications for flavour, stability and safety. Excessively acidic formulations may also irritate mucous membranes.

    Acid selection therefore matters. Different salts vary in thermal stability and degradation behaviour, while some acids can influence flavour profiles. These factors shape stability study design, impurity profiling and analytical method development.

    Formulation decisions can also affect regulatory classification in some jurisdictions, influencing whether products fall under consumer or medicinal frameworks. Understanding how nicotine salts interact with devices, formulations and regulatory expectations is essential for developing products that perform consistently and withstand scrutiny throughout their lifecycle.

    Working with a trusted compliance partner can provide valuable support throughout product development, helping teams navigate the practical and regulatory implications of nicotine salt formulation. This can include selection and validation of appropriate salt systems, development and validation of analytical methods, and the design of stability and impurity studies aligned with regulatory expectations.

    This ensures the product has the requisite support for PMTA, MAA, TRPR, and consumer product pathways, ensuring robust data and informed decisions are made at every stage, with the relevant information included in your submission files. To find out more about nicotine salts and formulation approaches in nicotine products, visit Broughton’s website.

  • Toxicology beyond the laboratory

    Toxicology beyond the laboratory

    ~ Separating scientific risk assessment from consumer perception ~

    Ingredient scanning apps, social media commentary and retail marketing claims have brought chemical safety under more scrutiny than ever, with everyday consumers now encountering toxicological language when choosing products. As simplified narratives circulate quickly, confusion has emerged between the identification of hazardous properties and the assessment of real-world risk. Here, Dean Hatt, Senior Toxicology Consultant and Toxicology Manager at Broughton, a contract research organisation specialising in analytical testing, toxicology and regulatory consultancy examines several misconceptions shaping public debate around product safety.

    Consumer-facing ingredient-scanning apps that interpret toxicity and hazard data now reach large, and often young, audiences, with Yuka alone having 55 million active users and toxicology content attracting hundreds of millions of views on platforms such as TikTok. These tools present results in formats that resemble regulatory judgement, using simple scores or colour codes that suggest definitive safety conclusions.

    However, the simplicity of these tools can be misleading. Safety is not determined by looking at individual ingredients in isolation – or even their concentration – but by understanding how a finished product behaves as a whole. In reality, risk assessment is a structured scientific process that considers multiple factors together: how ingredients interact within a formulation, how the product is used, how often it is used, and how the body is exposed to it. Two products containing the same ingredient at similar levels can present very different risk profiles depending on these variables.

    In regulated markets such as the UK and EU, safety is therefore assessed based on the complete product and its intended use, not a simplified view of individual components. This process draws on a weight of evidence, including study design, data quality and real-world exposure scenarios, to reach a balanced and scientifically robust conclusion.

    Hazard does not equal risk

    In toxicology, hazard identification represents an early step in a broader scientific process. A substance may possess hazardous properties under certain conditions yet pose minimal or no risk from the route of exposure or at realistic exposure levels. It isn’t as simple as providing a universal list of things that can and cannot go into products, so working with a partner who understands the nuances is key in product development.

    Expert toxicological assessments determine how much exposure occurs, how often it occurs, the route of exposure and how the body responds under those conditions, resulting in a subjective assessment of risk.

    Therefore we must be wary of the oversimplification of toxicology on ingredient-scanning tools and simplified scoring systems that compress analysis from reaction-based voting. A toxicological review can be initiated as a RAG (red, amber, green) system to aid in product development but must be followed by a comprehensive review that incorporates dose, context and margin of safety. This principle underpins international regulatory frameworks such as the EU’s REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, which requires chemicals to be assessed in relation to their intended uses and exposure scenarios.

    Removal is not always safer

    Public pressure to remove ingredients perceived as undesirable has increased. Research shows the UK free-from foods sector continuing to outpace the wider market as manufacturers innovate to meet growing demand for products free of allergens and certain additives.

    Yet reformulation is not automatically synonymous with improved safety. Substitutes are likely to have less extensive and reliable toxicological datasets or unknown impurity profiles. Altering a formulation can change absorption, metabolism or cumulative exposure patterns in ways that are not intuitive. Removing a flagged ingredient without structured evaluation may simply exchange a well-characterised substance for one that is less understood, and therefore potentially more hazardous.

