Small Pot Farms Are Biting the Dust


How would you feel if you sold your home and used your father’s retirement savings to start a business, only to lose it all after years of grueling work?

For Rebecca and Bjorn Hartman, the co-owners of a legal weed farm in Yelm, the answer is: ecstatic.

“The first few days after we decided we were done, we were just giddy, just happy to not be a slave to it anymore,” Rebecca Hartman said.

That’s the reality facing a growing number of small weed farm owners in Washington. They lined up by the thousands to get the coveted licenses to legally grow weed, but four years into Washington’s “green rush,” they’re finding it might be nearly impossible to actually turn a profit. Faced with the plummeting price of pot, the huge burden of complying with state regulations, and the competition with big farms that sell the majority of the state’s pot, small farms are starting to give up.

Micah Sherman, director of operations for Raven Grass farm in Olympia, said structural problems in Washington’s market are likely leading to an exodus of smaller farms.

“I anticipate anywhere from 25 to 50 percent of growers will either drastically reduce or shut down operations entirely this year,” Sherman said. “People are currently dumping large amounts of product at seemingly liquidation prices. There are numerous stories of desperate attempts at selling product at any price to pay bills and a general sense of impending doom among growers.”

In many ways, this turbulence in the market is the natural outcome for any industry that goes from black market to legal overnight—capitalism always has winners and losers. But the cannabis industry in Washington faces burdens that are wholly unique.

Stephanie Boehl, an adjunct law professor at Seattle University and a co-owner of a pot farm in Okanogan County, said cannabis business owners are forced to pay more for every aspect of their business because of pot’s stigma and federal illegality.

“Every transaction in the industry usually comes with some sort of marijuana premium, whether we are dealing with an electrician, supplier, landlord, or private investor,” Boehl said. “So that has a cost. But we also have the weakened position of bargaining with zoning restrictions and zoning laws that are not fair, and we are not in a position to push back because we are regarded as an illegal industry, regardless of what state law is.”

With pot’s current low price (the average wholesale price per gram was just $2.51 last fall, according to, it doesn’t take too many of these additional costs to shave off any remaining profit for the farmer.

When the Hartmans decided to close their farm, they destroyed all the remaining weed, figuring it would probably cost them more to sell it than what they would earn.

While small farmers pack up, big farms are only getting bigger. This past October, the state’s largest producer, Northwest Cannabis Solutions, sold more weed ($2.647 million) than the state’s 500 smallest farms combined ($2.638 million).

Bjorn Hartman said he isn’t angry with those large farms, he just wants to see the market treat small farmers fairly. “I don’t want to make it seem like we are blaming anyone other than ourselves,” he said. “Ultimately, we are responsible for our failure because we could have done things differently.”

Their biggest flaw may have been simply being too small. They never hired another full-time employee.

But Washington’s market doesn’t appear to support such small-scale farming, which is a shame. Our state is well-known for tiny wineries, coffee roasters, and breweries. Some of the best breweries in Seattle have as few as one or two employees, and I love being able to buy weed from equally small businesses.

But as more farms like the Hartmans’ go out of business, shopping small for weed might be a thing of the black-market past.

To read more visit:

Canada’s Golden Leaf Wants to Carpet the U.S. With Pot Retail Stores

Golden Leaf Holdings Ltd. is taking the first step to becoming the Starbucks or McDonald’s of weed, even though marijuana remains illegal across much of the U.S.

The cannabis company has opened a chain of marijuana stores in Oregon called Chalice Farms. And now venture firm BlackShire Capital has signed a letter of intent to franchise the model, setting the stage for stores across North America.

Startups in the fledgling — but fast-growing — industry are vying to create the first household name associated with marijuana. With investment bank Cowen & Co. seeing legal marijuana sales reaching $50 billion by 2026 from just $6 billion in 2016, investors have flooded the space in the hopes of riding the so-called Green Rush to riches.

“Like Starbucks is to coffee, we believe Chalice will be to cannabis,” said William Simpson, Golden Leaf’s chief executive officer.

State Laws

While analysts agree the industry is full of untapped potential, the patchwork of state laws has prevented companies from expanding aggressively: Nine states and Washington, D.C., allow recreational use, and 20 states allow medical use.

