Connect with us

Cannabis News

$9 Billion in Revenue and $2 Billion in Losses

Published

on


cannabis industry not profitable

The “marijuana mullet” is back with avengence in the cannabis industry as great top-line, headline-shocking, numbers for revenue got released with the usual massive losses on the bottom line, as usual.

Last year, an analysis of public filings by Green Market Report revealed that among the twenty largest publicly traded marijuana companies in the U.S., only one managed to turn a profit, while the rest collectively incurred a hefty $2.3 billion in losses. Despite generating over $8.7 billion in revenues altogether, these vertically integrated operators, with retail outlets, cultivation facilities, and manufacturing plants across various states, struggled to remain profitable.

 

These financial figures offer a glimpse into the overall performance of the cannabis sector. In 2022, a similar examination of financial filings indicated that merely two out of twenty-four public cannabis companies were profitable, with the sector as a whole facing losses exceeding $4 billion. However, it appears that losses have notably decreased year-over-year, signaling potential improvements in the industry’s financial landscape.

 

Top Performers and Underperformers

 

Green Thumb Industries (CSE: GTII) (OTCQX: GTBIF), based in Chicago, became the only cannabis firm to record net profits in 2023, with a $36.3 million profit on top of an amazing $1.1 billion in sales. This was a huge increase above its $12 million profit in 2022, demonstrating a stunning triple of yearly earnings.

 

In contrast, Florida’s Trulieve Cannabis Corp. (CSE: TRUL) (OTCQX: TCNNF) experienced the most significant setback of the year, with a whopping $527 million loss compared to $1.13 billion in sales.

 

However, Trulieve was not alone in its financial struggles. Curaleaf Holdings (TSX: CURA) (OTCQX: CURLF) of New York incurred losses of $281.2 million, despite leading in revenue among the twenty companies with an impressive $1.35 billion.

 

GTI, Trulieve, and Curaleaf were the exclusive trio to surpass the $1 billion revenue mark last year.

 

Other notable underperformers include:

 

– Ayr Wellness (CSE: AYR.A) (OTCQX: AYRWF), a Florida-based multistate operator, recorded a loss of $272 million.

– Cresco Labs (CSE: CL) (OTCQX: CRLBF) (FSE: 6CQ), headquartered in Chicago, faced losses amounting to $180 million.

– The Cannabist Co. Holdings Inc. (NEO: CBST) (OTCQX: CBSTF) (FSE: 3LP) from New York, reported losses of $174 million.

– Verano Holdings Corp. (Cboe CA: VRNO) (OTCQX: VRNOF), based in Chicago, incurred losses totaling $113 million.

 

The widespread financial struggles within the industry underscore the urgency behind potential regulatory changes, such as the Biden administration’s proposed shift of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III. Such a move could alleviate the industry’s tax burdens, potentially saving hundreds of millions annually, as estimated by various sources. However, the timeline for realizing these savings remains uncertain.

 

Market Upheaval

 

The dissimilarity between the evaluations from this year and the previous year emphasizes the volatility of the market, which is further emphasized by the removal of four firms from this year’s list.

 

MedMen Enterprises (CSE: MMEN) (OTCQX: MMNFF), one of the absentees, has essentially filed for bankruptcy. Due to a change of auditors, StateHouse Holdings (CSE: STHZ) (OTCQB: STHZF) and Vext Science (VEXTF) have not yet submitted their full-year financial reports to securities regulators.

 

The fourth omission, secondary multistate operator Red White & Bloom Brands (CSE: RWB), reported losses of $104.9 million and carried a debt of $240 million in the previous year, against revenues of $88.3 million disclosed in April.

 

According to Matt Karnes, Founder of GreenWave Advisors, the persistent losses stem from the exorbitant costs of operating within the federally illegal U.S. marijuana industry.

 

“Profitability and cash generation are formidable challenges,” Karnes remarked. “This underscores the urgency for government intervention… because financial resources are depleting rapidly. Section 280E is proving to be detrimental to all.”

 

Karnes acknowledged additional factors contributing to the sector’s financial downturn, including misplaced optimism surrounding the initial public offerings of many fledgling companies in recent years, and an underestimation of the competitive pricing in the illicit marijuana market.

 

Furthermore, political advancements at the federal level have been notably delayed compared to earlier industry expectations, resulting in failed expansion endeavors, unproductive infrastructure investments, and widespread price pressures, all culminating in diminished profit margins for the cannabis sector.

 

“The inability to accurately forecast when these dynamics will change, to decipher the political landscape effectively, presents significant challenges,” Karnes concluded regarding the ongoing financial setbacks. “This uncertainty remains a substantial obstacle.”

