doomed
11 hours ago
Bunk weed has no traction…😂
Nation’s oldest marijuana retailer facing multiple lawsuits related to unpaid bills
Doomed
January 15, 2025
Berkeley Patients Group (BPG), the nation’s oldest operational marijuana retailer, is embroiled in several lawsuits alleging the operator failed to pay invoices to vendors, landlords and service providers.
The Northern California retailer is facing at least three lawsuits that claim it owes various businesses more than $250,000 in unpaid bills, according to Berkeleyside, a nonprofit digital news outlet.
The lawsuits include:
A December 2023 civic claim by BGP vendor Event Horizon Technologies, which does business in California as Flow Cannabis Co., alleging it’s owed $60,605 for goods, merchandise and other services. Flow Cannabis – often referred to by its flagship brand, Flow Kana – has had financial struggles of its own.
A February 2024 filing by Oakland-based ABC Security Service claiming that BPG failed to pay $73,864 for security services.
A claim early last year by AZ DV Real Estate alleging the cannabis retailer owes $127,160 in rent and other costs. AZ DV owns a Berkeley property at 1101 University Ave. that BPG intended to move to but didn’t.
BGP denied all these allegations in a July 9 court filing, Berkeleyside reported.
The company first opened its doors in 1999 with a mission to serve the sick and dying, especially by providing medical marijuana to those with HIV and Cancer.
Growing at scale not working.
doomed
1 day ago
Go Tilray!
Home / Legal
Marijuana rescheduling process paused indefinitely after judge cancels hearing
author profile pictureBy Chris Roberts, Reporter
January 14, 2025
President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to lead the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will wield a heavier hand than expected over the ongoing marijuana rescheduling saga after the agency’s chief administrative law judge canceled hearings scheduled for next week.
DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney II issued a ruling late Monday that included the cancellation of a hearing scheduled for Jan. 21 pending the outcome of a yet-to-be-filed “interlocutory appeal” to the agency’s eventual administrator.
Anne Milgram currently holds the role of DEA administrator, but she’s likely to be replaced once Trump takes office and appoints a new leader for the drug-enforcement agency.
Trump’s initial nominee to head the DEA, Chad Chronister, abruptly backed out, and the president-elect hasn’t identified another choice.
Judge reacted to pro-rescheduling participants
Mulrooney’s ruling Monday came in response to a Jan. 6 request from two pro-rescheduling “designated participants” that Milgram and her agency be removed from the proceedings for demonstrating what they argue is bias.
In their filing, the participants – Village Farms International, a Florida-based agricultural firm that produces cannabis in Canada under a federal license there, and Texas-based Hemp for Victory – requested that Mulrooney allow them to file an appeal “to the Administrator” should Mulrooney refuse to take action.
And that’s what Mulrooney did, according to a copy of the ruling obtained by MJBizDaily.
“Notwithstanding the pleas of the Designated Participants that they are anxious for action on the proposed rescheduling of marijuana, the (filers) … are apparently eager to trade a timely disposition and recommended decision for the dubious advantage of piling on more” participants, Mulrooney wrote in part.
In his ruling, Mulrooney noted that he must find that granting such permission “is clearly necessary to prevent exceptional delay, expense or prejudice to any party, or substantial detriment to the public interest.”
Doing so now might help avoid a future lawsuit challenging the validity of the whole process, he noted.
“Were my analysis to be reviewed on appeal and determined to constitute prejudicial error, a remand would clearly result in significant delay and expense to the Designated Participants and the process,” Mulrooney added.
Federal law grants the next administrator leeway to consider briefs or schedule oral arguments.
“The matter is on stay here, and the Administrator will issue a briefing schedule, entertain oral argument if he/she desires, and issue a binding, written decision on this tribunal,” Mulrooney added, in part.
Mulrooney’s shock choice to pause the long-awaited rescheduling hearings follows the Jan 6 allegations that the DEA is demonstrating a sharp “bias” against rescheduling marijuana as federal health regulators recommended it do in August 2023.