The Chalice Farms dispensaries in Oregon were designed to create a warm, welcoming environment that would introduce new consumers to cannabis and dispel preconceived notions, Simpson said.

The public’s response has been favorable, Simpson said, with the most successful store averaging $400,000 a month in gross sales through the third quarter of 2017. The slowest location averaged about $100,000. The company said these figures would be higher in areas with a less-developed cannabis retail presence.

The franchise model, meanwhile, follows the same playbook as restaurant chains and coffee shops. But with marijuana prohibited from crossing state lines, every Chalice Farms won’t be able to offer the exact same products. Toronto-based Golden Leaf will attempt to work around this issue by manufacturing its own products locally, or developing a list of approved manufacturers and products in each state or region as necessary, Simpson said.

Entrepreneurs looking to become franchisees will have to pay a one-time $50,000 fee and 5 percent royalty fee.

BlackShire CEO Kevin Reed said the idea is to launch 35 to 45 stores in the next two years — first in Canada before moving to the U.S. The venture firm and Golden Leaf are in talks to create a management company for the franchises, which would be jointly owned.

BlackShire intends to invest C$25 million ($19.4 million) for potential Canadian and U.S. operations.

“We believe that we’re going to build something that will be around forever,” Simpson said. “It’ll be part of the household names when people think of cannabis in 20 years.”

To read more visit:

The Challenges of Cannabis Lawyering in Nevada

Nevada’s recreational marijuana market is less than a year old, but sales and tax revenues are soaring beyond early projections. Melissa Waite, a partner at Jolley Urga Woodbury Holthus & Rose in Las Vegas, is part of the flourishing green rush in the Silver State.

To read more visit:

Legislation to Fix Cannabis Industry Banking Issues Introduced in U.S. Senate

Photo via Keith Cooper

A bipartisan group of high-profile senators has already signed on in support of the marijuana banking amendment, which could see a vote as soon as this week.

One of the cannabis industry’s biggest roadblocks could soon come tumbling down, as the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on an amendment that would allow state-legal ganjapreneurs access to federally-backed banks.

According to Forbes, Oregon Democrat Jeff Merkley introduced Senate Amendment 2107on Wednesday as a part of a larger bill aimed at reducing financial industry regulations of 2010’s Dodd-Frank Act, originally passed in the wake of the Great Recession. The new amendment would restrict federal regulators from “prohibiting, penalizing, or otherwise discouraging a depository institution from providing financial services to a cannabis-related legitimate business.”

Because cannabis is still considered a Schedule I narcotic by the federal government, banks that rely on federal insurance have for years denied accounts to state-legal weed businesses, forcing America’s growing green rush to largely operate in cash. With no place to store their funds, canna-businesses argue that a lack of banking options has brought the plant’s criminal past into the legal market, with constant worries of theft and seizure by law enforcement.

Only days after Merkley’s amendment was introduced, the legislation already has nine high-profile co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle, including Rand Paul (R-KY), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris (D-CA), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

Despite the groundswell of support for Merkley’s marijuana banking amendment, the same cannot be said for Senate Bill 2155, the larger bill in which SA 2107 is housed.

Seen by opponents as a severe reduction of the Wall Street safeguards imposed after 2008’s financial crisis, SB 2155 (formally titled the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act) would let banks with $250 billion or less in assets off the hook from Dodd-Frank regulations, among other pro-banking rollbacks.

After the bill passed an initial vote with support from 17 Democratic lawmakers, Senator Warren — a co-sponsor of Merkley’s canna-banking amendment — chided her party mates, calling the overarching banking bill an affront to the American public.

“People in this building may forget the devastating impact of the financial crisis 10 years ago — but the American people have not forgotten,” told Democratic senators this week, according to Mother Jones. “The millions of people who lost their homes; the millions of people who lost their jobs; the millions of people who lost their savings — they remember, and they do not want to turn loose the big banks again.”

Outside of SB 2155 and SA 2107, Forbes writer Tom Angell notes that a piece of standalone Senate bill for cannabis banking already has 15 bipartisan co-sponsors, with an companion bill in the House already ammassing 89 supporters.

With significant support from Senate Republicans and Democrats (despite Warren’s objections), legislators will vote on SB 2155 next week, where the marijuana banking amendment could very well serve as a liberal consolation prize in an otherwise conservative victory.