 

Emerging Trends and Future Outlook

 

Even in the face of economic uncertainty, several new developments in the cannabis sector point to possible directions for expansion and stability. The growing focus on cost control and operational efficiency is one such trend. Businesses are actively looking for creative ways to save expenses by simplifying their processes, allocating resources as efficiently as possible, and lowering overhead. These businesses want to improve their bottom line and lessen the effects of market and regulatory uncertainty by concentrating on efficiency.

 

The diversity of product offerings and market tactics is another noteworthy development. Companies that deal with cannabis are branching out from typical flowers and investigating new product categories including drinks, topicals, edibles, and wellness items. Targeting specialized markets and customer groups and customizing items to fit their requirements and tastes is also becoming more and more important. By lowering reliance on any one product or market segment, this diversification not only increases the variety of revenue streams but also fortifies the resilience of the market.

 

Looking ahead, the industry’s future prognosis is heavily reliant on regulatory developments and policy changes. The Biden administration’s prospective reclassification of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III may have far-reaching consequences for the business, including lower tax costs and better access to financial services. However, the timing and breadth of regulatory changes are unknown, providing hurdles for businesses navigating the changing regulatory landscape. Despite these uncertainties, ongoing innovation, strategic adaptability, and a focus on long-term sustainability will be critical in determining the cannabis industry’s resilience and development prospects in the coming years.

 

The other main problem the industry may never be able to overcome is, as Jeff Bezos put it so well, “your margins are my opportunity“.  Once the 280E tax breaks get worked through the system, and that cash bonanza gets dispursed, the industry will always face the unrelenting pressure of the illicit or black market.  As soon as prices start to get too high, where stores and brands start to increase margins, the illicit market will become that much more appealing for their lower prices.  If the legal industry tries to push prices too high, the black market will snag market share from more price conscious consumers.  There is a glass ceiling on how high the legal market will ever be able to raise their prices due to price pressures on the black market.

 

While consumers may pay for the appearance of safety through lab testing and the convience of a brick-and-mortar store, the fact remains that cannabis flower is 60% cheaper on the illicit market and edibles can be up to 93% cheaper when local and state taxes are taken into account. People will price shop when the spread between legal products and illicit products widen to unreasonable amounts.

 

Bottom Line

 

The cannabis industry’s financial struggles, as highlighted by the significant losses incurred despite substantial revenues, underscore the need for regulatory reforms and operational adaptations. While some companies have managed to thrive, many others have faced considerable setbacks, grappling with challenges ranging from regulatory constraints to market volatility. The emergence of new trends, such as cost management initiatives and product diversification, offers avenues for growth and resilience in the face of uncertainty. However, the industry’s future trajectory will largely depend on the pace and scope of regulatory changes, as well as companies’ ability to innovate and adapt to evolving market dynamics.

 

Margin compression and the ever-looming black market may always create a glass ceiling for cannabis product prices going forward. Push to hard on a string and the consumer will look to save up to 85% on prices by finding a new piece of twine.

 

THE MARIJUANA MULLET, GREAT ON TOP, BAD ON THE BOTTOM, READ ON…

CANNABIS MULLET TOP LINE BOTTOM LINE

THE MARIJUANA INDUSTRY MULLET MAY NEVER END, READ WHY!



Source link

Cannabis News

California Appeals Court Rejects Marijuana Grow Permit, Citing Federal Illegality

Published

on

By


In a landmark decision that highlights the tension between state and federal cannabis laws, a California appellate court ruled on October 29th that property owners can refuse to allow the transportation of cannabis across their land via easements, even when the cannabis operation is approved by local authorities.

The Second District Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision draws attention to private property rights in a context where cannabis remains federally illegal, but state law allows licensed cultivation, distribution and sale. Presiding Justice Albert Gilbert stated, “No matter how much California voters and the Legislature might try, cannabis cultivation and transportation are illegal in California as long as it remains illegal under federal law.” JCCrandall LLC v. County of Santa Barbara, Case No. B333201, 2024 WL 4599304, Oct. 29, 2024.

Unless the California Supreme Court grants review – which I would not rule out – the decision empowers private property owners to refuse to contract with cannabis businesses, and restricts local government from approving cannabis operations that implicate the property rights of neighbors who object.

The case at hand

The dispute centered around a cannabis cultivation operation in Santa Barbara County, where JCCrandall LLC challenged a conditional use permit granted by the County to its neighbor, Santa Rita Holdings Inc. The critical issue was that Santa Rita Holdings could only access its 2.5-acre cannabis farm via an unpaved road crossing JCCrandall’s property through a pre-existing easement. JCCrandall grows oats and barley.