    Toxicology does not end at launch

    Post-marketing toxicology has become increasingly important as public concern evolves. Online discussion and consumer perception often shifts faster than formal review cycles, creating pressure to respond quickly.  Barcode-scanning ingredient apps illustrate the dynamic. As their scores circulate widely on social media, brands have reformulated products to avoid using flagged additives, even where those substances remain permitted by regulators in their real-world use.

    Clearly, when an app’s outputs are treated as final judgements rather than starting points for inquiry, they risk amplifying fear in places where evidence indicates low risk, while weakening trust in regulatory science more broadly. Therefore, clear public guidance is essential to ensuring health decisions remain grounded in scientific evidence.

    For more information on toxicology, risk assessment and how evidence-based toxicology supports product safety and regulatory compliance, visit Broughton’s toxicology services page.

  • Eight in ten adult smokers back risk-based tobacco regulation amid South Africa’s policy debate

    Eight in ten adult smokers back risk-based tobacco regulation amid South Africa’s policy debate

    Survey shows scientific evidence and local sentiment align: accurate information, proportionate regulation and access to scientifically substantiated smoke-free alternatives could accelerate South Africa’s progress away from cigarettes

    As South Africa debates new tobacco control legislation, new research by independent firm Povaddo shows that many smokers believe regulation should evolve with scientific evidence to better support adult smokers who do not quit altogether to move away from cigarettes.

    The findings form part of a broader multi-country survey conducted across several markets, revealing a consistent global trend: adult smokers are more likely to consider switching away from cigarettes when they have access to accurate information, and affordable alternatives supported by proportionate, risk-based regulation.

    An international survey commissioned by Philip Morris International (PMI) and conducted by independent research agency Povaddo in multiple countries including key markets in Europe, Latin America and Asia reveals that a majority of adult smokers across these regions share similar views mainly that innovation in smoke-free alternatives, combined with supportive policy frameworks, can accelerate declines in cigarette use. Moreover, respondents across the countries surveyed believe progress happens faster when governments, public health authorities and industry collaborate.

    The survey of adult smokers in South Africa found that eight in ten support risk-based regulation, where less harmful nicotine alternatives are regulated differently from cigarettes. Respondents believe this approach could accelerate progress in reducing smoking.

    The study highlights a clear message emerging from the research: many believe tobacco control policies should evolve alongside scientific evidence and provide adult smokers with accurate information about less harmful alternatives.

    Despite decades of tobacco control efforts, smoking remains a significant public health challenge in South Africa.

    The research suggests that 71% of smokers plan to continue smoking, while only 15% say they are interested in switching to smoke-free alternatives in the current regulatory environment.

    With an estimated 9.7 million smokers in South Africa, this suggests around 6.9 million people may continue smoking cigarettes unless policies better support switching for adults who would otherwise smoke.

    The research indicates that policy reform could significantly change this trajectory. In a  regulatory environment where adult smokers have accurate, science-based information on smoke-free alternatives and these products are regulated differently to cigarettes, the number of smokers willing to switch could more than double, potentially enabling up to 3.3 million South Africans to move away from cigarettes.

    This aligns with trends observed in several international markets, including Japan, where enabling regulatory environments have supported higher switching rates and accelerated declines in cigarette consumption, reinforcing the role policy can play in shaping public health outcomes.

    The study also identifies significant awareness gaps around smoke-free alternatives among South African smokers.

    Nearly 44% of smokers are unfamiliar with e-cigarettes, 65% are unfamiliar with heated tobacco products, and 70% are unfamiliar with nicotine pouches, suggesting many smokers lack basic information about smoke-free alternatives to cigarettes.

    Nearly 44% of smokers are unfamiliar with e-cigarettes, 65% are unfamiliar with heated tobacco products, and 70% are unfamiliar with nicotine pouches, highlighting low awareness of smoke-free alternatives among South African smokers. Therefore, the survey suggests that smokers don’t understand that SFPs are potentially much less harmful than cigarettes.

    Cigarette smoke contains more than 6,000 chemicals, around 100 of which are classified by public health authorities as harmful or potentially harmful. These substances are created through the combustion of tobacco – the burning process that is the primary cause of smoking‑related diseases. Nicotine itself, while addictive and not risk‑free, is not the main driver of these diseases. This crucial distinction is often poorly understood, reinforcing widespread misperceptions about the relative risks of smoke‑free alternatives.

