How to Discover New High-Profit Opportunities from Adjacent Directions Like Oral Health, Smoking Cessation Services, and Cigar Tasting

I increasingly find myself doubting the question "Are there any new opportunities in tobacco content?" itself.

Because once you lock your focus tightly on tobacco products, brands, and information, what you typically see is the same set of demands: price, authenticity, channels, product knowledge, policy changes, and consumption experience. The places with real profit margins often appear in the problems that arise after users leave "tobacco products."

A smoker may genuinely care about breath odor, teeth, gums, and social image; someone preparing to quit smoking may not lack "quit-smoking knowledge" but rather someone to remind them daily; a person interested in cigar culture may not only want to buy tobacco — they might want to understand history, origins, storage,utensils, spaces, social etiquette, and tasting culture.

This is what I understand as "adjacent opportunities."

It is not about repackaging the tobacco business, but re-observing the entire chain of needs that users form around tobacco.

WHO's 2025 oral health data points out that tobacco use is a significant risk factor for periodontal disease, and tobacco, alcohol, and betel nut are all important risk factors for oral cancer. Oral diseases affect billions of people globally.

The inspiration for business operators is not "rush to sell oral products," but rather: the original tobacco users may have a much longer consumption chain than tobacco products themselves.

My judgment is clear: if I had a small budget to find new profits, I would prioritize testing "health problems + behavior management + digital services" rather than directly entering tobacco product sales.

From oral health to smoking cessation services, adjacent directions hold high-profit opportunities

1. Don't Ask "What to Sell" First, Ask What Problems Users Have

When I used to do demand analysis, an easy mistake was to think about products immediately after seeing a user group.

For example, seeing smokers leads to thoughts of tobacco content, smoking accessories, memberships, and communities.

But the correct order should be reversed.

First ask:

Why does this person continuously generate demand?

A daily smoker may simultaneously experience several long-term problems:

Bleeding gums;

Bad breath;

Tooth staining;

Anxiety about dental checkups;

Family hoping they quit;

Failed quit attempts;

Socialwork needs;

Wanting to reduce smoking;

Needing supervision;

Needing a behavioral plan they can stick with.

What is truly worth studying among these are the problems that recur, cause clear pain, and that users are willing to pay for solutions.

This is also why I believe "adjacent directions" are more worth pursuing than "tobacco content itself."

WHO currently lists "helping quit tobacco" as a core tobacco control intervention, noting that counseling and medication can significantly increase successful quit rates.

More interestingly, in 2025 WHO specifically released a digital intervention toolkit for smoking cessation on chat platforms, which includes a 42-day quit challenge covering behavioral trigger identification, habit formation, privacy, and digital platform implementation.

This illustrates one point:

The commercial value of smoking cessation services exists not only in hospitals but also in the "ongoing management" aspect.

Of course, wheninvolving medical diagnosis, treatment, medication, etc., these must be undertaken by qualified professional institutions. What content entrepreneurs can do is better positioned in areas with clear boundaries such as health education, behavior recording, reminders, companionship, information services, and referral toprofessional institutions.

2. Why I Would Test "Oral Health" First

If given 1000 yuan to verify an adjacent market, I would probably start with oral health.

The reason is simple:

It is close enough to users' real pain points.

Lung health is too abstract for ordinary users.

"Your risk increases by X% in 20 years" — many people read it and forget.

But tooth discoloration, bad breath, and bleeding gums are problems users can feel today.

CDC data shows that adult smokers in the United States have significantly higher rates of dental caries than never-smokers, and notes that tobacco use is associated with oral cancer and periodontal disease.

I would break this market into three layers.

The first layer is health education.

For example:

"Why does smoking affect gums?"

"Why is oral management still needed after quitting?"

"Which oral problems require seeing a doctor promptly?"

This type of content builds trust.

The second layer is tools and services.

For example, health records, reminders, oral care plans, follow-up reminders, examination item explanations, etc.

The most important boundary here: ordinary content services must notimpersonate medical diagnosis.

The third layer is professional service referral.

The content platform handles user education and needs identification; users who truly need examination or treatment enter theformal medical service system.

At this point the business model transforms from "selling an article" to:

Content acquisition → Health education → User screening → Service appointment/referral → Compliant service revenue.