JCCrandall’s primary concern? It raised a number of complaints with the Santa Barbara County Supervisors about truck traffic and night operations, which did not gain traction, but in the Court of Appeal JCCrandall focused on what it claimed was potential liability associated with having federally illegal substances transported across its property, even though County regulators found that the Santa Rita operation was fully compliant with state and local laws.

Key legal findings

The appellate court’s decision hinged on several crucial points:

  1. Property Rights: The court emphasized that “the right to exclude others is the essence of the right of property ownership” and classified it as a fundamental vested right.
  2. Federal Supremacy: The panel determined that allowing cannabis transportation across private property “defies the Supremacy Clause” of the U.S. Constitution.
  3. State vs. Federal Law: While cannabis might be legal under California law, the court ruled that federal law’s prohibition takes precedence in this context.

California cannabis industry implications

Legal experts suggest this ruling could have far-reaching consequences for California’s cannabis industry. Section 1550.5(b) of the California Civil Code makes contracts within California involving cannabis lawful and enforceable, and Santa Rita Holdings bet the ranch on that argument. But the Court of Appeal held that the statute could not compel a landowner to allow cannabis to travel across its property on a pre-existing easement. Licensed operators may find it harder to do business because neighbors who have property rights affected by a cannabis business can object, and, under the JCCrandall ruling, local government must yield to those objections.

An example might be a cannabis dispensary that depends on access to its parking lot via an easement or is located in a shopping center where other lessees have rights to object to tenants notwithstanding the approval of the landlord. In cultivation, many cannabis farms depend on vehicular access through easements because they are remote and do not always have direct access to public thoroughfares, or they depend on water sourced from other properties pursuant to agreements made by prior owners who grew traditional crops. These neighbors might not need to show any negative impact on their property, but can argue that they could be found complicit in federally illegal activities.

I think the most problematic language in the JCCrandall ruling is the following, which might draw the attention of the California Supreme Court and cause it to grant review: “For as long as an easement is enjoyed, its mode and manner of use shall remain substantially the same as it was at the time the easement was created. The County argues the easement was used for agricultural purposes. But there is a vast difference between legal and illegal agricultural purposes.” (Emphasis added.) If California has determined that cannabis cultivation is legal – as it has – and state courts routinely enforce contracts involving cannabis, it is a pretty bold step to declare the use of a lawful pre-existing easement illegal simply because the agricultural crop is cannabis and take away easement access from Santa Rita.

Looking ahead

This decision creates new challenges for cannabis businesses in California, and will result in more disputes among neighbors. While the Biden administration has shown signs of easing federal marijuana restrictions, this ruling demonstrates that the federal-state law conflict continues to create significant legal hurdles for the cannabis industry.

California court decisions also can be persuasive authority in other states, so we might see similar litigation (and decisions) elsewhere in the country where cannabis has been legalized.

The case serves as a reminder that despite California’s progressive stance on cannabis, federal prohibition continues to cast a long shadow over the industry’s operations and development. As the cannabis landscape continues to evolve, this ruling may prompt businesses to reassess their property arrangements and local governments will certainly have to reconsider their permitting processes to give more careful consideration to objections by neighbors who claim that their property rights are implicated by cannabis operations.

Note: This post was first published earlier this month on the Alger ADR Blog.



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Autoimmune Conditions Are Rising Fast in American Medicine, Can Cannabis Help?

Published

on

By


cannabis autoimmune problems

Why Are Autoimmune Conditions On The Rise? And How Cannabis Can Help

 

Autoimmune diseases refer to a group of medical conditions that occur as a result of the immune system attacking your own tissues.

 

In a normal human body, the immune system is responsible for protecting the body by producing antibodies that prevent toxins, cancer cells, and viruses from harming the body. However, when one is struck by an autoimmune disorder, the immune system is no longer able to distinguish the difference between dangerous cells and healthy cells. As a result, the healthy cells are attacked, too.

Today, we know of around 100 different kinds of autoimmune conditions. Some of the most common examples of autoimmune conditions include rheumatoid arthritis (RA), lupus, inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, Type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis (MS), and the Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) to name a few. Others include Graves’ disease, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, psoriasis, and vasculitis.

 

According to the National Health Council, around 50 million Americans are affected by autoimmune diseases today. This is a conservative estimate, considering that several autoimmune conditions are tricky to treat and so many people go undiagnosed for long periods of time. It’s worrisome to note that there are more people developing autoimmune diseases these days, many of which have reached levels comparable to epidemics.