‘DEA has corrupted this hearing’
In an email to MJBizDaily on Monday, Robert Head, the chair of Hemp for Victory, said only the DEA is to blame for any delay in downgrading marijuana’s status under federal law from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 of the Controlled Substance Act.
Schedule 1 puts marijuana in the same category as heroin and LSD with no medical value.
“The DEA has corrupted this hearing,” Head said, adding that ensuring the hearing is fair is more important than a rapid resolution.
More on rescheduling
Marijuana rescheduling judge blasts DEA for ‘unprecedented, astonishing’ behavior
Colorado shut out of marijuana rescheduling hearings by ‘biased’ DEA, filing alleges
Finance experts mixed on prospects of marijuana capital infusion post-rescheduling
‘Biggest thing, ever’: Marijuana rescheduling recommendation hailed
“We owe it to the tens of thousands of activists who have worked on this issue over the past 50 years.
“We owe it to the veterans who overdosed and committed suicide because all they had was pharmacotherapy from the VA. We owe it to the people of this country to call out this corruption.
“If this new administration is really concerned about rooting out corruption, they should look into why the DEA is afraid of reclassifying marijuana to Schedule 3, and I don’t think it has to do with public safety.”
doomed
6 days ago
Home / Finance
Opportunities abound with distressed marijuana businesses – but use caution
Omar Sacirbey
January 9, 2025
Because there is a dwindling number of states that haven’t legalized medical and/or recreational marijuana, it is easy to be fooled into believing opportunities to get a cannabis business license would likewise be shrinking.
Opportunities abound, however.
The question is, where?
Often in mature markets such as California, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon and Washington state, many marijuana businesses that initially thrived are now struggling.
The owners of distressed businesses often put their licenses up for sale, presenting opportunities to entrepreneurs and investors aspiring to break into or expand in the marijuana industry.
While many cannabis businesses with potential can be had on the cheap, others might pose significant risk to their new owners.
How do you distinguish between a diamond in the rough and a disaster?
Seattle-based Heidi Urness and New Orleans-based Rudy Cerone, attorneys with the McGlinchey law firm, walk the MJBizDaily audience through the process:
How do businesses end up getting “distressed” in the first place?
Rudy Cerone: The main reasons businesses become distressed is because they don’t know the market. It is easy to grow bunk and fall flat.
They spend too much money on capex (capital expenditures), on fixed expenses, on operating expenses, but they don’t know what their revenue streams are going to be.
They’re scaling up, and their revenue stream can’t support their ongoing operations.
So, they don’t know their market.
It’s probably the biggest reason why a business would start to fail.
Heidi Urness: A lot of folks in the cannabis industry spend a lot of money without understanding what the return is going to be.
We see astronomical amounts spent on build-outs and similar things before you even see any revenue at all in some cases.
ADVERTISEMENT
Where can aspiring license buyers find distressed businesses for sale?
Heidi Urness: When it comes to the licenses, it’s a state-specific and municipality-specific game.
There are some websites that will list licenses for sale, but that’s not the same as just listing a property for sale.
It’s very difficult to find a distressed license.
Some folks will make Craigslist ads or go on various platforms that are starting to advertise this, because it’s hard to find a purchaser for a license because of all the nuance and due diligence that needs to go into it.
Folks do get desperate and will post their licenses on various platforms, especially ones that are popping up, which are really no more than just website frames someone puts up.
Otherwise, you really have to have your finger on the pulse of the industry.
Are there some states where you are more likely to find distressed assets more than others?
Heidi Urness: We see a lot in Oregon and Michigan.
That is largely born of the fact that when they first stepped into the cannabis industry – the state as a whole – they had unlimited numbers of licenses.
So there was just a huge amount of licenses, a huge amount of competition, and a lot of people were just squeezed out by economic factors, not by anything that they did wrong, no violations on the licenses.
So, where you see that oversaturation of licenses and then the attrition, you’ll know that there’s probably some licenses hitting the secondary market.
What are the most important things that someone seeking to buy cannabis business licenses needs to know about that permit?
Heidi Urness: There’s all sorts of things that you need to know about it, in terms of the obligations that it already has on it, contractually, but also its enforcement history.
