RE:RE:RE:AGM Rundown from my Notes Yeah I find that fairly strange. I personally don't think provinces would implement tariffs on cannabis trade amongst each other. Just seems very protectionist. There may be "preferred" growers that provinces (wholesalers) may lean towards, but that would conflict with derived demand. Don't get me wrong though I think an Aphria greenhouse in the south Okanagan (BC) would do exceptionally well. As long as they don't need to have 10 different greenhouses in order to distribute in 10 provinces, you know what I mean?
GoBlue2016 wrote: Mike
provinces will, over time as supply equals demand, give preferential treatment to provincial growers.
I dont know how they do that unless they own the retail distribution channel.
Cross border tariffs? Don’t know how that’ll fly especially with case in maritimes about guy and beer and alcohol over provincial boundaries.
online?? I keep believing Provinces will scoop on line which is easy to centralize.
So not sure exactly for privatized retail.
GoBlue
MiikeD wrote: GoBlue, thank you for the info!
I do have a couple questions with your notes. I'm not fully understanding what you are saying regarding "provincialism" and rec? Can you elaborate please. Are you saying Aph may have to expand into certain provinces so they can sell their product in those provinces? Might there be laws or restricitions for provinces buying wholesale from certain LPs? I'm also wondering about your acquisition comment.. are you saying Aph may be looking to get bought out one year after rec?
AGAIN, THANKS FOR YOUR EFFORTS! MUCH APPRECIATED!
But first where I was wrong or at least mistaken…. Yes, Aph expects provincialism to play a part in the future based on discussions with purchasing bodies of provinces for rec… so they may enter these provinces as a grower… but not until over a year after rec comes in do to supply demand imbalance. So that gives time to enter these markets via acquisition of late stage LP.