 

But cannabis can help!

 

How Cannabis Can Help Curb And Manage Autoimmune Diseases

 

Not one single cause is responsible for the alarming growth of autoimmune diseases, though there are several factors at play. While there isn’t just one cause we can point at, it’s certain the reasons lie in our environment. After all, human genetics haven’t changed significantly yet the chemicals, toxins, and pollutants in our food and everyday items have risen dramatically.

 

In addition, people are getting less sleep than ever; stress rates are through the roof, and people are constantly worried. There is a clear link between psychological stress and physical health as well as immunity, which is why it isn’t unusual – it’s even common – to see many autoimmune disease cases flare up after people experience severe stress caused by grief, an accident, job loss, or the death of a loved one. These highly stressful and traumatic conditions wreak havoc on the body’s immune response, causing inflammation all over the body.

 

Conventional treatments prescribed to treat autoimmune conditions are focused on taming inflammation; these usually include steroids but also some non-steroidal drugs. These drugs often come with unwanted side effects, but research has shown that cannabis can work with the endocannabinoid system through THC and CBD, as well as other cannabinoids, to simulate similar results. In one study for example, we can see the clear association of the endocannabinoid system for neurodegenerative and inflammatory processes seen in Multiple Sclerosis and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.


There has also been an increasing number of studies proving the efficacy of cannabis for treating several autoimmune conditions.

 

Cannabis For Multiple Sclerosis

 

Multiple sclerosis is one of the autoimmune conditions where a growing number of studies have come out supporting the therapeutic benefits of cannabis for. In a 2024 study, patients with multiple sclerosis reported several improvements in quality of life after using cannabis-based medical products (CBMPs). For the study, British investigators analyzed the impact of cannabis based medicinal products made from either oil or extracts in 141 patients who were enrolled in the UK Medical Cannabis Registry.

 

The researchers then analyzed the changes in patient outcomes after a month, then three and 6 months after. According to the patients themselves, they were able to sustain improvements in their mental and physical health after marijuana therapy.

 

“This case series demonstrates a potential association between the initiation of CBMPs and improved patient reported outcomes in sleep, anxiety, and general HRQoL [health-related quality of life] measures, over six months,” said the study authors. “Additional measures for HRQoL, including various physical and mental health subdomains, also exhibit improvements up to six months when compared to baseline,” the authors concluded.

 

In another study from 2023, patients with multiple sclerosis reported significant improvements in symptoms after cannabis use. For the study, researchers from the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, New York, analyzed the medical records of 141 patients with multiple sclerosis, who were also legally authorized to consume medical marijuana products. They then analyzed data from the patients after one up to 4 follow-up sessions after the initial session of cannabis therapy. Sixty-five percent of patients consumed 1:1 THC:CBD tinctures.

 

According to the authors: “The results of this study indicate that use of MC [medical cannabis] to alleviate symptoms of MS is largely efficacious, with improvement in pain (72 percent of patients), muscle spasticity (48 percent of patients), and sleep disturbance (40 percent of patients) frequently reported.”

 

“More than half of opioid users at baseline were able to either discontinue or decrease their opioid use after starting MC. The mean daily MME [morphine milligram equivalents] was significantly reduced from the initial visit (51 mg) to the last follow-up visit (40 mg). This is consistent with previous literature showing that MC legalization is associated with decreased opioid use and that MC use is associated with decreased opioid use in patients with chronic pain. These findings indicate that MC may represent an alternative analgesic to opioids for some patients,” they wrote. 

 

Anecdotal Evidence

 

While more studies are needed to determine cannabis’ effect on other autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, we can rely on anecdotal evidence. In 2020, data from the medical journal, Rheumatology, revealed that patients who have this condition, along with those who have lupus and fibromyalgia, consume cannabis.

 

In fact, it was reported that marijuana was extremely common especially for patients with fibromyalgia. “In this meta-analysis, we found that one in six patients suffering from rheumatologic disease actively consumes cannabis, reducing pain reduction… A favorable effect of cannabis on pain in our meta-analysis reinforces the idea that cannabis could be used for analgesic purposes,” the authors concluded.

 

Conclusion

Cannabis is a safe and natural way to help prevent and treat the symptoms of autoimmune disease. It targets inflammation at its root, and is a proven natural way to help cope with stress, pain, insomnia, and inflammation all while protecting the brain. However, it’s important to ensure you medicate with clean, organic sources of marijuana.

 

AUTOIMMUNE AND CANNABIS, READ ON…

AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES THAT CANNABIS CAN HELP

CANNABIS FOR 9 DIFFERENT AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES!