The biggest advantage of this model is that user demand is not artificially created.

Bleeding gums are a pain point.

Bad breath is a pain point.

Dental problems are a pain point.

You don't need to educate users on "why you should have this pain point."

3. What Smoking Cessation Services Can Actually Charge for Is Often Not Knowledge

I am very clear on this point.

Quit-smoking content is cheap; ongoing management during the quitting process is what can generate paid value.

There is already an overwhelming amount of "how to quit smoking" articles online.

So if someone tells me:

"I'm going to create a quit-smoking knowledgepaid course priced at 199 yuan."

My first reaction is not about market size, but to ask:

Why wouldn't users just search for it?

If the answer is only "my course is more professional," I wouldn't invest.

But if the product becomes:

"A 42-day behavior management service."

The logic changes.

Users record daily:

When did they want to smoke today;

Why did they want to;

How many cigarettes did they actually smoke;

Which scenario is hardest to control;

Did they meet today's goal;

How to adjust after failure.

This is no longer a knowledge product but a continuously used service.

WHO's digital smoking cessation toolkit itself adopts a 42-day challenge design, which at least shows that "continuous behavior intervention" is a service structure worth studying.

Suppose I run a small-scale test in April 2026.

An account has 8000 followers.

I don't run ads; first, publish 5 articles:

"Why Day 3 of Quitting Is Particularly Hard"

"Why the Post-Meal Cigarette Is the Hardest to Quit"

"People Who Fail to Quit Usually Don't Lack Knowledge of the Harms"

"How to Record Your Smoking Triggers"

"When to Seek Professional Help During Quitting"

Then set up a 49 yuan "7-day behavior recording experience."

Not treatment.

Not a promise of "guaranteed quitting."

Just:

Daily reminders;

Behavior recording;

Informationorganizing;

Periodic feedback;

Suggesting professional help when necessary.

If 100 out of 8000 followers click, that's not surprising.

Suppose 20 out of 100 are willing to pay 49 yuan:

Revenue of 980 yuan.

If total test costs are controlled within 500 yuan, this experiment is still worth continuing.

But if only 1 person out of 100 buys at 49 yuan, I wouldn't immediately conclude "the quit-smoking market has no money."

I would first suspect the product.

Because "49 yuan for quit-smoking knowledge" and "49 yuan for 7 days of continuous companionship" are fundamentally different things.

4. What Should Really Be Tested Is "Outcome Management"

When I make business judgments, I have a very simple principle:

Users pay for outcomes, not for information.

The same applies to oral health.

"What is periodontitis" can be easily obtained for free.

"What should I do if my gums have been bleeding recently" is a specific need.

"I've quit smoking for 21 days, why do I feel changes in my mouth" is an ongoing need.

"I booked a dental appointment but can't understand theexamination form items" is also a service need.

So what content operators should most seek is:

The gap between users knowing the problem and solving it.

This gap is often where business opportunities lie.

5. Cigar Tasting: I Would Not Prioritize "Selling Tobacco"

Cigars are a direction that easily gives entrepreneurs illusions.

Because itappears has high average order value, strong user spending power, and naturally carries cultural, social, and lifestyle attributes.

But I would not invest my first funds in tobacco product sales.

The reasons are realistic: health risks, tobacco regulation, advertising restrictions, platform rules — all can become hard constraints on the business model. WHO's 2026 updated guidelines continue to emphasize extensive restrictions on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship, with digital channels and cross-border communication also under regulatory scrutiny.

So what I am more interested in is:

Why do cigar users like this scenario?

If tobacco products are temporarily removed, what remains may include:

History;

Origin culture;

Wood;

Fermentation knowledge;

Storage;

Implement culture;

Space design;

Aroma experience;

Social etiquette;

Collecting culture;

High-end lifestyle;

Tea and coffee pairing culture.

There is a very interesting business judgment here:

Users may be purchasing not just tobacco, but an entire identity and experience.

Therefore, a content team can entirelystudy "non-tobacco experiences."

For example, high-end aroma culture, coffee and woody aroma experiences, tea culture, space experiences, collecting knowledge, etc.

This is not about secretly replacing tobacco advertising with another name, but seriously studying the cultural consumption needs behind the original usergroup.