To read more visit:

Canadian Marijuana Company To Be Listed On The NASDAQ

The cannabis industry is set to reach yet another milestone this week. While we won’t see the passing of any new legislation or any states announcing legalization, the plant has still managed to nudge its way further into the mainstream, with one Canadian marijuana company to be listed on the NASDAQ, beginning Tuesday.

Cronos Makes History

Cronos Group Inc., a cannabis company that already trades on the Canadian Stock Exchange, is set to become the first marijuana company to appear on a major U.S. exchange. Shares will be available to trade on the NASDAQ beginning Tuesday.

Cronos founder and chief executive officer Mike Gorenstein believe this isn’t just a massive victory for his own company, but for the industry as a whole.

“It’s very significant for the company and the whole industry,” Gorenstein said in an interview with the Financial Post. “It’s a huge moment—just shows the stigma is continuing to erode on cannabis.”

In Canada, medical marijuana has been federally legal since 2001, and the country is set to legalize recreational marijuana sometime in the fall after the original July 1st deadline was pushed back by lawmakers. On the flip side, the plant remains federally illegal in the U.S., with 29 individual states allowing it for medicinal purposes, and just nine states (as well as the District of Columbia) recreationally.

Not to mention the fact that Jeff Sessions recently nixed Obama-era protections that allowed state-legal industries to create cannabis laws without government interferences. This has caused some prominent U.S. investors to think twice about investing in the Green Rush. According to Gorenstein, U.S. sanctions are what caused him to relocate his company to Canada in the first place.

However, Gorenstein expects that his company’s move to the NASDAQ could cause hesitant investors to change their tune.

“A lot of U.S. investors still are unsure about the legality: There’s not a lot of awareness about the fact that it’s federally legal in Canada versus the U.S.,” he said. “By listing on Nasdaq, it will open up the opportunities for a lot of U.S. investors that otherwise were unsure—even on the institutional level.”

Final Hit: Canadian Marijuana Company To Be Listed On The NASDAQ

Despite its current federal status in the U.S., Gorenstein hopes to eventually expand his business into the U.S. Currently, Cronos is working on building a growing facility in Israel and has received a license through a joint venture in Australia.

And while Cronos will become the first to trade on the U.S. Stock Exchange, it isn’t the first Canadian cannabis stock with U.S. ties. Back in October, Constellation Brands, which brews Corona beer, invested a whopping $191 million in the Canadian cannabis company Canopy growth.

“This move is a complete game changer, not only for Canopy but also for the entire industry,” Eight Capital analyst Daniel Pearlstein said at the time.

He certainly wasn’t wrong. After falling 7.3 percentage points over the fiscal year, Cronos shares were up as much as 11 percent following Mondays’ news. U.S. investors are clearly interested in getting in on the Green Rush from the ground floor. If more and more legal Canadian cannabis companies continue to make its way on to the U.S. exchange, it could prime marijuana investors for a big payday.

But right now, it’s up to the federal government to allow that happen.

To read more visit:

Not So Green: “Where There’s Smoke” Uncovers Marijuana’s Surprising Impact on the Environment

Bringing together scientists, activists, cops, and even a U.S. Congressman for an interdisciplinary anthology, the new book explores the overlooked effects that cannabis has had on America.

Presented with the option for legal marijuana, ten out of ten stoners would jump at the opportunity, no questions asked. As recent polls show, even plenty of nonsmokers would. Why? Well, weed is great, for starters. But sky-high tax revenue! Jobs! Pardons for unfairly incarcerated drug offenders! There’s plenty to love, as 61% of America now realizes, including, for the first time, a majority of Republicans.

The pros of legalization and cons of criminalization are obvious to all of us who aren’t Jeff Sessions, but by focusing on the no-shit benefits and consequences, we’re obscuring a plethora of valid concerns that accompany every multibillion-dollar industry. Whether slipping under the gaze of government and law enforcement while illegal, or going unchecked due to conflicting state and federal guidelines while legal, weed’s impact on the environment, the economy, our bodies, and growers themselves is often ignored.

