RE:RE:RE:CDS Policy - Bruce Linton's red herring
I see Bruce's point about other Lp's entering into the state's possibly making it harder to pitch to us funds but how interested in the sector are the funds in the first place if they won't do enough dd to separate Lp's that have entered the state's from those that don't/wont. It sounds like the funds he's pitching to have just made the choice to avoid the sector all together because of the confusion and that's what's frustrating him, but if their concern is legality it's Bruce's job to pitch them on canopy's federally legal only policy. Vic pulling the whole dispensary card when it comes to entering the state's grey market type of deal. Bruce wants to see dividends on his commitment to the straight and narrow and right now he's not, that's why he's pissed. Just like Lp's point out dispensaries for being illegal bruce is pointing out aphria's illegal operations and they are just that federally illegal. But dispensaries still exist and aphria is still in the US. Bruce either has to be happy with his choice to comply 100% with the laws of all countries or follow aphria in. This whole aph vs canopy thing is f'ing annoying they are not comparable they are taking totally different approaches and the only way to tell which strategy was better will be looking at financial 1 to 2 years after rec sales commence until then everyone just arguing for their preferred approach with not real data to back it up. You can't compare a company that is prioritizing profitability to one that prioritizing growth.