RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Next round of Cash for Canopy will be a mortgageGoBlue2016 wrote: I'll try one more time with you.
And if you remember correctly I asked you for your WEED projections for Q4. You came back with motherhood statements. I challenged you to back up the motherhood and you couldn't.
No, I didn't explain my 'motherhood' statements because you were being rude and aggressive (shocking I know). I don't need to rehash why I like Canopy. Read my first posts if you really want to know. It hasn't really changed since I started investing.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
Banks lend money on historic performance. They will take into consideration forecasts but not likely given the poor EBITDA to date. They are doing WORSE than last year. Banks love trends. This is not a good one.
Are you trying to insinuate new venture companies and industries dont get financed by the big banks? Canopy's costs have grown, but that is due to rapid expansion and investment. Not due to inability to make the numbers work. We could have been profitable in 2016 if we halted after the farm purchase and stopped growing the factory. Stopped engaging with the medical community, lobbying the governement, engaging with the community with concerts, MADD advertising, and stopped funding various other research inititatiives. The banks will lending will incorporate the buisiness plan into its equation. I would also argue the history of the CEO running the company is a good metric for historic trends to base on in their risk analysis. And Bruce has created profitable businesses in the tech sector before.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
Banks do not want to repossess security. So they don't make the loan in the first place. ESPECIALLY WHAT WILL BE A SINGLE PURPOSE FACILITY. If WEED couldn't make a go of it what makes you think another can. That's how banks think. Banks make maybe 3-4% a year in Net interest. So if a loan goes bad they write off way more than they collect.
Banks obviously dont WANT to reposess, but that Insurance is what makes the loan favorable for them regardless. They dont need to run the business. The will sell it off piece by piece, or possibly the whole thing to potential buyers. Your crazy if you think someone wouldnt buy the Hershey factory in its current state. Big Tobacco or even another LP would be licking their chops at the chance.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
The "risk tolerance" WEED exhibits will be ok for Goldman but not any Canadian bank I know of. Canopy is not not yet a good credit if they lose money.
CIBC has already begun a revolving line of credit for Canopy. The risk tolerance of the big banks will HAVE to adjust to the lastest Canadian industry once legislation de-risks the Industry. Their shareholders will demand it. Mark my words, it will happen.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
BDC will rely on a higher LTV BUT NOT WHEN debt cannot be serviced. They are known as "Lender of last resort". Who knows maybe FCC (I'll let you look them up) will start lending to sector.
You keep insinuateing Canopy cannot service its debt due to negative EBTIDA. But you also keep dismissing the cash on hand, and revenue being generated that can be repriortitized. There is no reason we cannot service our debts before we reach positive EBTIDA.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
Bruce is wrong. He is right they would t finance construction as their is extra performance risk. But they won't finance it when it's complete until the cash flow can service it.
I have Arranged greenhouse financing in the past.
This isn't personal financing. It is commercial.
I'll take the word of Bruce over yours anyday man. No offence. You talk alot about your 'credentials'. This is stockhouse... I've also spoken to hedge fund managers that have Billions in dollars at their exposure and Millionaire traders that lurk on message boards calling people the worst things imaginable. So excuse me if I take your claims with a grain of salt.
GoBlue2016 wrote:
if you do not want to learn I CANNOT TEACH YOU.
But I am learning more about Commercial lending because of this discussion. I always try to learn. Even from the bears.