A new book, Where There’s Smoke: The Environmental Science, Public Policy, and Politics of Marijuanaseeks to uncover the unintended consequences of pot cultivation, legalization, and monetization. Bringing together scientists, activists, law enforcement officials, and even a U.S. Congressman for an interdisciplinary anthology, the book explores all angles and outcomes of the legal and illegal weed industries.

Congressman Jared Huffman opens the book by revealing that illegal marijuana farming in public lands such as national parks is “the biggest environmental issue” in his district of Northern California. In the first section, we’re informed how pot prohibition exacerbates this strain on protected lands, and how threatened species are being poisoned in the process. But just when you’re siding with Huffman’s move to increase penalties for these illegal growers, next comes a chapter about the unfair burden those laws place on the undocumented immigrants conscripted by cartels to maintain grow operations. Where There’s Smoke is constantly in conversation with itself as it discusses these ever-evolving issues that don’t have a clear-cut solution and require much more attention.

Char Miller, a professor of environmental analysis at Pomona College in California, was tasked with rounding up a murderer’s row of experts for the book, as well as editing their entries. Enthusiastic and tirelessly inquisitive, Miller asked questions that few others have about the shifting impact of pot on the U.S., and found the right minds to flesh out answers. Eager to pick his brain about the past and future consequences of mass-market marijuana on the country, MERRY JANE hopped on the phone with Professor Miller to talk about Where There’s Smoke and its exhaustive approach to untapped cannabis issues.


MERRY JANE: How did you first become involved with this project and what did you hope to accomplish with it?
Char Miller: 
Where the book began and where it ended are not the same places, which is a lovely outcome. My background is in environmental history, so I work fairly closely with a number of folks who are employees of the U.S. Forest Service. I began getting these reports from friends on the ground that the impact of illegal marijuana grows on the national forest and public lands was seeming not only to escalate, but was developing these really quite serious impacts on biodiversity. It’s one thing to have illegal logging or illegal mushroom picking; it’s a whole other thing to have a billion-dollar illegal industry located on your site.

I had a column for a long time in KCET, one of the local public radio stations, and I wrote several pieces that an editor saw, and she called me up and said, ‘We need to talk about this!’ So we started to think about a book that would look at the impact of marijuana on public, private, and tribal lands. But then it morphed because I started asking people I knew and people I didn’t know — scientists, law enforcement people, activists on the ground — to write chapters for it. Their insights sort of took the book in a new direction, which was to talk about the environmental impacts to be sure, but also to talk about the political changes that were erupting in Oregon and California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, and elsewhere. I went, Oh. This is a much better book.

Was it a challenge to find experts in all these fields who were willing to study the repercussions of illegal cannabis farming, or were lots of them already doing that?
They were actually already devoting part of the work to it, and that’s how I found them. Some of this is going through Google Scholar and just reading hundreds of articles and going, Oh, this is an interesting group that’s working on this; let me talk to them. I knew about the work that was taking place up in Northern California and in the Sierra, because those was my colleagues in the Forest Service. The author of the Colorado chapter had written a blog post about the election, just before the election in Colorado. So I called her up and said, ‘Loved your post, I want 5,000 words that explores the subsequent consequences.’

Involving all these people from different background led to some fun internal debate in the book. There’s this really interesting discussion by Amos Irwin about the complications of law enforcement and who was getting arrested [at illegal grow sites] and therefore paying for the cartel’s actions. It clearly isn’t the cartels; it’s usually undocumented immigrants. Then Rep. Jared Huffman, who represents the northern coast of California and introduced legislation that made illegal marijuana growing an environmental crime, wrote the introduction. And Amos goes, ‘Wait, but look who that’s punishing! The lowest of the low are getting clobbered by this, not the people who should be paying.’ I loved the fact that that tension was there [among contributors in the book], because it means that we don’t know all of the answers.

Map of illegal grow sites in California, 2004-2014

It seems like a very knowledgeable brain trust you’ve put together. I don’t know how you’d put this into action, but I think some kind of forum with all these people would be hugely beneficial and informative to a lot of people. Is there any idea on your side to further this conversation?
That’s actually a great concept. One of the places I hope this can happen, because a number of our people in the book actually teach there, is at Humboldt State University. It’s at the epicenter [of the marijuana growing industry], and it also has an institution on marijuana research. These are issues that have been addressed in a scattershot sort of way, and if you could pull people together to have a larger conversation, we might actually figure out before the next set of states legalize — and God knows, there’s going to be a lot of them — what some of the upsides and downsides are.