    Among smokers not interested in alternatives, 43% cite health risk concerns, often linked to misinformation, while 28% say alternatives are too expensive.

    The research indicates that smokers are open to considering alternatives if the right conditions are in place.

    More than 80% of smokers say affordability and accessibility are key factors when considering smoke-free products.

    Specifically:

    • 82% say alternatives should be cheaper than cigarettes
    • 82% want them to be easily available in stores
    • 80% want product information at the point of sale
    • 78% want risk-reduction information to help them make informed choices

    These findings suggest that providing accurate information and improving access to science-based alternatives could play an important role in helping adults who would otherwise continue smoking, transition away from cigarettes.

    The research also highlights concerns among smokers about the potential unintended consequences of overly restrictive policies.

    Around three-quarters of respondents believe strict bans on smoke-free alternatives could push smokers toward cheaper illicit tobacco or nicotine products instead.

    Respondents also indicated that a regulatory approach recognising differences in risk between products could help reduce smoking while limiting the growth of illicit markets.

    Taken together, the findings point to a clear opportunity for South Africa: a modernised, evidence-based regulatory framework that differentiates between products, expands access to scientifically substantiated smoke-free alternatives, and prioritises accurate information could significantly accelerate the decline of cigarette use amongst adults who would otherwise smoke.

    Sensible regulation is needed – regulation that recognises the role scientifically substantiated smoke-free alternatives can play in helping adult smokers who would otherwise smoke to move away from cigarettes, while maintaining strong protections for youth and non-smokers.

    ends

    About the study

    The findings are based on a survey conducted by independent research firm Povaddo between 28 March and 10 April 2025 among adult smokers in South Africa, examining perceptions of tobacco regulation, smoke-free alternatives and willingness to switch away from cigarettes.

  • Cyprus Contracts to Clean Up Cigarette Butts

    Cyprus Contracts to Clean Up Cigarette Butts

    Cyprus approved a six-year license for CPC Rethink Filters Ltd. to operate a collective system for managing cigarette filter waste, under new 2024 regulations targeting environmental impacts from tobacco products. The authorization, granted by the Agriculture Ministry, designates the company as the body responsible for handling the collection and disposal of cigarette butts, one of the “most common forms of litter affecting urban areas, beaches, and marine ecosystems.”

    The initiative includes plans to roll out dedicated collection infrastructure in collaboration with local authorities and to conduct public awareness campaigns promoting responsible disposal practices, as part of broader efforts to reduce pollution linked to tobacco product waste.

  • 22nd Century Expands Low-Nicotine Research with NC State

    22nd Century Expands Low-Nicotine Research with NC State

    22nd Century Group entered a testing services agreement with North Carolina State University to validate new low-nicotine tobacco varieties designed to improve yield and leaf quality while maintaining reduced nicotine levels, the company said. The research will evaluate genetic traits, crop performance, and commercial scalability as the company looks to strengthen its supply chain.

    The initiative builds on 22nd Century’s proprietary reduced-nicotine platform, which underpins its FDA-authorized VLN cigarette products. The company said the collaboration is aimed at supporting long-term production efficiency and aligning with evolving regulatory focus on nicotine reduction.

  • IKETech Wins Honors at Global Age Assurance Awards

    IKETech Wins Honors at Global Age Assurance Awards

    IKETech LLC was recognized at the 2026 Age Assurance Industry Awards, taking home “Privacy-Centric Age Assurance Solution of the Year” and receiving a “Highly Commended” distinction for innovation. The awards, presented at the Global Age Assurance Standards Summit in Manchester, U.K., were judged by an independent panel of experts across technology, policy, and youth protection, highlighting growing attention on solutions aimed at preventing underage access to restricted products.

    IKETech is an AI-driven compliance infrastructure company formed as a joint venture between Ispire Technology, Berify, and Chemular. The company focuses on developing systems that combine identity verification with device-level controls to enable real-time age assurance, particularly for regulated categories such as nicotine products. Its platform is designed to support regulatory compliance while maintaining privacy standards, as governments increase scrutiny of age-restricted sales and distribution channels.

  • OPEN LETTER to Olivér Várhelyi, European Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare

    OPEN LETTER to Olivér Várhelyi, European Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare

    ROME, APRIL 9TH 2026

    Dear Commissioner Varhelyi,

    Last Thursday, we had the opportunity to read the results of the evaluation report on the review of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD).

