RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:CDS Policy - Bruce Linton's red herring
1) i said why i think its different but to clarify, I PERSONALLY feel that it is a big risk for a foreign company to operate OR take a stake in a federally illegal operation in the US. State's rights vs feds gets tricky in the states and while the feds might not want to encrouch on state's rights having a foreign owned company taking part could present it self as a good target for republicans. You know the whole "good people don't smoke marijuana" "Murica!" Type crowd. "Them canadian be pushing their wacky tabacky liberal hippy craap in our state we best do smnnn" I'm not saying it's right or going to happen but I think foreign investment would be the first to be targeted and they may just do it to appease their base while not being seen as going after state's rights or Americans them selves. That just my opinion. 2) yes i can golden leaf holdings, nutritional high to name a few operate in the US but are canadian based companies. 3) I didn't bring up federally illegal to support my argument I wasn't arguing. I was letting you know what I though of Bruce's rant an why I think he feels the way he does. I didn't say whether or not he's right or wrong just that I can see how it could be frustrating if you wanted to be 100% But the book but that not really the standard being maintained for the industry. I think it's a risk vs reward decision and kind of liked that about aphria so take it easy champ! 4) home team vs foreign legal defence ummm what? It's FEDERALLY ILLEGAL! If the feds choose to go after anyone they can! They are choosing not to, if they did there is no legal defense. This is politics. Legally the feds can shut it all down, the political backlash is the problem! My point is that if they were to throw the anti weed, Jeff seccions, Republican base type crowd a bone they could target foreign companies without upsetting the state's rights crowd to much probably without upsetting Americans in general. I'm sure even the pot head want the industry to stay American owned and wouldnt biatch to much about pushing out foreign investment/operations They may even support it. I did say its unlikely. It weird, you can acknowledged there is some risk? Entering the US is 100% risk free in your opinion.... Lol 5) what's your point? Are you agreeing with me that b.c. dispensaries are a good comparison to legal states.... and yes b.c. is more sympathetic to the dispensary model personally I'd prefer it tweed mainstreet brick n mortar filled with canopy + streaming partners bud and products... yes please! 6) managing and owning are two different things. I acknowledged aph steak in Nuuvera but, they do not own it can be counted full as aph grow space they are two separate entities (for now) even if they have a wiring relationship. I know aph is building as well but that doesn't change you inflating aph grow space using Nuuvera greenhouse. 7) if you are willing to be open minded but from my experience (and reading a few of your previous posts) most of the aph fan boys show up here with a closed minded view. You guys are here to bash. I get it accountants types like aph but not all entrepreneurs are accountants. It takes a team to make and run a business. Accountants, visionaries, deal makers industry specialist, marketers etc, so far aph fan boys primarily only come for one of those fields (accountants) so unless you guys are open to hearing the value that all those other skill sets bring that eventually add to the thing you guys like most.... the bottom line. Then there's nothing to talk about. 8) well from what I read on this board most aph share holders aren't. They come here to bash with smug attitudes toting aph ebita and positive earning as if no one else's opinion matters, but in the end money talks and so far the markets have decided that canopy is still worth more. That can change and maybe it will but obviously over the scope of all investors there's more then just positive quarters and current ebita to consider otherwise aph would currently be the leader.