RE:RE:RE:RE:I was imaginingYawn, it went nowhere fast and was a piss poor choice in a partnership.
Sadly, TNY rubbed up on a lot of piss poor partnerships, relationships or whatever.
It was almost like we were afraid of our own success if we did the right thing.
I am amazed that TNY is still standing! It seems to be beating the odds!
I think the States is ready to allow the potbiz to implode on itself by their indecision to rewrite the legislation with fairness to the pot biz at least compared to alcohol.
Cartel stakes are too high for politicians to do the work to rapidly pass anything conducive to aiding legitimate potpreneurs.
Why else would they ignore the tax revenue potential from a new vice? Governments love vices and the revenue they can tax.
Tinley received a non-payment loan for 5 years, name another company in the sector getting such generous funding.
They did put up $7 million worth of state of the art bottling facility as collaterol.
And losing control and their co-bottlers, albeit for a fee, if it is paid and if the co-bottling revenue comes upfront.
Tinley's and Beckett's have to be good and in the right promotional hands to build them as brands, in which case, Tinley could survive, maybe even thrive if we follow suit and give the consumers strength and size of their beverages, comensurate with the competition.
I haven't sold a share and I am at about break-even. I gambled my investment when I chased this down to buy it and didn't bail when it was flirting with $2 per share.
TNY could be a boutique winning sku, or Beckett's. Or I see hemp infused beverages coming to life again and that is what got us the $2 shareprice, way back in the Hemplify days.
glta and dyodd