98 vs. $4.13), paired t(61) = 10.84, p < .01, but the price of snus was reduced relative to cigarettes for both Marlboro (M = $4.01 vs. $4.27), paired t(49) = 6.76, screening libraries p < .01, and Triumph/Newport (M = $3.37 vs. $4.20), paired t(22) = 3.43, p < .01. Prices for each snus brand and cigarettes are shown by brand below in Figure 1. Figure 1. Mean observed prices for snus and cigarettes in stores selling each product. Promotion and perceived demand A variety of promotional strategies were evident across the three brands. The percentage of each characteristic within stores is shown for each brand in Table 1. The use of interior signs was more common than exterior signs for all brands but especially so for Marlboro Snus, for which only one (2%) exterior sign was observed.

Both Camel and Triumph Snus were advertised with exterior signs about half the time (53% and 50%, respectively). Table 1. Marketing characteristics: Percentage of stores selling product Incentives were not frequently observed in any store. The use of ��onsert�� coupons attached to cigarette packs was most common at stores selling Camel products (25%), with a few observations for Marlboro (16%) and none for Triumph. Discount coupons were widely available for Camel Snus (27%) but rarely present for Marlboro (8%) and none was observed for Triumph. However, Triumph was much more likely to be given away free with a cigarette purchase (21% vs. 7% for Camel and 6% for Marlboro). Product placement also varied by brand.

Although Snus products were commonly placed near the cash register and closer to cigarettes than to smokeless tobacco, Triumph Snus was less likely to be placed in close proximity to the register (74% vs. 95% for Camel and 94% for Marlboro). Snus placement across all brands was most often closer to cigarettes than to smokeless tobacco, but Marlboro was positioned nearest to cigarettes 100% of the time versus 88% for Camel and 83% of the time for Triumph. Vendors reported the highest demand for Camel Snus, which was the only brand receiving any ratings of ��high�� (8%) and was rated as ��medium�� in one third of stores (33%). More than 85% of attendants at stores selling Marlboro and Triumph Snus rated the demand for these products as ��low,�� and even the demand for Camel Snus was rated as ��low�� at 58% of stores.

Discussion The results appear to reflect differences in marketing strategy by American companies and may also demonstrate different approaches to test GSK-3 marketing. Although the availability of these products varied substantially, snus of one kind or another was available in more than 80% of the observed stores. The fact that the products were almost always placed with cigarettes may indicate that they are being marketed to smokers rather than to users of conventional smokeless tobacco.