You can give me a license that otherwise would be worth a million dollars, but in some states if it has two violations in the last two years, a third violation means I forfeit the license. That thing’s probably worth $10,000.
Every state has some sort of threshold where when you commit a certain amount of violations, you will eventually lose the license.
Every asset will have its own kind of unique considerations of the risks associated with it. The license is just one of them.
What you want to see from these folks is that there is no litigation. That there’s been no threat of litigation. There’s been no cease-and-desist. There’s no challenge to the intellectual property.
Because that is a risk that comes along with that particular asset, that someone could challenge.
And, ultimately, that IP could be worth nothing if it’s found that there’s superior user.
How do you vet distressed businesses that are for sale?
Rudy Cerone: If you’re looking to buy a business in distress, they would be setting up a virtual data room which has all the documents that you would need to be informed about the business.
They should hire what we call the chief restructuring officer, or someone that’s a third party who’s not emotionally invested in the business and is skilled at putting together all of the information that’s needed.
You do an NDA (nondisclosure agreement) with any prospective purchasers.
When you are vetting financials, what are you watching for?
Rudy Cerone: I like to see audited financial statements to the extent that they’ve got them.
If they’re big enough, they’re going to have audited financial statements from their CPA that says this is the profit-and-loss statement, this is the cash-flow statement, this is the balance sheet – and get those as up to date as soon possible, so you see the raw numbers.
And then you get all of the documents necessary to operate the business and licenses and that kind of stuff.
Vendor contracts are essential.
2024 MJBiz Factbook – now available!
Exclusive industry data and analysis to help you make informed business decisions and avoid costly missteps. All the facts, none of the hype.
Featured inside:
Financial forecasts + capital investment trends
200+ pages and 49 charts highlighting key data figures and sales trends
State-by-state guide to regulations, taxes & market opportunities
Monthly and quarterly updates, with new data & insights
And more!
Get the Facts
If you’re looking to get into cannabis, how safe or not is it to get into it by buying a distressed license?
Rudy Cerone: As far as getting free and clear, that’s the primary way.
You’re buying assets, and not necessarily, in most cases, an operating business.
You’re buying the land, the assets to grow, the lease at which the dispensaries are operating, the inventory.
You’re bringing your own expertise in order to operate those assets as a thriving business.
You’re not acquiring the business as a going concern.
You’re usually acquiring the assets that are necessary to operate a going concern business.
If you know your market, you know your competition, you don’t overspend, and you’re experienced, and you just need the assets to expand on in a particular place, it’s probably not risky at all.
But if you’re a novice, and you’re looking to pick up mom and pop’s distressed dispensary, you’re probably going to have trouble.
doomed
1 week ago
D.E.A. Is your friend…😂
Colorado shut out of marijuana rescheduling hearings by ‘biased’ DEA, filing alleges
author profile pictureBy Chris Roberts, Reporter
January 8, 2025
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration rejected a September request from Colorado officials to participate in the United States’ historic marijuana rescheduling process.
That’s one example of the “bias” that should disqualify the agency from overseeing the hearings, according to claims made in a filing submitted Monday to the DEA’s chief administrative law judge, John Mulrooney II.
The decision to exclude Colorado, where sales of adult-use marijuana began more than a decade ago, but include authorities from states without regulated cannabis such as Nebraska and Tennessee demonstrates why the agency should be removed from the proceedings, the filing claims.
Monday’s filing is the latest effort by designated participants Village Farms International and Hemp for Victory to disqualify the DEA, which has “obstructed the rulemaking process at every turn.”
The two companies are among the 25 parties selected by the DEA in October to participate in hearings before Mulrooney.
Bias and conflict of interest claimed at DEA
Village Farms, with headquarters in Florida and British Columbia, and Hemp for Victory, based in Texas, claim to have found evidence of bias and “undisclosed conflicts of interest and extensive ex parte communications by DEA that must be disclosed and made part of the public record.”
According to the filing, the evidence includes:
An “(u)ntimely, biased, and legally-improper” filing made by the DEA on Jan. 2 that “echoes anti-rescheduling talking points” such as “marijuana has a high abuse potential and no currently accepted medical use,” and denies other participants adequate time to review and respond, in violation of federal procedure.
Concealment of “roughly 100 requests” to participate in the hearings that were rejected, including Colorado’s, and its “communication and coordination with at least one anti-rescheduling DP, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.”
Reliance on the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, a DEA “‘partner’ on matters related to fentanyl,” which is a “potential conflict of interest.”
The DEA’s Jan. 2 filing includes evidence and testimony that its two witnesses intend to introduce in future hearings, which are scheduled to resume Jan. 21 and extend into March.
The 66-page, undated and unsigned DEA document bears “an unmistakable resemblance to the positions the anti-rescheduling” witnesses have taken, according to Monday’s filing.
“This new evidence confirms that DEA has worked to stack the deck against the Proposed Rule by favoring anti-rescheduling parties in its selection of hearing participants and obstructing a balanced and thoughtful process based on science and evidence,” Monday’s filing noted.
Colorado governor requested role in hearing
Monday’s filing – written by attorney Shane Pennington, the witnesses’ counsel and a partner at Porter Wright’s Washington, D.C., office who specializes in administrative law, attempts to show in greater detail how the agency “disfavored pro-rescheduling parties, including DEA researchers, doctors, scientists, and the State of Colorado, which has competently regulated a medical marijuana program for over a decade.”
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis requested in a Sept. 30 letter to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram that the state be allowed to present “relevant, unique, and non-duplicative” data that shows “marijuana having medical utility and abuse potential far below opioids.”
In his letter – a copy was attached to Monday’s filing – Polis expressed a fear that any federal rescheduling decision made without considering Colorado’s position “will introduce significant risks” to state-regulated marijuana frameworks, including the ability to regulate sales as well as collect tax revenue.
But, according to Monday’s filing, Milgram “barred Colorado from presenting that data” by ignoring Polis’ letter and declining to extend the state an invitation.
Instead, the DEA mentioned Colorado 27 times in its Jan. 2 filing, part of an effort “to cast doubt on the success of the decade-old state-regulated program,” according to Monday’s claims.
“Yet DEA makes no attempt to engage with the positive evidence from Colorado and summarily rejected Colorado’s request to participate in this hearing,” the filing continued.
“And now, secure in the knowledge that the Administrator’s secret selection process has guaranteed that Colorado will not be able to respond or defend itself, DEA reveals its plan to smear the state’s successful regulatory program in these historic and very public proceedings.”
The DEA also allowed the state of Nebraska, which is attempting to thwart a medical marijuana ballot initiative approved by its voters in November, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation to participate in the proceedings.
Both states are opposed to rescheduling, according to their filings.
A ‘sham orchestrated by the DEA’
These revelations show “these proceedings are a sham orchestrated by the DEA to stonewall cannabis from being transferred to a Schedule III designation,” Village Farms founder and CEO Michael DeGiglio said in a statement Monday.
As MJBizDaily has reported, both the initial roster – selected by Milgram – as well as further decisions by Mulrooney appear to tilt the list toward witnesses who oppose moving marijuana from Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule 3.
Mulrooney, who rejected a Nov. 18 motion by Village Farms and Hemp for Victory to remove the DEA from the rescheduling hearing based on agency employees’ communications with another anti-cannabis designated participant, has yet to respond to Monday’s filing.
The motion asked Mulrooney to delay the hearings until communications between the DEA and witnesses are released and, potentially, further action taken.
It also asks Mulrooney to compel the DEA to “to declare whether it supports or opposes” marijuana rescheduling.
“At a minimum, (Mulrooney) should postpone the upcoming hearing to allow for an investigation into DEA’s conduct, including its ex parte and undisclosed communications with anti-rescheduling organizations and other entities,” Monday’s filing adds.
BottomBounce
1 week ago
Tilray Brands, Inc. $TLRY
Top Institutional Holders
Holder Shares Date Reported % Out Value
Morgan Stanley 10.04M Sep 30, 2024 1.11% 14,052,991
Tidal Investments, LLC 9.71M Sep 30, 2024 1.07% 13,588,648
Susquehanna International Group, LLP 7.65M Sep 30, 2024 0.85% 10,708,058
Highbridge Capital Management, LLC. 5.19M Sep 30, 2024 0.57% 7,267,399
Vanguard Group Inc 3.9M Sep 30, 2024 0.43% 5,462,596
Blackrock Inc. 2.65M Sep 30, 2024 0.29% 3,706,868
Aristeia Capital, LLC 2.44M Sep 30, 2024 0.27% 3,411,678
Bank of Montreal /CAN/ 2.18M Sep 30, 2024 0.24% 3,047,108
Invesco Ltd. 2.05M Sep 30, 2024 0.23% 2,865,692
Geode Capital Management, LLC 2M Sep 30, 2024 0.22% 2,803,555
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TLRY/holders/
BottomBounce
1 week ago
Tilray Brands, Inc., $TLRY a lifestyle consumer products company, engages in the research, cultivation, processing, and distribution of medical cannabis products in Canada, the United States, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America, and internationally. The company operates through four segments: Beverage Alcohol, Cannabis, Distribution, and Wellness. It also offers medical and adult-use cannabis products; purchases and resells pharmaceutical and wellness products; and produces, markets, sells, and distributes beverage alcohol products, and hemp-based food and other wellness products. The company offers its products under the Tilray, Aphria, Broken Coast, Symbios, Navcora, Charlotte's Web, Montauk Brewing, Shock Top, 10 Barrell, Breckenridge Brewery, SweetWater Brewing, Breckenridge Distillery, Blue Point Brewing, Broken Coast, Redecan, XMG, Manitoba Harvest, CC Pharma, Good Supply, Solei, Mollo, Chowie Wowie, Original Stash, Canaca, RIFF, Bake Sale, The Batch, HEXO, Alpine Beer Company, Green Flash, Hiball Energy, Redhook Brewery, Square Mile Cider, Widmer Brothers Brewing, Runner's High Brewing Company, Happy Flower, and Fresh Hemp Foods brands. It sells its products to retailers, wholesalers, patients, physicians, hospitals, pharmacies, researchers, and governments, as well as direct to consumers. The company was formerly known as Tilray, Inc. and changed its name to Tilray Brands, Inc. in January 2022. Tilray Brands, Inc. is headquartered in Leamington, Canada. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TLRY/profile/
doomed
2 weeks ago
Get your Tilray’s alcool cancer fix today!
Need help now? We’re here to answer your questions about cancer. Contact the Cancer Information Helpline by email or live chat or call 1-888-939-3333.
Canadian Cancer Society Logo
Some sobering facts about alcohol and cancer risk
Home Cancer information Reduce your risk Limit alcohol Some sobering facts about alcohol and cancer risk
Did you know?
Drinking alcohol raises your risk of developing head and neck, breast, colorectal, esophageal, liver, stomach and pancreatic cancers.
Smoking and drinking together – and the number of drinks you have – also increases your risk of developing cancer. Tobacco and alcohol together are worse for you than either on its own.
Drinking about 3.5 drinks a day doubles or even triples your risk of developing cancer of the mouth, pharynx, larynx and esophagus.
Drinking about 3.5 drinks a day increases your risk of developing colorectal cancer and breast cancer by 1.5 times.
The less alcohol you drink, the lower your cancer risk.
Body showing that drinking alcohol raises your risk of developing mouth, breast, liver and other cancers
Our recommendation
Limit alcohol. To reduce your cancer risk, it’s best not to drink alcohol. Canada’s Guidance on Alcohol and Health outlines the health risks of alcohol and can help you make an informed decision on whether you drink and how much.
If you choose to drink alcohol, keep your cancer risk as low as possible by having no more than 2 standard drinks a week. The less alcohol you drink, the lower your cancer risk.
What is 1 standard drink?
One standard drink is about:
142 mL (5 oz) of wine, 12% alcohol content
43 mL (1.5 oz) of spirits, 40% alcohol content
341 mL (12 oz) of beer or cider, 5% alcohol
News
Market Data
Customized watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, OTC Markets Small-Cap, LSE and more.
Monksdream
3 days ago
MoneyMaker111
1 week ago