Just before the legalization vote in California, in November 2016, we held a very large and well-attended dialogue [at Pomona College] about the proposition, and brought in pharmacologists and political scientists. I’m pretty sure half the audience was stoned, based on their languid questions, but it was really good because you’ve gotta pull in this stuff and let people voice their concerns.

An issue that many of the authors in the book bring up is the problems that have been created by a disconnect between state and federal policy. How would you sum up those problems, which have probably been worsened by the current administration?
One of the issues that I did not anticipate was this long-standing, 18th-century tension between states’ rights and federal rights, and where those boundaries are located. Because marijuana is a Schedule I drug thanks to Richard Nixon and his administration, growers, whether legal or illegal, cannot deposit their profit in a federally insured bank. That poses all sorts of dilemmas, because there aren’t a lot of private banks in the country, although I know that California is considering creating its own state bank where those funds could go. I’m really interested in that problem, because it’s a workaround, right? If the feds say no and the state says yes, interesting! Then what happens? I think you’re going to see very powerful states like California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and even the District of Columbia, pushing back hard inside the federal courts.

I think the Obama administration’s balancing act, which is to say, ‘Let the states experiment, we won’t interfere. Let’s see where it goes and evaluate it,’ was the right call. The Trump administration clearly believes in states’ rights on questions of race, but is unwilling to recognize them in this case because of, frankly, their badly outmoded, antique version of what marijuana is and the threats that it poses. If you listen to the Attorney General, it sounds as if you’re listening to somebody who deeply inhaled on the notion of “reefer madness.” Marijuana is not heroin! I’m sorry. And yet, that’s his perception. [Jeff Sessions] hasn’t yet moved on this issue — and that’s in part because he and the president are in deep trouble — so maybe we just ride this tide out. But this is a real tangle. Marijuana demonstrates to us how unclear we are about the dividing line between state and federal rights.

Another thing is that legal marijuana is producing so many tax receipts for Oregon, Washington, California, DC, and now Massachusetts, that the surrounding states are all going, ‘Oh my God! We need to get in on this green rush.’ That makes the federal government’s attack difficult to manage, because the states are gonna say, ‘Look, this is free enterprise. It isn’t just states’ rights, it’s about commerce and our right to regulate that commerce as long as it doesn’t cross state boundaries.’ I mean, California expects to get a billion dollars from tax receipts. Jesus! No one’s gonna oppose that!


California’s legalization measure was the first to include significant allocation of funds towards environmental restoration and enforcement of environmental growing standards. Do you think that’s something that should be adopted elsewhere, or is that endemic to California because of the size of their grow operation scene?
The logic is that, of all the states, California would be the one that says, ‘We’ve got to do this because the damage is clear and the vast majority of marijuana grown in the United States is grown in California.’ That connection struck me as quite logical. But now that it’s passed in California, I would think other states are weighing the possibility of tracking the same issue. In a state like Massachusetts, they have no idea what the environmental impact will be because they’ve not had any analysis of that possibility. So why not include it?

The other thing that Prop 64 did that I really like is to put a portion of the [tax revenue from legal sales] towards research on the psychological and physiological impact of marijuana. What is it doing to us? The irony is that it’s been very tough for American researchers to find funding to do that research because it’s a Schedule I drug. You take it off of that register, and all of a sudden we have some money to do the research. That strikes me as a perfectly legitimate stipulation on the part of the state, which I also hope other states will pick up on and pursue.

The final thing I would say about Prop 64, which may not actually come true, is its protection of small growers. At the moment, that seems to not be working out very well for the small growers, whose prices apparently tumbled from $1,500 a plant to $500 a plant. That makes it very hard for small growers to gain the kind of income that they were when it was illegal. Big money is moving in fast, which is not terribly surprising. But I think, whatever the early shakeout in the industry is, there will always be a role for the small grower in exactly the same way there is in the wine industry. This is going to be a niche market, and you can sell it like you would really high-priced wines coming off of 40-acre wineries.