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Hemp and the New Senate Farm Bill

Published

on

By


The U.S. Senate’s version of the Farm Bill finally landed this week. They’re calling it the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act of 2024 (the “Senate bill”). The Senate bill follows on the House’s proposal, called the Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2024 (the “House bill”), offered in May. Neither the Senate bill nor the House bill would preempt state or Indian law regarding hemp or the regulation of hemp products. This means states and tribes will retain a lot of latitude in regulating hemp and hemp-derived products– which gets people fired up.

Aside from giving states some runway, the Senate bill and the House bill differ in key respects regarding hemp. Therefore, these august bodies must confer and reconcile their sundry proposals. That could happen in 2024, but seems more likely in 2025 when the new Congress convenes. As of this week, though, we finally have a framework.

The Senate Bill re-defines “hemp” and defines “industrial hemp”

Section 10016 of the Senate bill (“Hemp Production”) amends the definition of “hemp.” Hemp was defined in the 2018 Farm Bill and removed from the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), taking us on a truly wild ride. See: What Happened to Hemp? (“What Happened”). The Senate bill also gives us a definition for “industrial hemp.” Here are those definitions, with points of emphasis in bold:

(1) Hemp. The term “hemp” means (A) the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 total tetrahydrocannabinol concentration (including tetrahydrocannabinolic acid) of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis; and (B) industrial hemp.

(3) Industrial Hemp. The term “industrial hemp” means the plant Cannabis sativa L. if the harvested material (A) is only (i) the stalks of that plant, fiber produced from those stalks, or any other manufactured product, derivative, mixture, or preparation of those stalks (except cannabinoid resin extracted from those stalks); (ii) whole grain, oil, cake, nut, hull, or any other compound, manufactured product, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the seeds of that plant (except cannabinoid resin extracted from the seeds of that plant); or (iii) viable seeds of that plant produced solely for production or manufacture of any material described in clause (i) or (ii); and (B) will not be used in the manufacturing or synthesis of natural or synthetic cannabinoid products.

The new regime

Again, the definitional stuff in bold is what I want to emphasize.

First, the Senate bill keeps the THC threshold at 0.3 percent, which is an arbitrary number we’ve been advocating against for years. The Senate bill mirrors the House bill in this respect, though, so we are stuck with this, unless Ron Paul gets his way.

Second, the Senate bill keeps the 2018 Farm Bill’s total THC standard, including THCA. The House bill does this too. This was fairly predictable: in What Happened, I wrote that we could “expect the total THC standard to remain, which means that actual Delta-9 THC won’t be the only metric for calculating THC content.”

We’ve also explained on this blog that the 2018 Farm Bill and USDA rules mandate total THC testing on pre-harvest hemp batches, but do not mandate such testing on post-harvest hemp or hemp products. The Senate bill doesn’t change this paradigm, which means the “loophole” for gas station weed remains open. This proposal is a big win for opponents of the House bill’s “Miller Amendment,” which would narrow the definition of “hemp” to exclude intoxicating hemp-derived substances.

Third, the Senate bill introduces a new definition and framework for industrial hemp. The House bill does this too, albeit slightly differently. The idea here is to invite farmers to grow hemp for fiber and grain purposes, while freeing them from regulatory burdens with the Department of Agriculture and criminal exposure with the Department of Justice. More specifically, for “industrial hemp” growers, the Senate bill:

  • removes background check requirements;
  • instates “relaxed regulatory requirements” for sampling and inspection methodologies (which will need to be adopted by rule); and
  • develops a certified seed program. 

The Senate bill also makes any hemp producer ineligible to grow hemp for five years if that producer, “with a culpable mental state greater than negligence, produces a crop of hemp that is inconsistent with that license.”(Hint: use the seed program.) The proof standard here seems like it could be an issue, and even if anyone has been adjudicated as growing marijuana under the guise of hemp, Farm Bill ineligibility seems like a far-off concern.

Bottom line

The big takeaway for me is that the Senate bill leaves the door open for intoxicating hemp products, whereas the Miller Amendment to the House bill does not. Something’s gotta give. And it needs to happen soon, because we’re already long overdue. As I explained in a webinar last week, the Farm Bill deals with the nation’s entire food supply, not just hemp. Therefore, this is not like with the SAFE Banking Act, where we have a proposed law specific to cannabis that may or may not ever pass. The Farm Bill must pass, and soon.

Stay tuned and we’ll keep you updated on any major happenings. For more on this topic, check out our massive hemp and CBD archive, or these specific, recent posts:



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media