Nutritional High International Inc. Ordinary Shares C.NHL

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Hmmm...

[LiquidOctopusV2]

To make it clear, Canadian tourists make up ~6.8% of all tourists to Las Vegas.  Californians make up 16% and they have legal weed too.  But even there, they may buy weed while they're in Nevada. 

LiquidOctopusV2 wrote: Tourists in Germany aren't getting cannabis because it's a on medical licences - not for foreign  party goers.  How reliable is you understaning of the prescription process in Germany.  I ask because you use the loose system in parts of Canada as your example (b/c it wasn't even like that in every province - you maybe are in B.C. or Ontario). 

As for the tourists, you're right that Canada is the top origin of foreign tourists to Las Vegas.  But that's still just 27.4% of all foreign tourists going into Las Vegas.  And Candians may be weed [I meant "buy weed"] while they are visiting because they can't take it with them across the border.  Mexicians make up a similar share - with North America being just less than 50% of foreign sourced tourists to Las Vegas.  But, foreign tourists make only 24.7% of all tourists to Las Vegas.  Most are from the US.  And there are other visitors to other parts of Nevada, but I take your point, Las Vegas is the major draw.  Should anyone care to view the official statistics for themselves: https://www.lvcva.com/stats-and-facts/visitor-origin/

Nutritional High owns (I think) 15% of David's Aura Health, which is the one that is active in Israel and Germany.  In that regard, Nutritional High directly stands to benefit from Aura's activities there.  I'm not against your idea, in theory.  But for right now I want the company delivering on California and Nevada. 

mrmonopoly wrote: Firstly, Germany gets more than 4x as many tourists as Nevada, and the majority of Vegas tourists are Canadian who likely aren't prioritizing cannabis anymore. Secondly, you can be prescribed medical cannabis for something as minor as bad headaches in Germany. Look what was happening in Canada before recreational legalization; it was easier to get cannabis medically prescribed than it was to find a dealer, and it was (and still is) very easy to find a dealer. Thirdly, margins appear very healthy in Germany based on the limited details of the that Pharmadrug deal.

The way I see it it's an opportunity to pick up a Calyx-equivalent in Germany, except the first-mover advantage in Germany is way more clear than it was for California.

LiquidOctopusV2 wrote: Nevada is sin city. Germany is medical cannabis only.  80 million Germans don't all have glaucoma.  Germany has about just less than 2x the population as Nevada racks up in tourists in  year.  Pot is a perfect fit in Nevada be cause people will make pot part of their trip. Margins in Nevada are awesome for cannabis right now, far from saturated.   

mrmonopoly wrote: I agree about California, but do you actually believe investments in Nevada are better than Germany? Germany has 20x the population and Nevada is quickly becoming saturated. There is significantly more opporutnity in Germany than Nevada. That's not even debatable.

LiquidOctopusV2 wrote: You're talking about that other Posner company, NH has no licences or presence in Europe.  I think California and Nevada are both better than Germany.   

The costs are sunk, the buyout is all but certain.  You've got classic cold feet!  

mrmonopoly wrote: Well it's only for 75% interest and they've shed some of the assets. Tough to say what they'll actually get out of it. 

Would you not rather see them continue the distribution game in Europe with Pharmadrug? For a fraction of the cost? That has some major first mover advantage in a potentially huge market as legalization unfolds, compared to Nevada which clearly has a backlog of applications/acquisitions or it wouldn't take this long to get approvals.

LiquidOctopusV2 wrote: The takeover in escrow is enough reassurance for me.  What they paid is less than the current 2 year run rate, so I don't think they overpaid.  I want this deal closed because I think Nevada is a great market.  

mrmonopoly wrote: Yes that may be true... but they've been telling investors "any day now" since August. They shouldn't be making claims/promises that they have no control over. EAT has more at stake than the state does and it just looks bad now, especially since they have some history of pulling out of deals.