These two must be clearly distinguished.

6. I Would Build a 40-Point Scoring Model for Adjacent Opportunities

I don't decide on investment by feeling.

I score each opportunity.

Total 40 points.

My internal standard is relatively blunt:

Above 30 points: worth investing in testing.

25–30 points: only run small experiments.

Below 25 points:defer for now.

For example, a "digital smoking cessation companionship service":

Demand intensity 5;

Willingness to pay 4;

Average order value 3;

Repurchase rate 4;

Delivery cost 4;

Customer acquisition difficulty 3;

Regulatory risk 3;

Team capability match 4.

Total 30 points.

Can be tested.

But a direct "cigar product promotion account," even if user spending powerappears very high, as long as regulatory risk and platform risk score low, the total can quickly fall below 25 points.

In that case, I would rather not do it.

High-profit opportunities must simultaneously satisfy commercial value and sustainability.

Looking only at average order value is the easiest trap to fall into.

7. I Would Use 1000 Yuan for a 7-Day Experiment

If I were to verify a new direction right now, I wouldn't first register a company, develop an app, or hire customer service.

I would first run a minimal experiment.

Day 1: Identify a Pain Point

For example:

"Planning to quit, but particularly prone to relapse after meals."

Don't write it as:

"Help users live a healthy life."

Too broad.

It must be small enough to be verified.

Day 2: Create 3 Articles

Each article solves only one problem.

Don't rush to sell.

Observe:

Read rate;

Bookmark rate;

Comments;

Private messages;

Users actively describing their problems.

Day 3: Talk to 50 Real Users

I wouldn't even first ask:

"Are you willing to buy?"

That question has very low value.

I would ask:

"When was your last failed quit attempt?"

"Which time of day is hardest to control?"

"How do you currently deal with it?"

"How much money have you spent on this problem in the past?"

The last question is especially important.

People who have already spent money are far more valuable than those who say they are willing to pay.

Day 4: Create a Low-Priced Product

For example, 49 yuan.

Not to make money.

But to verify:

Whether users are willing to spend real money.

Day 5: Start Delivery

Handle it manually.

Don't develop a system.

Don't build complex features.

Even if completed with spreadsheets, forms, and message reminders, that's fine.

Day 6: Calculate the Numbers

Assume 100 people enter the page.

20 leave contact information.

8 pay.

Revenue of 392 yuan.

If advertising and labor costs total 300 yuan, although the profit is only 92 yuan, this experiment has already generated an important signal:

8% page-to-payment conversion.

Then continue observing the second week.

Day 7: Decide to Continue or Stop

If user completion rate is only 20%, the service design may have problems.

If user completion rate reaches 70%, and someone proactively asks:

"Is there a 30-day version?"

That is a very strong signal.

Because users are starting toraise longer-term needs.

8. My Most Feared Failure: Spending 5000 Yuan to Get a Pile of "Interested"

I've designed simulated postmortems for this type of failed test.

Suppose a team makes "health management for smokers."

Budget 5000 yuan.

Promote content.

Get 300 consulting users.

Looks good.

80 of those 300 leave contact information.

The team is very excited.

But only 8 people actually pay.

Average order value 99 yuan.

Total revenue 792 yuan.

5000 yuanfor 792 yuan.

The team finally concludes:

"This market has no commercial value."

I disagree.

Because this experiment actually only proved one thing:

This customer acquisition method and product combination did not form a commercialclosed loop.

Digging further:

300 consulting users;

80 leave contact information;

8 pay.

Consultation to payment is only 2.67%.

Why?

Maybe the ads attracted "curious users."

Maybe the content promises were too big.

Maybe the 99 yuan product lacked credibility.

Maybe users thought they didn't need long-term management.

Maybe users were worried aboutinvolving medical issues and didn't understand what the service was.

So for the second round, I wouldn't add another 5000 yuan.

I would only use 500–1000 yuan.

Narrow the product from "health management" to:

"7-day smoking behavior recording + professional material explanation +manual feedback."

Retest.

The most dangerous thing in entrepreneurship is not failure, but repeating the same mistake with a larger budget.

9. To Judge High-Profit Opportunities, I Only Look at Five Numbers

What ultimately decides whether I scale up investment is not readership.

