Cigar Pass Put/Take Rules Discussion

[Eshaw99]

I generally stick with ISOM for ISOM and NC for NC, but I think it should be left up to the pass host. If the pass host chooses to allow NC for ISOM and vica versa, I think it needs to be stated up front and not decided on mid-pass.

 

[H311oLHD]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

 

[insight]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

Do you have a reason?

 

[bfreebern]

I've been involved in both types and I have no problem with either. While I agree that it's usually the standard for CC/CC and NC/NC, the CC/NC and vice versa gives someone who hasn't had the experience to enjoy something they don't usually get.

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

If it's on pass by pass basis, I see no problem. Then again, the passes that I'd either host or be involved in, I'd trust each and every participant.

 

[stevehawk]

Personally I like the Cuban for Cuban, Non-cuban for non-cuban rule.
But it is really up the the person instigating the pass to make up the rules.
If they choose "non standard" rules for their pass, so be it.

that's my 2 cents.

x2

As long as it is clearly stated up front, and not implemented mid-pass.

 

[tone-ny]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

We should never be so rigid, you'll find this out as you progress through this hobby.

 

[Gonz]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

While you are entitled to your opinion like all others, if you're going to be so polar and accusing about it perhaps you ought to explain why you feel that way.

 

[sinnyc]

I think I'll add that CC for CC, NC for NC is definitely easier and so for passes with newbies or folks that don't know each other that well it might be the way to go.

- Tim

 

[JLAudio]

Let's say the embargo is lifted, in which CCs are legal and available. Would we still be having this discussion? I still bet some still wouldn't agree with CC for NC.

I ask only because some people are totally against it, and some are for it (NC for CC), as it stands right now.

 

[Bxcigrfan]

i dont care either way, i have not been but in one pass and it was NC only. However i wonder about the rarity thing cause CC's are rare in the fact that not everyone can get there hands on them. So does a 08 psd4 have the same rarity as a BTL 08? so does the CC's already start with an advantage? meaning you would need to start with a NC that has some rarity in it like woam, btl, anejo or other limited release cigars to match a 08 CC?

 

[mmburtch]

It's funny, because the embargo plays into it, and then it doesn't. The if you're going to take possession of contraband, you should be ready to trade contraband for it. Yet receiving a pass with them in it is really no different in the eyes of the law...."But I didn't inhale".

I've been in passes run both ways, and even ran a pass where all trades were blind and pre-approved. If I don't like the rules, I don't have to join the pass. I do agree though, that things like C/NC, 2-1s and blind trades are for passes with known participants. Passes allowing newer members should be stricter. If you want to break the rules, you need to know what there all about first.

It should definitely be up to the host, and to some extent, the members of the pass.

 

[H311oLHD]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

While you are entitled to your opinion like all others, if you're going to be so polar and accusing about it perhaps you ought to explain why you feel that way.

Gonz, insight, tone-ny, bfreebern (hopefully I'm addressing all of you & didn't leave anyone out),

This is my opinion and only how I see this --- but there's a risk involved in dealing with CC's and in my eyes, both parties should have to participate in this risk. To clarify, CCs are more risky to get than NCs. The government wouldn't come after you for getting your hands on a HTF Opus (and I know this is an extreme case), while they would have grounds for coming after you for purchasing a CC. In my eyes, what I'm trying to say is forget dollar amounts and match up risk amount. For my passes, I only allow CC for CC b/c I feel that no matter how HTF an NC is, I'm not risking anything when I purchase it.

I'm sorry for a messy response back, but I hope this gives a glimpse into my thoughts on the subject.

-Aaron

 

[tomthirtysix]

Well, considering everyone in your pass has their hands on the box, they are taking just as much risk, regardless of which cigars they put / take.

 

[grateful1]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

While you are entitled to your opinion like all others, if you're going to be so polar and accusing about it perhaps you ought to explain why you feel that way.

Gonz, insight, tone-ny, bfreebern (hopefully I'm addressing all of you & didn't leave anyone out),

This is my opinion and only how I see this --- but there's a risk involved in dealing with CC's and in my eyes, both parties should have to participate in this risk. To clarify, CCs are more risky to get than NCs. The government wouldn't come after you for getting your hands on a HTF Opus (and I know this is an extreme case), while they would have grounds for coming after you for purchasing a CC. In my eyes, what I'm trying to say is forget dollar amounts and match up risk amount. For my passes, I only allow CC for CC b/c I feel that no matter how HTF an NC is, I'm not risking anything when I purchase it.