    While we support and support the need to strengthen tobacco control policies to protect minors who are starting to smoke and non-smokers, we believe the evaluation report suffers from an imbalance in the scientific evidence and would like to highlight the following points:

    • Better regulatory standards promised but not delivered

    The European Commission promised an evidence-based and impartial evaluation. Instead, the process failed to meet its standards, reaching conclusions based on opinions, assumptions, and clear gaps in the evidence. The risk is that bias will cloud the data, which is the only reliable tool for making accurate, evidence-based decisions that can truly help and support the public.

    • Independent science, particularly on harm reduction, has been sidelined.

    The Commission fails to take science seriously. DG SANTE relies on incomplete evidence, fails to properly evaluate smoke-free products compared to cigarettes, and repeats claims widely rejected by scientists. The report characterizes vaping as a gateway to smoking, despite robust evidence showing that a record number of adult smokers have switched to vaping products, reducing the negative impact on their health or as an acceptable transition tool to quitting.

    People need clear answers to make informed choices, but this assessment fails to even address the fundamental question of whether smoke-free nicotine products are less harmful than traditional smoking. By failing to address this issue, it ignores a fundamental question.

    Although the Commission has committed to “gathering scientific evidence on the health risks and benefits” of tobacco and nicotine products, its assessment fails to meaningfully address the science of tobacco harm reduction and adopts the “quit or die” dichotomy, which places the burden of the health consequences on the person with tobacco use disorder, ignoring all the social and economic determinants that contribute to the development of their addiction and the resulting burden of disease.

    • The Commission relies largely on the SCHEER opinion, which does not assess the comparative risks of vaping versus traditional smoking. This is precisely the comparison consumers need to make informed choices, which many smokers have already made through a process of trial and error, aware of the risks and the need to at least partially improve their consumption patterns.

    • The Commission’s official statements have downplayed the risk-reduction potential of smoke-free products, contradicting international health authorities and independent researchers, and putting consumers at risk.

    • Evidence demonstrating that alternative flavors and products help adult smokers switch to combustion-free products has been ignored or downplayed. Furthermore, focusing on the “risk vs. nonuse” comparison ignores the reality that many consumers will not quit nicotine completely. Different dependence profiles (strong or long-standing) exist that make smokers resistant or their receptor structure fixed.

    • The Open Evidence Report used by the Commission considered only 10 Member States and was largely based on data prior to 2017. Furthermore, only 26% of the literature reviewed was based on data from EU Member States, without any significant consideration of harm reduction, a partial prevention tool already adopted in numerous branches of medicine.

    • The Swedish case completely ignored

    Sweden reduced smoking by 54% in the same period by ensuring that safer alternatives to nicotine—such as snus, nicotine sachets, and e-cigarettes—are acceptable, accessible, and affordable. As a result, Sweden now has the lowest smoking rates in Europe—5.3% in 2024 and currently 3.7%—and a dramatically reduced disease burden, including a 61% lower male lung cancer mortality rate than the EU average and a 34% lower overall cancer death rate. However, the only reference to Sweden in the Commission report is as a warning about the use of nicotine sachets. The information presented in this way is unbalanced and does not help citizens make informed choices.

    Conclusions – As the MOHRE Observatory, which has been applying the principles of risk reduction as a partial prevention tool in the medical field for years, particularly in the fight against smoking, we believe that this evaluation represents a missed opportunity to truly advance European public health.

    Harm reduction is neither a new nor controversial concept in medicine. It is the rationale that governs the treatment of opioid addiction, diabetes management, pathological gambling policies, and numerous other areas. Applying this same rationale to smoking is not a concession to industry: it is applied science, real-life experiences for people with tobacco addiction.

    We therefore call for:

    1. Adopting a comparative, not absolute, risk assessment approach, recognizing that the relevant comparison for public health is not between smoke-free products and no use, but between smoke-free products and combustible cigarettes, which continue to kill 700,000 Europeans every year.

    2. Include in the TPD review the evidence produced by independent health authorities—including Public Health England, the US FDA, and the researchers who documented the Swedish case—rather than relying solely on selective opinions that ignore decades of peer-reviewed literature on assisted smoking cessation.

    3. Recognize that the heterogeneity of addiction profiles requires a variety of therapeutic tools. Imposing a single tobacco cessation route—total and immediate cessation—is equivalent to ignoring everything that behavioral medicine and addiction neuroscience have taught us over the past thirty years.