Photo by John Nores, courtesy of the author

Some contributors sounded pretty unconvinced that even national legalization would convince cartels to pack up and leave California, so what’s their main revenue stream, or who are they selling to now that anyone over the age of 21 can buy marijuana down the street?
That’s a great question, and we don’t have enough data yet to know. However, there was a recent story in the LA Times that Mexico is now arguing it should legalize because so much marijuana is now flowing into Mexico from the United States’s legal production. So it’s like another state looking at California, like Nevada or Utah, and going, ‘Oh hell, we don’t want California to steal our business.’ A lot is at play at the moment and we just don’t know how enmeshed the cartels are, and how difficult it will be to pry them off the landscape. I think for a period of time, as long as there’s the capacity to grow and distribute and make money, they will continue to use their illegal grows and continue to manipulate people in very dire circumstances to do their bidding. The hope is that some of that can diminish through legalization, but honestly, we don’t have enough data yet to know that’s the case.

Since you put down the pen on this book, what new developments have you seen that have the most potential impact on the environment or anything else that’s discussed in the book?
One of the unknowns is the role of investment capital that is flowing into California, that sees marijuana as just one more product to be manufactured. We’re going to see that the greenhouses in the Salinas Valley that used to grow flowers are now growing bud. That strikes me as a logical transition, economically speaking, and capital is going to have its way. People see money, and they’re going to go flocking to that money, and it’s going to be really interesting to watch that unfold.

I think the other thing that we should watch for, as this green rush sweeps across the country, is how the individual states determine what manner marijuana will be made legal, what the restrictions are, how they will deal with the federal government that’s clearly in an unhappy state at the moment. Secondly, seeing the environmental problems that illegal and legal growing have produced, what kind of stipulations will they make about how marijuana is grown? How much water do they use? Do they dewater rivers and streams? Are we going to be dealing with a whole other set of environmental damages? I hope this book points that out and people say, ‘Oh, OK, that’s something we have to think about. We have to factor that into our legalization campaigns.’ And I hope they will.

To read more visit:

Cannabis Industry Leaders Come Together This Spring At The Cons

Experts in the fields of cannabis, tattoos and alternative modeling will converge this spring at The Cons.

This spring, conventions for cannabis, tattoos and alternative models will converge into one venue in an event called The Cons. The event, which is the first of its kind, will take place in Miami, Florida. And this event is already garnering excitement and anticipation from all three industries.

The Cons

The Cons was co-founded by Stacey Havoc and Clinton Cox. They saw the previous success of conventions dedicated to the alternative model and tattoo industries. And they knew, instinctually, that the growing cannabis sector would fit in seamlessly.

“After four great years in Miami with Cam Con,” Cox said in a press release, “it seemed like a natural fit for today’s world, as Inked Culture, Cannabis Culture and Alternative Model Culture are overlapping.”

In addition to being dedicated to cannabis, alternative models and tattoos, The Cons will cater to people working in these industries as well as fans who want to expand their education about their interests.

“This market is starving for information,” Cox added. He says that The Cons will feature sessions aimed towards those who wish to stake their claim in these markets. Because these industries, particularly the cannabis industry, is seeing a rapid growth, events like The Cons could prove invaluable to industry hopefuls.

Havoc explains, “we are excited to show the cannabis industry how to produce a proper Miami Beach poolside B2B and B2C show.”

Final Hit: The Cons, The First Multi-Alternative Lifestyle Expo, Coming To Miami

The cannabis business has been quickly evolving from illicit deals to a multi-billion dollar industry. Thus, events like these are extremely valuable for anyone who is interested in joining the Green Rush. With the huge influx of medical research, scientific studies and spreading legalization, the cannabis space has the potential to be one of the most important industries. Not only in the United States but the world.

The Cons will be at SLS Miami Beach, starting on May 29 and ending on June 1, 2018. For more details and registration information, visit their website here.

To read more:

As Of Late June, Aurora Had 16,000 Active Registered Patients Less Than 18 Months After Its First Sale.