It is five numbers:

Customer acquisition cost.

How much did it cost to acquire one paying user?

First-order gross margin.

After deducting labor, platform, and delivery costs, how much is left?

Repurchase rate.

Are users willing to continue?

Service time.

How much labor does one user actually consume?

Referral rate.

Do users proactively bring new users?

For example:

Customer acquisition cost per user: 30 yuan;

First purchase: 99 yuan;

Delivery cost: 25 yuan;

First order contribution: 44 yuan.

Looks good.

But if only 2% of users repurchase, don't rush to scale.

Conversely, if:

Customer acquisition cost: 35 yuan;

First purchase: 99 yuan;

Delivery cost: 30 yuan;

First contribution: 34 yuan;

In the second month, 40% of users purchase a 129 yuan service.

Then the model is completely different.

What is truly worth scaling is not the business with the highest average order value, but the business where user lifetime value is clearly higher than customer acquisition cost.

10. What Deserves the Most Attention Is Actually "Cross-Border Entry Points"

I believe the truly interesting opportunities in the future are not about making "tobacco content" increasingly narrow, but about connecting user problems.

For example:

Tobacco content → Oral health education;

Tobacco content → Smoking cessation behavior management;

Smoking cessation content → Digital companionship;

Oral health → Formal medical service referral;

Cigar culture → Non-tobacco lifestyle culture;

Aroma experience → Tea, coffee, woody aroma experience content;

High-end social → Membership-based cultural activities.

There is a very important shift here:

Your competitors are no longer just other tobacco accounts.

You begin to enter larger markets like health services, lifestyle, membership services, digital tools, and cultural consumption.

But at the same time, you must also accept a fact:

Crossing borders is not about bypassing regulation.

If a project's real purpose is still to promote tobacco products, just packaging content as "culture," "tasting," or "healthy lifestyle," it may still involve tobacco advertising, promotion, or sponsorship regulatory issues. WHO FCTC guidelines on Article 13 explicitlyfocus on direct and indirect promotion, as well as commercial communications that may have promotional effects.

So I prefer to dotrue's demand migration, not packaging migration.

11. My Priority Order Would Be Like This

If I were starting from zero right now, my order would not be:

Tobacco products → Cigar sales → Smoking accessory sales.

I would rather:

First layer: Health problem content.

First find the problems that users truly suffer from.

Second layer: Behavior management services.

Turn free content into ongoing services.

Third layer: Professional service connection.

Parts requiring medical or professional intervention are handed over to qualified institutions.

Fourth layer: Lifestyle experience.

Study the cultural, social, and experiential needs users truly purchase.

Fifth layer: Digitalization.

Only develop tools aftermanual services have verified that people are paying.

The biggest advantage of this sequence is that investment can be controlled at every step.

If 1000 yuan can't verify it, don't invest 10000 yuan.

If 10000 yuan can't verify it, don't develop a 100000 yuan system.

12. What I Am Actually Looking for Is Not "New Tobacco Industry Products"

What I am actually looking for is:

Problems among tobacco users that have not yet been well solved.

These are two completely different lines of thought.

If the user's problem is strong enough, the original industry boundaries become less important.

A smoker may first come to your content because of bleeding gums;

Then startfocus on quitting;

During quitting, need behavior recording;

Then startfocus on exercise, sleep, diet;

Finally become a long-term health service user.

The profit chain here already far exceeds the initial tobacco content.

This is also where I believe "cross-border opportunities" have real value.

Not giving the tobacco business abeautiful name.

But starting from the problems users actually face every day to find services that are higher frequency, more essential, easier to repurchase, with lower marginal costs, and that can be delivered legally and compliantly.

If a new project requires me to invest over 100,000 yuan upfront, I am usually very cautious.

If only 1000 yuan is needed to verify:

Someone is willing to leave contact information;

Someone is willing to pay 49 yuan;

Someone is willing to buy a second time;

Someone is willing to proactively recommend;

And service costs can continuously decrease;

Then I will start increasing the budget.

I would rather use 1000 yuan to buy one real payment data point than use 50000 yuan to buy 100,000 reads.

Because reads only prove someone saw you.

Payment, repurchase, and referral start to prove you have found a business.