I'm sorry for a messy response back, but I hope this gives a glimpse into my thoughts on the subject.

-Aaron

So, this is on a 'risk' basis...opposed to....____________?

 

[H311oLHD]

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

While you are entitled to your opinion like all others, if you're going to be so polar and accusing about it perhaps you ought to explain why you feel that way.

Gonz, insight, tone-ny, bfreebern (hopefully I'm addressing all of you & didn't leave anyone out),

This is my opinion and only how I see this --- but there's a risk involved in dealing with CC's and in my eyes, both parties should have to participate in this risk. To clarify, CCs are more risky to get than NCs. The government wouldn't come after you for getting your hands on a HTF Opus (and I know this is an extreme case), while they would have grounds for coming after you for purchasing a CC. In my eyes, what I'm trying to say is forget dollar amounts and match up risk amount. For my passes, I only allow CC for CC b/c I feel that no matter how HTF an NC is, I'm not risking anything when I purchase it.

I'm sorry for a messy response back, but I hope this gives a glimpse into my thoughts on the subject.

-Aaron

So, this is on a 'risk' basis...opposed to...._price/cost____

 

[bully1875]

The way I see it is if you can match rarity for rarity and msrp for msrp, or it's a highly sought out stick, why not??

Ex.. Conde 109 1st release for a BBMF 06 ????

 

[moki]

I've always used and participated by the old Cuban for Cuban, Non-cuban for non-cuban rule when it comes to puts and takes in cigar passes. However recently there's been a few passes that have not used this ruling, and allowed CC for NC and NC for CC. I'd like to get some opinions as to how people feel about this, either good or bad. I'm personally not sure how I feel about it. Besides the legality and morality that comes into play with Cuban cigars, they're still just tobacco rolled up that is from a particular country of origin. We don't frown on trading Nicaraguan puros for Dominican ones, why should it be any different when they're from Cuba?

What do you all feel are the pros and cons of allowing any cigar to be traded for any other cigar regardless of where it was manufactured?

Or has this discussion already taken place a while back and I was absent that day?

I think the pass owner -- assuming he is sufficiently clueful (which is a large caveat) -- should be able to do whatever he likes in terms of allowing/denying puts/takes.

I would not care at all regarding putting/taking a Cuban cigar for a non-Cuban cigar. Some people running passes might; that's their right.

Currently running a pass on another board. I will not stand for anything besides CC for CC. IMO - there should be no NC for CC EVER, even if the host wants there to be. Of course, that doesn't mean it wont happen, but in my eyes, CC for CC is the ONLY way to go on this issue. Setting a stupid prescident in my eyes.

LMAO. Can we keep him?

Out of the handful of passes I've been in, I think only Phil's (kind of) current pass is the only one that allowed NC for CC. Personally, I like it that way. Of course, as Phil said, it's much easier when the people in your pass are people you know, as opposed to an open pass where you don't necessarily know everyone.

Nope, other passes have been run where this was not in effect.

 

[tomthirtysix]

Out of the handful of passes I've been in, I think only Phil's (kind of) current pass is the only one that allowed NC for CC. Personally, I like it that way. Of course, as Phil said, it's much easier when the people in your pass are people you know, as opposed to an open pass where you don't necessarily know everyone.

Nope, other passes have been run where this was not in effect.

I'm sure it has been in other passes. I meant out of the handful I have been involved in.

 

[jkim05]

Personally I'm not opposed to it from a theoretical standpoint there's always a way to match up value, but from a practical perspective I've seen passes that allow this that got sucked clean of habanos rather early into the pass. The problem is there are always plenty of people willing to trade NC's for CC's, but fewer who would trade the other direction. Now without getting into whether Cuban cigars are better than non-cubans, etc, this bias still exists and would only reveal itself in the pass. A pass among friends who presumably have reasonably equal access would be the best scenario for this to happen. I've seen passes where a lot of the traditional rules were loosened and they worked because of the people involved. Just my 2 cents.

 

[moki]

Personally I'm not opposed to it from a theoretical standpoint there's always a way to match up value, but from a practical perspective I've seen passes that allow this that got sucked clean of habanos rather early into the pass. The problem is there are always plenty of people willing to trade NC's for CC's, but fewer who would trade the other direction.

Based on what? From what I've seen, in the passes where it has been allowed, it hasn't been an issue at all.