    4. Conduct a serious analysis of the Swedish experience, which constitutes the most rigorous natural experiment available in Europe on the impact of tobacco harm reduction on population health. Ignoring it is not scientific caution: it is an omission that would require explicit justification.

    A review of the TPD based on filtered evidence will not only fail to achieve its public health objectives but also risks pushing adult smokers toward more harmful products due to poorly calibrated regulation. As the Scientific Board, we cannot emphasize enough that protecting health requires the courage to follow the evidence, even when it leads in politically inconvenient directions.

    We remain available to contribute our scientific expertise to the review process, in the belief that a dialogue based on robust data and transparent methodologies can lead to policies that effectively protect both non-smokers and smokers seeking realistic harm reduction paths.

    Respectfully,

    ·      Johann Rossi Mason, Sociologist and Director of MOHRE Observatory

    ·      Fabio Beatrice, MD PhD, Director of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory 

    ·      Claudio Leonardi, MD PhD, Presidente della Società Italiana per le Malattie da Dipendenza (SIPaD) and Member of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory

    ·      Konstantinos Farsalinos, MD, PhD, visiting researcher at the University of Patras, Greece. Smoking Behavior Research Unit, University of Western Attica, Greece, and scientific member MOHRE Observatory Board

    ·      Giacomo Mangiaracina, MD, Presidente ANP, Past President SITAB and Member of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory

    ·      Giuseppina Massaro, Psichologist and Member of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory

    ·      Claudio Zin, MD, PhD, specializing in Nephrology at the University of Buenos Aires Clinics Hospital (UBA), Science Journalist, Former Minister of Health of the Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina and Member of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory

    ·      Heino Stover, Executive Director of the Institute for Addiction Research in Frankfurt (ISFF) and Member of Scientific Board MOHRE Observatory

  • WORKS CITED for: The Arithmetic of Harm Reduction: Why the World Cannot Afford America’s Regulatory Model

    By J. Preston Campbell, PhD

    Action on Smoking and Health (ASH). (2021). Hidden costs: The economic burden of cigarette smoking on U.S. healthcare. https://ash.org/hidden-costs-healthcare/

    Alacrita Consulting. (2024). Valuing pharmaceutical assets: When to use NPV vs. rNPV. https://www.alacrita.com/whitepapers/valuing-pharmaceutical-assets-when-to-use-npv-vs-rnpv

    BioPharma Vantage. (2025). Master pharma & biotech discount rates. https://www.biopharmavantage.com/pharma-biotech-discount-rates

    Broughton Group. (2025, February 20). Demystifying the PMTA pathway for nicotine pouches: Key challenges and opportunities. https://www.broughton-group.com/blog/demystifying-the-pmta-pathway-for-nicotine-pouches-key-challenges-and-opportunities

    Delnevo, C. D., Hrywna, M., Wackowski, O. A., & Steinberg, M. B. (2024). Prevalence of nicotine pouch use among US adults. JAMA Network Open. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2820917

    Food and Drug Administration. (2021a). PMTA final regulatory impact analysis. https://www.fda.gov/media/152622/download

    Food and Drug Administration. (2021b). Modified risk tobacco product applications: Draft guidance for industry. https://www.fda.gov/media/190651/download

    Food and Drug Administration. (2025a, January 15). FDA authorizes marketing of 20 ZYN nicotine pouch products [Press release]. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-authorizes-marketing-20-zyn-nicotine-pouch-products-after-extensive-scie

    Food and Drug Administration. (2025b). FDA pilot program will fast-track certain nicotine pouch PMTAs. Summarized by Tobacco Law Blog. https://www.tobaccolawblog.com/2025/10/fda-pilot-program-will-fast-track-certain-nicotine-pouch-pmtas/

    Food and Drug Administration. (2025c). Modified risk tobacco products. https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/advertising-and-promotion/modified-risk-tobacco-products

    Food and Drug Administration. (2026, January 12). FDA authorizes 6 nicotine pouch products, completing review in record time [Press release]. https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ctp-newsroom/fda-authorizes-6-nicotine-pouch-products-completing-review-record-time

    Food and Drug Law Institute (FDLI). (2023). FDA review of new tobacco products: A public health narrative. https://www.fdli.org/2023/08/fda-review-of-new-tobacco-products-a-public-health-narrative/

