New Disposable VUSE GO 5000 and VUSE GO 6000 Launched

InnovationVUSE by 2FIRSTS.ai
Nov.23.2023
New Disposable VUSE GO 5000 and VUSE GO 6000 Launched
VUSE recently launched "VUSE GO 5000" and "VUSE GO 6000" disposable products in the Middle East market.

On November 23, 2FIRSTS, a popular vaping brand, discovered that VUSE has launched new disposable products called "VUSE GO 5000" and "VUSE GO 6000" in the Middle East market. These products come in high nicotine content variants, with the "VUSE GO 5000" offering 5000 puffs and the "VUSE GO 6000" offering 6000 puffs.

New Disposable VUSE GO 5000 and VUSE GO 6000 Launched
The product "VUSE GO 6000" sold on the VUSE official website | Image source: VUSE

 

These two products each come in 5 different flavors, namely mango ice, grape ice, blueberry ice, mint ice, and blue raspberry.

New Disposable VUSE GO 5000 and VUSE GO 6000 Launched
The product "VUSE GO 5000" is sold on the official VUSE website. Image source: VUSE.

 

The official retail price of VUSE GO 5000 is 80 dirhams, equivalent to approximately 155 Chinese yuan.

 

Previously, 2FIRSTS conducted market research in Russia and found that VUSE had launched a product with a range of 5000 puffs in that market, with a retail price of 1300 Russian rubles, approximately 95 Chinese yuan, which was 60 Chinese yuan lower than the official VUSE website in the Middle East.

 

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

As Regulators Focus on Nicotine Pouch Child Safety, Safeguard Pursues an External Packaging Route
As Regulators Focus on Nicotine Pouch Child Safety, Safeguard Pursues an External Packaging Route
As regulators pay closer attention to child safety in nicotine pouches, manufacturers face a practical challenge: how to strengthen child-resistant packaging without unnecessarily reworking products, production lines and regulatory submissions already in place. In a written interview with 2Firsts, Chemular detailed Safeguard’s external packaging approach, its customer-specific testing requirements and possible PMTA pathways. The model remains early-stage, but it offers a new way to think about an increasingly important regulatory and manufacturing issue.
Industry Insight
Sep.19
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
The UK’s Vaping Products Duty (VPD), scheduled to take effect in October 2026, is prompting retailers to assess how different vape categories may be affected. UK retailer Vape HQ has estimated potential price changes under the new volume-based tax system, showing that 100ml shortfill e-liquids could see prices rise from around £12.99 to £39.39, a 203% increase, while 2ml prefilled pod vape kits could rise from £5.99 to £6.52, an increase of about 9%. The estimates highlight how a volume-based tax structure creates uneven cost impacts across product categories.
Aug.19
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company Launches Flavored Vuse Pro Pods in U.S. Without FDA Marketing Authorization
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company Launches Flavored Vuse Pro Pods in U.S. Without FDA Marketing Authorization
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company has begun selling four flavored Vuse Pro pods — Peach, Berry, Watermelon and Fresh Mint — in Ohio and selected other U.S. markets. According to the Vuse U.S. FAQ, Vuse Pro contains approximately 5.0% nicotine by weight, and Vuse Pro pre-filled pods are intended for use with Vuse Alto devices. Reynolds told 2Firsts that product labeling lists an e-liquid capacity of 2.0 mL per pod. The Vuse Alto Power Unit received FDA marketing authorization in 2024, while the new Vuse Pro pods themselves have not received marketing granted orders. The rollout follows the FDA’s May 2026 revision of enforcement priorities for certain unauthorized vaping products with qualifying pending applications.
BAT
Sep.10
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
According to CBS Los Angeles on August 27, 2026, California lawmakers have passed Assembly Bill 762, which would phase out disposable, battery-embedded nicotine vapes in the state. If signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, manufacturing and importation of the covered products would be prohibited beginning January 1, 2027, followed by a sales ban on January 1, 2028. Driven primarily by concerns over electronic waste, lithium-battery fires and environmental pollution, the legislation would further shift California’s legal vape market toward rechargeable, refillable or replaceable-pod devices.
Aug.28
Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia’s withdrawal of its appeal in a landmark liquid-nicotine case has left a High Court ruling that struck down the 2023 nicotine exemption in force, bringing liquid and gel nicotine used in vaping products back under the Poisons Act 1952. At the same time, the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 continues to provide a regulatory framework for vaping products, creating uncertainty over retail sales, taxation and existing inventory. MPs are calling for nicotine vape sales and excise collection to stop, including refunds of more than RM354 million collected since 2023, while industry and consumer groups are asking the government to clarify the current legal position.
Sep.04
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore and four authorized U.S. CCELL distributors are asking a California federal court to permanently dismiss a core antitrust claim brought by direct purchasers. Plaintiffs allege that Smoore coordinated minimum wholesale prices, customer allocation and limits on price competition among distributors, amounting to a per se unlawful horizontal conspiracy. The defendants say the alleged conduct reflects ordinary vertical relationships between a manufacturer and its distributors. The court previously dismissed a similar claim, and the latest dispute centers on whether the second amended complaint adds sufficient facts to establish a horizontal agreement.
Sep.14