As part of our transparency policy we try to arm our clients with as much information about the products we sell as possible.

We believe this gives our clients the necessary data to make a well informed purchasing decision.

ith this in mind we present a short guide to Vaporizer Rebranding.

Rebranding, also known as white label or private label manufacturing, has been around since time immemorial.

Its the practice of placing ones logo or branding on an already existing product. Its an efficient way of creating a brand without having to go through a lengthy manufacturing/development process.

Naturally this industry shortcut also exists in the vaporizer business.

Below we have two products, one is a private label product (re-brand) and the other is the original.

If you can't really see any differences between the two, that's because they are identical but for two things.

The first is the Logo and the second is Price.

To help you see why there is a cost difference we have to look at what is happening behind the scenes.

As with any other industry the vape business follows a couple standard supply chain steps.

They may have slight variations (more or less complicated) but in general the four scenarios below give a good idea of how things work.

Scenario 1 - The Scenario

In this supply chain scenario, one which we at use for almost all our transactions, a retailer goes directly to a vaporizer manufacturer and purchases vapes and accessories straight of the manufacturing line.

When we say manufacturer this can be either of two types:

1. Companies like Arizer, Storz & Bickel, MFLB etc., who make their own vaporizers and do not re-brand their products to other companies.


2. Companies that make vaporizers, sell them under their own brand and also offer re-branding of their vaporizers.

This scenario is the most challenging for the retailer in sourcing product. But translates to the lowest price for the end customer.

Scenario 2 - Distributor 2-Step

Supply chain scenario 2 includes an often employed sourcing method, where a retailer purchases product from an intermediary business known as a distributor.

Distributors buy products from original manufacturers (non-re branded) in large quantities and allow retailers to purchase smaller quantities from them instead of having to purchase big amounts of product at once.

Although this scenario adds extra costs to the equation it is often the only way a small retailer can purchase product in quantities they can afford.

Using a distributor as a source of product also lets retailers concentrate on serving their customers instead of having to deal with importation of product (customs, taxes, shipping etc. etc.).

This scenario is the fastest for the retailer in sourcing product. But translates to a moderate price for the end customer.

Scenario 3 - The Re-Brand

This 3rd scenario finally brings a re-branding entity to the equation.

A re-branding entity is usually a company that takes an existing product and through an agreement with its original manufacturer puts their own logo/spin on the product.

The re-branded product becomes its own Brand and is marketed as such.

The reason for the cost increase in this scenario is that now the manufacturer's cost and margin needs to be covered, the new brand owner's operating cost and margin needs to be covered and the retailer's cost and margin needs to be covered.

This scenario is equally fast as scenario 2 for the retailer in sourcing product.

But translates to a higher price for the end customer.

Scenario 4 - The Whole Enchilada

This last scenario is one that includes the most steps before it reaches the end customer.

This means that it takes the most amount of time, the most amount of parties involved.

Each step from Manufacturer to Brand to Distributor to Retailer to Customer carries an additional cost and margin calculation.

This scenario is equally fast as scenario 2 and 3 for the retailer in sourcing product.

But translates to the highest price for the end customer.


Going back all the way to the beginning of this article we have two products.

We have the Kandypens Miva and we have the Airistech Nokiva.

The Kandypens Miva is a re-branded version of the Airistech Nokiva.

In order for us to stock the Miva we would have to go through scenario 3 or 4.

The result being that you as the end customer would pay a higher price for the unit.

Our policy at is to offer our clients good quality vaporizers at the lowest possible price.

This is why you will not see re-branded vaporizers in our selection.

This may make our inventory look tiny compared to other stores but you are guaranteed to be getting the best possible deal on your vape.


I did not want to single out any one manufacturer or brand in the above article.

However, I needed to use real world examples so the Miva made the list.

There are many other brands out there that go through this re-branding exercise.

Atmos, Grenco, Wulf etc. etc.

Some of these re-brands simply put their own logo on the item, others do give you more tangible features.

For example you get different color options, some really nice graphic designs, special editions, accessories etc.

Its up to the customer make an educated, conscious decision whether these extras justify the premium or not.

We encourage you to do so.

The above four scenarios give a general overview of the ecosystem.

They are by no means exhaustive.

There are endless iterations and supply chain models, I tried to package them into four identifiable systems.

At times you will see that our displayed pricing is the same as other retailers.

This is because some manufacturers impose a Minimum Advertised Price (MAP).

This means that no retailer is allowed to advertise their product below this price.

In order to account for this imposed higher price we offer free bonus items in our packages.

By including all these bonus items try to offset the higher price and make our value proposition the best in the industry.