    Goniewicz, M. L., et al. (2025). The effects of oral nicotine pouches on cigarette smoking behavior. PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12377922/

    Hartmann-Boyce, J., et al. (2025). Oral nicotine pouches for cessation or reduction of use of other tobacco or nicotine products. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CD016220. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12549188/

    JJCC Group. (2026, February 5). PMTA submission pricing: Understanding the true cost. https://jjccgroup.org/pmta-submission-pricing-guide/

    Leonard Davis Institute (LDI), University of Pennsylvania. (2025, April 23). FDA needs to reboot rules for less harmful tobacco alternatives. https://ldi.upenn.edu/our-work/research-updates/fda-needs-to-reboot-rules-for-less-harmful-tobacco-alternatives-after-bidens-del

    Maciosek, M. V., et al. (2022). The cost-effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy sampling programs. PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9585132/

    Mallock, N., et al. (2019). Levels of selected analytes in the emissions of “heat not burn” tobacco products relevant to human health risk assessment. Archives of Toxicology, 93, 2145–2149.

    Masiero, G., et al. (2025). Cost-effectiveness analysis of e-cigarettes compared to nicotine replacement therapy. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article-abstract/27/3/466/7756831

    SGS Group. (2025, March 13). UAE mandates ECAS certification for tobacco-free nicotine pouches. https://www.sgs.com/en-sa/news/2025/03/uae-mandates-ecas-certification-for-tobacco-free-nicotine-pouches

    Snusforumet. (2021, June 27). New study: Nicotine pouches have 99% lower toxicity than cigarettes. https://snusforumet.se/en/new-study-nicotine-pouches-have-99-lower-toxicity-than-cigarettes/

    World Health Organization. (2023). Tobacco. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tobacco

    Xu, X., Bishop, E. E., Kennedy, S. M., Simpson, S. A., & Pechacek, T. F. (2015). Annual healthcare spending attributable to cigarette smoking: An update. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 48(3), 326–333. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4603661/

  • AIR and Cantor Equity Partners III Announce Public Filing of Form F-4 Ahead of Planned Merger and Nasdaq Listing

    PRESS RELEASE

    Global hookah innovator continues to deliver strong results with approximately $400 million revenue, $47 million profit for the year and $140 million in adjusted EBITDA in FY 2025

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates – March 30, 2026 – AIR Limited (“AIR” or the “Company”), the global leader in hookah and pioneer in advanced inhalation technologies, and Cantor Equity Partners III, Inc. (Nasdaq: CAEP) (“CAEP”), a special purpose acquisition company sponsored by an affiliate of Cantor Fitzgerald, today announced the filing of a Registration Statement on Form F-4 (the “F-4”) by the Company and AIR Holdings Limited with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with the previously announced proposed business combination.

    “The filing of the F-4 is an important milestone as we take another step closer to becoming a public company,” said Stuart Brazier, CEO of AIR. “We’re continuing to perform well and execute our business strategy, and we are optimistic about the rising popularity of hookah globally and especially in the U.S. With Al Fakher, our flagship brand and the largest hookah brand in the world, along with our other research-based products and world-class management team, we look forward to the strong capital foundation, financial flexibility and institutional credibility we expect from becoming publicly listed in the U.S.”

    As the transaction progresses, AIR’s business remains on a growth trajectory. For the year ending Dec. 31, 2025, AIR’s revenue increased approximately 6% to $400M from $377M the previous year. For the same period, AIR’s profit for the year was $47 million and $34 million for the years ending Dec. 31, 2025, and 2024, respectively. For the same period, AIR’s adjusted EBITDA (with profit for the year as the closest IFRS measure) also improved 7% to $139M from $130M.

    Background Information on AIR’s Business Combination
    On Nov. 7, 2025, AIR and CAEP, a special purpose acquisition company sponsored by an affiliate of Cantor Fitzgerald, announced that they entered into a definitive business combination agreement for a proposed business combination (the “Proposed Business Combination”) that, upon closing, will result in the combined company AIR Global PLC (“AIR Global”) becoming publicly listed on the Nasdaq in the United States under the ticker symbol “AIIR.”

    The transaction is expected to be completed in the first half of 2026, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary conditions.

    Additional information about the Proposed Business Combination, including a copy of the Business Combination Agreement, are available in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed by CAEP with the SEC and available at www.sec.gov.