Smoore & Glo Hilo - a look at the key patent EP4082363A1

BTI 0.00%↑ PM 0.00%↑

Note: this post was initially published on 2 April, but I later found out that I could be wrong about the key patent involved in Glo Hilo. Just took a look at the patents filed by Smoore in China concerning “aerosol generation substrate”, and there are certain patents (e.g. CN119423395A) that look more similar to the Virto stick. Still, what matters is the comprehensive patent portfolio owned by Smoore, which will drive innovation for the next generation product. The next-generation product could be an upgrade from Hilo or something entirely different.

How did Glo Hilo achieve 5 seconds of pre-heating, compared to the 20 seconds required by IQOS Iluma? I just took a look at Smoore’s patent portfolio, and EP4082363A1 (EU-wide coverage) seems to be the key patent in concern. This is based solely on my desktop research, and I haven’t received any official confirmation from either company. Here is the link to the patent so you can conduct your due diligence. The analysis below is partly based on my limited high-school-level physics knowledge. So, please correct me if I am wrong.

This patent describes the processing technology of tobacco sticks, as mentioned in my previous article. Magnetic particles (Fe/Ni-based, 50-150µm diameter) are uniformly embedded in the aerosol substrate (i.e. tobacco sheet inside the stick). Electromagnetic induction (with frequencies above 200 kHz) then directly heats the particles. As such, thermal energy does not need to be transferred over a long distance. The aerosol generation substrate can be quickly baked to generate aerosol, and the heating time is significantly shortened.

For the existing design of IQOS Iluma and Glo Hyper consumables, due to the loosely stacked tobacco and low thermal conductivity, they share a common problem that leads to a dilemma.

The problem - Tobacco can’t be evenly baked regardless of the form of the heating element (the form of a sheet, the form of a rod, or the form of a peripheral tube). Heat in a central heating sheet (such as the TEREA stick for IQOS Iluma, as shown in Fig. 2) and a central heating rod (such as the IQOS 3, as shown in Fig. 1) is transferred from the center to the periphery, and heat in a peripheral heating tube (such as the Glo Hyper, as shown in Fig. 3) is transferred from the periphery to the inside.

The dilemma - Since the baking distance changes, tobacco close to the heating element is likely to be scorched, producing a burnt smell. In contrast, tobacco that is far away from the heating element is insufficiently baked, and the taste changes continuously with each inhale. Avoiding this would lead to long pre-heating time and low tobacco utilisation, i.e. ineffective release of aroma and nicotine from tobacco. The tobacco in the region far from the heating element is insufficiently baked, which can lead to problems such as the severe burnt smell of the tobacco close to the heating element.

As you can see from patent EP4082363A1, it addresses this pain point elegantly by enhancing the thermal conductivity of the tobacco sheet. I have seen a video of a research analyst cutting open a Glo Hilo vs IQOS Iluma stick after use, and the video shows that the tobacco sheet inside the Glo Hilo stick remains very sturdy after use. In contrast, the tobacco filament inside the IQOS TEREA stick appears brittle. I guess that’s because the tobacco sheet inside Glo Hilo is mixed with metal (i.e. magnetic particles). I am unable to share the video here due to copyright issues. If you have WeChat installed on your phone or PC, you can search for “Glo Hilo”, and the video will appear as shown.

Although it may seem counterintuitive, I am not suggesting that the Glo Hilo Stick is a better product than IQOS Terea. While science is important, what defines a consumer product’s success is user experience, customer acquisition, retention and market share. Consumers don’t simply look at the patent document and then realize, “A-ha, this is a good product.” It is also possible that solving the problem of long pre-heating times may create other issues that negatively impact the user experience. It is similar to an F1 race; improving engine performance may negatively impact the chances of winning a race. Technology and patents only matter if the product can secure a meaningful and sustainable market share over the years.

Let’s wait and see.