Marijuana buds and pill bottle on top of money I don’t expect the stock Green Rush to perform like it did in 2016 in the remainder of the year, but there are several reasons to anticipate a strong finish for Aurora in 2017. The company ranks as one of the largest licensed providers of medical marijuana in Canada. This market continues to expand. As of late June, Aurora had 16,000 active registered patients less than 18 months after its first sale. The company added 3,000 of those patients in May and June alone. If this recent momentum continues (which I think will be the case), Aurora’s revenue should increase tremendously in the next few months. Aurora also stands to benefit from its expansion into the German market. Germany legalized medical marijuana earlier this year, but the country is importing the drug until it can establish a regulatory program for cultivation. That has opened a big market to Canadian marijuana growers in particular. Aurora has jumped on this opportunity by acquiring Pedanios GmbH, a leading German wholesale importer, exporter, and distributor of medical cannabis, a few months ago. Then there’s the potential for Canada to legalize recreational marijuana.

To read more visit

Listen To The Interview Or Read “weed Entrepreneur Brings In Over $1 Million A Year Running ‘bud And Breakfast’ Hotels”: Http:// Before This Cannabis Stock News Is Here, It’s Published To Subscribers On 420 Investor.

mjmj 1mo Joel Schneider, CEO of The MaryJane Group The company quit filing with the SEC last March and is delinquent in issuing its annual filing for the year ending 4/30/16 as well as the the following two quarters. Schneider stated that his company has delisted, but this is not true, as the company continues to trade on the OTC Pink Sheets. Our call to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) confirmed that the stock has not been delisted. The publicity of the interview seems to have sparked interest in the stock, which saw a big increase in volume, with 142mm shares trading,  as it moved to the highest level in more than a month: We emailed the company in order to find out why it isn’t filing with the SEC but received no response, and we called the corporate headquarters and each of the three properties only to get stuck in a loop of an automated marijuana call answering system earlier today. While Schneider painted a rosy picture as he called out annual revenues in excess of $1mm, investors should be cautious trading in the stock given the lack of compliance with the regulatory requirements of filing periodic updates. CNBC inadvertently pumped a worthless penny stock apparently. Listen to the interview or read “Weed entrepreneur brings in over $1 million a year running ‘bud and breakfast’ hotels”: Before this cannabis stock news is here, it’s published to subscribers on 420 Investor. Based in Houston, Alan leverages his experience as founder of online communities 420 Investor , the first and still largest due diligence platform focused on the publicly-traded stocks in the cannabis industry. With his extensive network in the cannabis community, Alan continues to find new ways to connect the industry and facilitate its sustainable growth. At New Cannabis Ventures , he is responsible for content development and strategic alliances.

To read more visit

San Francisco plans to wipe out thousands of older marijuana convictions

SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco’s district attorney said Wednesday that city prosecutors will toss out or reduce thousands of criminal convictions for marijuana dating back decades, a move allowed under the 2016 state ballot measure legalizing recreational sales of pot.

District Attorney George Gascón said his office will dismiss nearly 3,000 misdemeanor cases and review nearly 5,000 felony cases for possible action.

Proposition 64 legalized the recreational use of marijuana. It also allowed people convicted of marijuana charges to petition courts to toss out the cases or reduce penalties.

Gascón says that process can be time-consuming and costly, so prosecutors in the district attorney’s office plan to review and wipe out eligible cases en masse. Some people with convictions may not know they are eligible, Gascón said.

“A misdemeanor or felony conviction can have significant implications for employment, housing, and other benefits,” Gascón said. He said prosecutors will review cases from 1975 through passage of Proposition 64 in November 2016.

He said 23 petitions for dismissal or reduction have been filed in San Francisco since passage of Proposition 64.

As of September, around 5,000 people had applied for a change to their records, according to state data. That’s a fraction of the people that experts estimate are eligible.

Laura Thomas, deputy state director for the pro-marijuana organization Drug Policy Alliance, estimated more than 100,000 people are eligible to have their records changed.

Assemblyman Rob Bonta, a Democrat from Oakland, introduced legislation on Jan. 9 that would require county courts to automatically expunge eligible records.

Recreational marijuana became legal in California last year, and on Jan. 1 it became legal for licensed dispensaries to sell it to non-medical patients.

The U.S. Justice Department announced earlier this year that it’s halting an Obama-era policy to take a hands-off approach toward states that have legalized marijuana. Pot is still illegal under federal law.

The federal move could lead to increased prosecutions of marijuana sellers and growers, although it’s unclear how aggressive federal attorneys will be.

To read more visit: