doomed
6 hours ago
Growing at scale = RECALL
USA is no different than Canada…
R E C A L L
California operators and regulators scramble in wake of pesticide scandal
California cannabis brands, retailers and testing labs are scrambling to regain the confidence of consumers in the wake of a pesticide scandal that has poisoned good will in the state’s regulated industry.
Some retailers, such as Long Beach-based Catalyst Cannabis Co., are running their own independent lab tests to sniff out potentially contaminated products and identify their source.
Meanwhile, the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), the state’s chief marijuana regulator, is facing criticism from nearly every segment of the industry after a report by the Los Angeles Times and WeedWeek that ?highlighted the presence of pesticides in several regulated products.
Mr Bob Smith
8 hours ago
ImageCannabis Industry Faces Legal and Financial Challenges
Anthony Coniglio and Dan Ahrens Discuss Cannabis Industry’s Path Forward on “Trade to Black” Podcast.
Anthony Coniglio sees lawsuit dismissal as a path to higher courts.
Anthony Coniglio stresses the need for clear IRS rules in the cannabis sector.
Dan Ahrens highlights state actions like Ohio’s and Pennsylvania’s in driving market growth
In yesterday’s episode of the “Trade to Black” podcast we had special guests Anthony Coniglio, CEO of NewLake Capital (OTCQX:NLCP) and Dan Ahrens. The conversation discussed a complex situation where strategic litigation, state-level advancements, and financial regulations are shaping the future of cannabis stocks and the broader market.
The dismissal of a lawsuit by major marijuana companies aiming to block government prohibition enforcement is a notable development. While the initial reaction may have been disappointment, industry leaders view this as a strategic step towards higher courts. Anthony Coniglio, CEO of NewLake Capital, explains, “Many of the folks that brought the suit explained that it was designed to get to the Supreme Court. It was actually designed to fail at some point along the way so that it could make its way through the appellate process and ultimately get to the Supreme Court.”
This strategic litigation underscores a deliberate effort to challenge and potentially overturn outdated precedents, setting the stage for more favorable federal regulations. The recognition by the federal court that plaintiffs have standing to bring the suit further strengthens the industry’s position. Coniglio notes, “A real obstacle for the plaintiffs here would have been if the judge would have said that they have no standing…but actually the judge in the ruling…states that he does believe that they do indeed have standing.”
The financial scenario for cannabis companies remains challenging, particularly with the IRS reaffirming that cannabis businesses cannot claim normal business deductions. This is due to marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which deems it to have no medical use and a high potential for abuse. Coniglio emphasizes the need for clarity, “Having the IRS come out and say exactly what they’re going to do will be really important for investors because it will allow them to calculate what the liability will be.”
The potential rescheduling of cannabis to Schedule III would significantly reduce these financial burdens, allowing for standard business deductions and fostering a more stable financial environment. However, the exact implementation and timing remain uncertain, with industry leaders calling for clear and fair guidelines from the IRS.
State-level developments continue to drive cannabis industry growth. Ohio’s impending start of adult-use sales and Pennsylvania’s expected movement towards legalization are critical. Dan Ahrens from AdvisorShares highlights the influence of state actions, “Ohio pressures them a little bit…because they’re going to have that border business going to Ohio. Pennsylvania is coming.” These state-level advancements are crucial for the overall market, contributing to increased acceptance and normalization of cannabis use. The progress in Ohio and Pennsylvania exemplifies how regional markets can catalyze broader industry growth and influence neighboring states.
Investor sentiment in the cannabis industry is highly volatile, driven by regulatory news and market reactions. Recent sell-offs, partly due to misunderstandings about legal and regulatory announcements, highlight the importance of informed investor education. Ahrens stresses the significance of a focused investment strategy, “Our fund is very, very top heavy…And it’s top five holdings, top 10 holdings…There’s some stuff at the bottom that might have a little more torque, might have a little more upside.” Long-term investors are encouraged to focus on fundamental strengths and growth prospects, tuning out short-term volatility and headline-driven market fluctuations. The overall outlook remains positive, with anticipated regulatory advancements and state-level expansions providing a solid foundation for future growth.
The potential rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III is a critical focal point for the industry. While this move would significantly alleviate financial and operational burdens, complete descheduling remains a distant goal. Coniglio remains cautiously optimistic, “I think it takes a fair bit of time. I think it’s going to take a lot of research and a lot of normalization before we actually get descheduling.”
The Supreme Court decision overturning the Chevron deference, which allowed federal agencies significant power to interpret laws, adds another layer of complexity. Coniglio elaborates, “Just about every business in America has a federal agency that oversees that business and has some rulings out there that are guiding that business…It should be the courts that should arbitrate what the law is.” This decision could impact the cannabis industry’s regulatory framework, potentially shifting more interpretative power to the courts and away from federal agencies. However, the immediate effects on cannabis rescheduling remain uncertain.
The cannabis industry faces legal battles, state-level progress, financial challenges, and potential federal rescheduling. Staying informed and adaptable is crucial for long-term growth and strategic opportunities. Industry leaders emphasize the importance of clarity, strategic litigation, and informed investment strategies.
Mr Bob Smith
8 hours ago
Cannabis Industry Faces Legal and Financial Challenges
Posted July 2, 2024 on The Dales Report
ImageCannabis Industry Faces Legal and Financial Challenges
Anthony Coniglio and Dan Ahrens Discuss Cannabis Industry’s Path Forward on “Trade to Black” Podcast.
Anthony Coniglio sees lawsuit dismissal as a path to higher courts.
Anthony Coniglio stresses the need for clear IRS rules in the cannabis sector.
Dan Ahrens highlights state actions like Ohio’s and Pennsylvania’s in driving market growth
In yesterday’s episode of the “Trade to Black” podcast we had special guests Anthony Coniglio, CEO of NewLake Capital (OTCQX:NLCP) and Dan Ahrens. The conversation discussed a complex situation where strategic litigation, state-level advancements, and financial regulations are shaping the future of cannabis stocks and the broader market.
The dismissal of a lawsuit by major marijuana companies aiming to block government prohibition enforcement is a notable development. While the initial reaction may have been disappointment, industry leaders view this as a strategic step towards higher courts. Anthony Coniglio, CEO of NewLake Capital, explains, “Many of the folks that brought the suit explained that it was designed to get to the Supreme Court. It was actually designed to fail at some point along the way so that it could make its way through the appellate process and ultimately get to the Supreme Court.”
This strategic litigation underscores a deliberate effort to challenge and potentially overturn outdated precedents, setting the stage for more favorable federal regulations. The recognition by the federal court that plaintiffs have standing to bring the suit further strengthens the industry’s position. Coniglio notes, “A real obstacle for the plaintiffs here would have been if the judge would have said that they have no standing…but actually the judge in the ruling…states that he does believe that they do indeed have standing.”
The financial scenario for cannabis companies remains challenging, particularly with the IRS reaffirming that cannabis businesses cannot claim normal business deductions. This is due to marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which deems it to have no medical use and a high potential for abuse. Coniglio emphasizes the need for clarity, “Having the IRS come out and say exactly what they’re going to do will be really important for investors because it will allow them to calculate what the liability will be.”
The potential rescheduling of cannabis to Schedule III would significantly reduce these financial burdens, allowing for standard business deductions and fostering a more stable financial environment. However, the exact implementation and timing remain uncertain, with industry leaders calling for clear and fair guidelines from the IRS.
State-level developments continue to drive cannabis industry growth. Ohio’s impending start of adult-use sales and Pennsylvania’s expected movement towards legalization are critical. Dan Ahrens from AdvisorShares highlights the influence of state actions, “Ohio pressures them a little bit…because they’re going to have that border business going to Ohio. Pennsylvania is coming.” These state-level advancements are crucial for the overall market, contributing to increased acceptance and normalization of cannabis use. The progress in Ohio and Pennsylvania exemplifies how regional markets can catalyze broader industry growth and influence neighboring states.
Investor sentiment in the cannabis industry is highly volatile, driven by regulatory news and market reactions. Recent sell-offs, partly due to misunderstandings about legal and regulatory announcements, highlight the importance of informed investor education. Ahrens stresses the significance of a focused investment strategy, “Our fund is very, very top heavy…And it’s top five holdings, top 10 holdings…There’s some stuff at the bottom that might have a little more torque, might have a little more upside.” Long-term investors are encouraged to focus on fundamental strengths and growth prospects, tuning out short-term volatility and headline-driven market fluctuations. The overall outlook remains positive, with anticipated regulatory advancements and state-level expansions providing a solid foundation for future growth.
The potential rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III is a critical focal point for the industry. While this move would significantly alleviate financial and operational burdens, complete descheduling remains a distant goal. Coniglio remains cautiously optimistic, “I think it takes a fair bit of time. I think it’s going to take a lot of research and a lot of normalization before we actually get descheduling.”
The Supreme Court decision overturning the Chevron deference, which allowed federal agencies significant power to interpret laws, adds another layer of complexity. Coniglio elaborates, “Just about every business in America has a federal agency that oversees that business and has some rulings out there that are guiding that business…It should be the courts that should arbitrate what the law is.” This decision could impact the cannabis industry’s regulatory framework, potentially shifting more interpretative power to the courts and away from federal agencies. However, the immediate effects on cannabis rescheduling remain uncertain.
The cannabis industry faces legal battles, state-level progress, financial challenges, and potential federal rescheduling. Staying informed and adaptable is crucial for long-term growth and strategic opportunities. Industry leaders emphasize the importance of clarity, strategic litigation, and informed investment strategies.
Mr Bob Smith
8 hours ago
MARIJUANA POLITICS
Court dismisses lawsuit challenging federal Marijuana laws
Posted July 2, 2024 on Politico
ImageCourt dismisses lawsuit challenging federal Marijuana laws
The cannabis companies that filed the case are represented by the high-power law firm of David Boies and plan to appeal.
The U.S. District Court of Massachusetts dismissed a case challenging marijuana’s federal illegality on Monday, rejecting arguments made by cannabis companies against prohibition.
U.S. District Judge Mark Mastroianni, an Obama appointee, ruled that the plaintiffs have standing to sue, but in dismissing the lawsuit his order applied the same analysis that the Supreme Court did when it last addressed the issue in 2005 in Gonzales v. Raich.
“Only the Supreme Court can overrule its own decisions and lower courts must apply a precedent with direct application, even if there is a basis for believing the precedent has been undermined by later developments,” the order read.
The Massachusetts marijuana companies — represented by the powerhouse law firm of David Boies — had argued that the facts around marijuana have changed since the Supreme Court ruled on the issue.
The companies plan to appeal the ruling.
The details: While attorneys for the Justice Department challenged the marijuana companies’ standing, the court ruled that the plaintiffs in the case had grounds to sue due to the threat of federal enforcement.
“The court … finds Plaintiffs have shown there is a causal connection between their economic injuries and the CSA,” the order read.
But the court ruled in favor of the federal government when it came to the commerce clause and due process. In Raich, the Supreme Court ruled that even state-legal medical marijuana cultivation was subject to the commerce clause because of its potential impact on the interstate commerce of cannabis.
“This court must apply the same analytic framework in this case because Plaintiffs’ Commerce Clause claim is legally identical to the claim in Raich,” the order read.
The court also found that there is no precedent establishing a fundamental right to cultivate cannabis in the U.S.
“In the absence of a fundamental right to engage in the cultivation, processing, and distribution of marijuana, Plaintiffs cannot prevail on their substantive due process claim,” the order read.
More context: While plenty of pro-marijuana advocates have attempted to challenge marijuana’s federal illegality over the years, this case is notable because the plaintiffs are being represented by the law firm of Boies, best known for his successful antitrust litigation breaking up Microsoft.
Josh Schiller, partner at Boies Schiller Flexner and one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, said that the ruling was fair even though their constitutional arguments were rejected by the court.
“I’m pleased with substance of it because the court finally said we had standing,” Schiller said in an interview.
The timing of the order was “serendipitous,” he said, because of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that protected federal regulations from lawsuits. That ruling could imperil efforts by the Biden administration to loosen federal marijuana restrictions, making the Canna Provisions case all the more important to state cannabis actors, Schiller explained.
What’s next: Attorneys for the plaintiffs plan to appeal the decision to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. Whether that court decides to hear the case itself or punts it to the Supreme Court — “either outcome would be fine with us,” Schiller said.
Mr Bob Smith
8 hours ago
Cannabis legalization is not wanted.
MARIJUANA BUSINESS NEWS
Cannabis businesses lose court challenge to US Marijuana ban
Posted July 2, 2024 on Reuters
ImageCannabis businesses lose court challenge to US Marijuana ban
Federal Judge Dismisses Massachusetts Cannabis Businesses’ Challenge to Federal Marijuana Prohibition.
A federal judge on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by several Massachusetts cannabis businesses who argued the federal prohibition on marijuana is unconstitutional, saying only the U.S. Supreme Court could overturn its 2005 ruling upholding the law.
Cannabis businesses represented by prominent litigator David Boies had urged U.S. District Judge Mark Mastroianni in Springfield to conclude the Supreme Court's ruling could not be applied anymore because the landscape surrounding marijuana regulation had changed so much over two decades.
In that case, Gonzales v. Raich, the high court held that under the Commerce Clause, Congress had the authority to criminalize the possession and use of marijuana even in states that permitted its use for medical purposes as it did in the Controlled Substances Act.
But Mastroianni, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, wrote, opens new tab "the relief sought is inconsistent with binding Supreme Court precedent and, therefore, beyond the authority of this court to grant."
He rejected additional arguments that the ban violated the business' due process rights, saying "there is simply no precedent for concluding that the Plaintiffs enjoy a fundamental right to cultivate, process, and distribute marijuana."
Mastroianni stressed that the businesses were not without other avenues to seek relief, saying they could try to get their arguments before the Supreme Court and remain "free to advocate for marijuana to be reclassified or removed from the CSA."
The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard
Joshua Schiller, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at Boies Schiller & Flexner, in an interview said the ruling was expected and that his clients would press their case on appeal, which could ultimately involve taking the matter to the Supreme Court.
The lawsuit was filed in October by Massachusetts retailer Canna Provisions, marijuana delivery business owner Gyasi Sellers, grower Wiseacre Farm and publicly traded multistate operator Verano Holdings (VRNO.NLB), opens new tab.
In challenging enforcement of the CSA as applied to their businesses, the plaintiffs pointed to shifts in how the federal government approached marijuana enforcement as a reason to conclude the Supreme Court's 2005 ruling no longer applied.
As the number of states that have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use has grown to 38, including Massachusetts, the U.S. Justice Department and Congress have taken steps to abandon their efforts to block the drug's use, their lawyers argued.
Most recently in April, the Justice Department moved to make marijuana use a less serious federal crime by reclassifying it as a Schedule III drug instead of Schedule I, which is reserved for drugs with a high potential for abuse.
Boies during a hearing in May pointed to a 2021 statement that conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a different case in which he said the 2005 ruling's reasoning may no longer apply and that the ban "may no longer be necessary or proper."
The case is Canna Provisions Inc v. Garland, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 3:23-cv-30113.
For the plaintiffs: David Boies and Joshua Schiller of Boies Schiller & Flexner
For the U.S.: Jeremy Newman of the U.S. Department of Justice
Mr Bob Smith
8 hours ago
Cannabis legalization is not wanted.
MARIJUANA BUSINESS NEWS
Cannabis businesses lose court challenge to US Marijuana ban
Posted July 2, 2024 on Reuters
ImageCannabis businesses lose court challenge to US Marijuana ban
Federal Judge Dismisses Massachusetts Cannabis Businesses’ Challenge to Federal Marijuana Prohibition.
A federal judge on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by several Massachusetts cannabis businesses who argued the federal prohibition on marijuana is unconstitutional, saying only the U.S. Supreme Court could overturn its 2005 ruling upholding the law.
Cannabis businesses represented by prominent litigator David Boies had urged U.S. District Judge Mark Mastroianni in Springfield to conclude the Supreme Court's ruling could not be applied anymore because the landscape surrounding marijuana regulation had changed so much over two decades.
In that case, Gonzales v. Raich, the high court held that under the Commerce Clause, Congress had the authority to criminalize the possession and use of marijuana even in states that permitted its use for medical purposes as it did in the Controlled Substances Act.
But Mastroianni, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, wrote, opens new tab "the relief sought is inconsistent with binding Supreme Court precedent and, therefore, beyond the authority of this court to grant."
He rejected additional arguments that the ban violated the business' due process rights, saying "there is simply no precedent for concluding that the Plaintiffs enjoy a fundamental right to cultivate, process, and distribute marijuana."
Mastroianni stressed that the businesses were not without other avenues to seek relief, saying they could try to get their arguments before the Supreme Court and remain "free to advocate for marijuana to be reclassified or removed from the CSA."
The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard
Joshua Schiller, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at Boies Schiller & Flexner, in an interview said the ruling was expected and that his clients would press their case on appeal, which could ultimately involve taking the matter to the Supreme Court.
The lawsuit was filed in October by Massachusetts retailer Canna Provisions, marijuana delivery business owner Gyasi Sellers, grower Wiseacre Farm and publicly traded multistate operator Verano Holdings (VRNO.NLB), opens new tab.
In challenging enforcement of the CSA as applied to their businesses, the plaintiffs pointed to shifts in how the federal government approached marijuana enforcement as a reason to conclude the Supreme Court's 2005 ruling no longer applied.
As the number of states that have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use has grown to 38, including Massachusetts, the U.S. Justice Department and Congress have taken steps to abandon their efforts to block the drug's use, their lawyers argued.
Most recently in April, the Justice Department moved to make marijuana use a less serious federal crime by reclassifying it as a Schedule III drug instead of Schedule I, which is reserved for drugs with a high potential for abuse.
Boies during a hearing in May pointed to a 2021 statement that conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a different case in which he said the 2005 ruling's reasoning may no longer apply and that the ban "may no longer be necessary or proper."
The case is Canna Provisions Inc v. Garland, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 3:23-cv-30113.
For the plaintiffs: David Boies and Joshua Schiller of Boies Schiller & Flexner
For the U.S.: Jeremy Newman of the U.S. Department of Justice
doomed
16 hours ago
Rescheduling could be at risk after Supreme Court decision
Posted July 2, 2024 on Green Market Report
Panic is setting in over fears rescheduling may not happen after the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron ruling.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the 40-year-old case against Chevron, a move that was celebrated by many in the cannabis industry who thought it would open the door to federal legalization, via lawsuits against the Drug Enforcement Administration.
But now the opposite could happen; existing cannabis operators could be shut down.
Chevron case
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 40 years ago that federal agencies, specifically the Environmental Protection Agency in the Chevron case, “have the authority to regulate a specific this,” Leah Heise, a partner at Wolf Meyer and a Constellation Advisor at consulting firm Kearney told Green Market Report.
The basis for the ruling was that these agencies deal with issues that are scientifically complex, so they are best equipped to decide the rules. This typically led courts to defer to agency decisions, which made it very difficult to challenge those rules. That decision withstood more than 70 previous attempts to overturn it.
But with the latest ruling, that deferral can be more readily called into question, Heise said.
“If the federal agency is telling you … you can’t put X amount of CBD inside of a product, well, I’m going to sue the agency, and I’m going to tell the court that they don’t know what they’re talking about,” she said. “And the federal agency can no longer rely on the fact that (it is) supposed to be the expert in overseeing these things.”
At first glance, that could look like a great scenario for cannabis, with the outlaw industry able to tell the government to take a hike. Heise said that if she were advising a corporation or was inside of an MSO or another well-funded company, she’d be very carefully looking at every regulation and statute that applied.
“I’m going to see where I can push the boundaries so that I can put more revenue back into my profits and losses,” she said.
No more Schedule III?
Because of this, Heise thinks Schedule III is off the table.
“I’m concerned that not only will it be reversed, but that it may not happen because the agency is going to have to be far slower and more meditative about how they’re doing this rulemaking,” she said. “An agency’s goal, anytime they’re issuing regulations, they’re always thinking about the challenges that are coming. What’s their budget to enforce against these challenges? So they’re going to try to be as clear as possible, but I think we’re going to see it be very, very slow.”
Josh Schiller of Boies Schiller, who recently fought to reschedule cannabis agreed saying, “Along with Chevron, I think rescheduling is gone. I think it’ll be canceled.”
Schiller expects that after the Department of Justice’s current public comment period on the proposed rescheduling move is over, one or more anti-cannabis groups will file legal challenges to rescheduling in the conservative-friendly Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals – based in Louisiana – and that such challenges will be upheld based on the Chevron ruling.
“They will file cases, and they’ll say a court should decide whether marijuana is capable of being abused and/or is considered medicinal, and they’ll throw out everything the Biden Administration has done to try to get marijuana reclassified. So that effort, which was supposed to help the industry, will be stayed for a while, if not permanently,” Schiller predicted.
The agencies will be looking to Congress for more guidance on the laws instead of the other way around, much like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration asking Congress for assistance regulating CBD. But that’s no slam dunk either, as the FDA has failed to get any direction from lawmakers.
The ripple effect even hits the banks. Heise said, “Can banks rely on the fact that the federal government has said they won’t prosecute them if they work with cannabis? Will they pull out? Can we as an industry rely on a statement from the Department of Justice that they’re not going to prosecute? I mean, it puts every opinion letter, every opinion memo into question.”
Securities law
The ruling could also curb the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Green Market Report has covered numerous examples of fraudulent players taking advantage of cannabis investors. Often retail investors complain that the punishments for the bad actors are too light, and they never recover their lost investments.
With the Supreme Court limiting the agency’s power, cannabis investors will have nowhere to turn if they get ripped off. It could be open season for con artists in the world of cannabis penny stocks.
power11
16 hours ago
GOOD, JUST KEEP BUYING, EVENTUALLY YOUR GRAND KIDS IN 15-20 YEARS FROM NOW MIGHT THANK YOU !!!
PATIENCE IS THE NAME OF THE GAME AND APPARENTLY YOU HAVE CONVINCED YOURSELF OF THAT.
10 YEARS IS LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG WAIT SENIOR
IGGY IGGY, BUT DON'T MIND ME, KEEP ON LOADING UP, REMEMBER 30 CENTS IS COMING
nssrr5
6 days ago
Tilray Brands (NASDAQ:TLRY) has seen its stock drop by more than 25% from its January price, yet it still stands out as a top cannabis stock for long-term growth because of its inherent strength within its native market and increasing forays into sales diversification.
An often-overlooked strength of Tilray is its expanding craft beer business. Since acquiring several brands from Anheuser-Busch (NYSE:BUD) in 2023, Tilray has seen its alcohol sales double, providing essential diversification within the competitive cannabis market.
The craft beer sector holds significant potential that is frequently underestimated. As the push for broader recreational cannabis legalization advances through national legislative channels, Tilray’s well-established production, distribution, and operational network positions it uniquely to capitalize on this trend. Ultimately, this robust infrastructure could be instrumental in distributing cannabis products nationwide, giving Tilray a notable advantage over its competitors.
Tilray is currently pursuing an additional $250 million to fund strategic acquisitions and expand its business operations. While this move will result in share dilution, it also offers a compelling entry point for long-term investors seeking to benefit from the potential upside in undervalued cannabis stocks
doomed
6 days ago
Tilray Brands, Inc. (“Tilray Brands” or “Tilray”) (Nasdaq | TSX: TLRY), a leading global lifestyle and consumer packaged goods company inspiring and empowering the worldwide community to live their very best life, today announced the launch of Runner’s High Brewing Company, a new non-alcoholic brand from Tilray Beverages.
“With the explosive growth of running for sport or for hobby, there is an opportunity for a non-alcoholic brew that runners reach for after a run no matter the distance,” said Prinz Pinakatt, Chief Marketing Officer at Tilray Beverages. “We want Runner’s High to be the ‘beer of choice’ of runners and their community of social and casual runners, not just elite athletes.”
Runner’s High will make its debut at the Peachtree Road Race July 3-4, 2024, in Atlanta, Georgia. The race, put on by the Atlanta Track Club, is the world’s largest 10 kilometer running event, with 60,000 participants, and attracts both amateur and professional runners.
Runner's High Brewing Company's Official New Brews
Three next level non-alcoholic brews, Runner’s High Golden Wheat, Raspberry Wheat, and Dark Chocolate will be launching in Atlanta with several expansion markets to follow soon for 2024. Golden Wheat is a bright golden ale with citrus, pine needles and pink grapefruit aromas and only 90 calories. Raspberry Wheat is uniquely ruby red in color, with fully ripe raspberry and raspberry jam taste and aromas with 70 calories. Dark Chocolate is a rich dark brown brew, with tasting notes of moist chocolate cake and while rich in flavor, is only 60 calories.
Cannabis experts predicts another dud as there is no money in canna drinks.
Not part of the culture.
nssrr5
6 days ago
I am not sure why anyone would not be buying the crap out of Tilray with these ridiculous gift of PPS.
Tilray Brands (NASDAQ:TLRY) has seen its stock drop by more than 25% from its January price, yet it still stands out as a top cannabis stock for long-term growth because of its inherent strength within its native market and increasing forays into sales diversification.
An often-overlooked strength of Tilray is its expanding craft beer business. Since acquiring several brands from Anheuser-Busch (NYSE:BUD) in 2023, Tilray has seen its alcohol sales double, providing essential diversification within the competitive cannabis market.
The craft beer sector holds significant potential that is frequently underestimated. As the push for broader recreational cannabis legalization advances through national legislative channels, Tilray’s well-established production, distribution, and operational network positions it uniquely to capitalize on this trend. Ultimately, this robust infrastructure could be instrumental in distributing cannabis products nationwide, giving Tilray a notable advantage over its competitors.
Tilray is currently pursuing an additional $250 million to fund strategic acquisitions and expand its business operations. While this move will result in share dilution, it also offers a compelling entry point for long-term investors seeking to benefit from the potential upside in undervalued cannabis stocks
KILLAZILLA
2 weeks ago
WRONG!!!! KEEP UP DUMBASS!!!!!!!
https://www.inside.beer/news/detail/canada-molsoncoors-sells-majority-stake-in-cannabis-company/
Less than one year after Molson Coors announced to exit Truss USA and the business with cannabiol infused beverages (CBD) in the United States (inside.beer, 17.11.2022), its subsidiary Molson Coors Canada has also sold its 57.5% stake in Truss Beverage Co, Canada.
Buyer is Tilray Brands, a cannabis-lifestyle and consumer packaged goods company with operations in Canada, the United States, Europe, Australia, and Latin America. Tilray Brands closed in June its acquisition of Canadian cannabis producer Hexo Corp., thus giving it access to Hexo’s joint venture with Molson Coors, Truss Beverage Co. The acquisition created what Tilray described as “Canada’s largest cannabis company by revenue.” (inside.beer, 23.6.2023)
Tilray has recently expanded its product offerings and emerged as a prominent player in the consolidation of the US craft beer industry.
Trade like a pro: Leverage real-time discussions and market-moving ideas to outperform.
Bazwar6
1 week ago
Hot Features
Premium
