Item
1. Business
Company
Overview
We
were incorporated on July 5, 2011 in the State of Delaware. We are a development stage company that has accumulated an inventory
of real property assets but has not generated revenues from our business operations. Our original business plan was to develop
an “L-3” stretching apparatus to be used by gym enthusiasts for their exercise activities.
On
July 3, 2013, we changed our name to Longview Real Estate, Inc. in connection with the pursuit of a new business plan. We are
now engaged in the business of acquiring a portfolio of distressed properties in certain strategic areas at deep discounts, rehabilitating
these properties and selling or leasing them for the quickest and highest return possible.
On
January 30, 2014, we changed our name to Cannabis-Rx, Inc. Accordingly, in additional to acquiring and selling/leasing real estate
assets, we have decided to expand our business and cater to the real estate needs of the regulated cannabis industry, in states
and other locations where such business is licensed and permitted. In this niche market, we plan to purchase real estate assets
and lease growing space and related facilities to licensed marijuana growers and dispensary owners for their operations.
We
also intend to expand our business in the next twelve months to provide financing and consulting services to the cannabis industry
in addition to our commercial real estate solutions. The extent of our pursuit into this new line of business is still under consideration,
and we are considering services including regulatory compliance and license application. We believe there is a significant amount
of business in this space and we have changed our name to better reflect our business direction.
We
have raised $16,000,000 through the sale of unsecured promissory notes and we recently signed a secured drawdown agreement providing
us access to an additional $14,000,000. We intend to deploy these funds into business operations that we believe best suited in
the cannabis industry, as well as continue to pursue our real estate activities.
Proposed
Cannabis Activities
Legal
Considerations in Cannabis Related Activities
The
Cole Memo
We
intend to conduct rigorous due diligence to verify the legality of all activities that we engage in. We realize that there is
a discrepancy between the laws in some states, which permit the distribution and sale of medical and recreational marijuana, from
federal law that prohibits any such activities. The Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) makes it illegal under federal
law to manufacture, distribute, or dispense marijuana. Many states impose and enforce similar prohibitions. Notwithstanding the
federal ban, 21 states and the District of Columbia have legalized certain marijuana-related activity. These 21 states include:
Alaska, Michigan, Oregon, Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Rhode Island, California, Illinois, Nevada, Vermont, Colorado, Maine, New
Hampshire, Washington, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, Massachusetts and New Mexico.
In
light of these developments, U.S. Department of Justice Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole issued a memorandum (the “Cole
Memo”) to all United States Attorneys providing updated guidance to federal prosecutors concerning marijuana enforcement
under the CSA. The Cole Memo guidance applies to all of DOJ’s federal enforcement activity, including civil enforcement
and criminal investigations and prosecutions, concerning marijuana in all states.
The
Cole Memo reiterates Congress’s determination that marijuana is a dangerous drug and that the illegal distribution and sale
of marijuana is a serious crime that provides a significant source of revenue to large-scale criminal enterprises, gangs, and
cartels. The Cole Memo notes that DOJ is committed to enforcement of the CSA consistent with those determinations. It also notes
that DOJ is committed to using its investigative and prosecutorial resources to address the most significant threats in the most
effective, consistent, and rational way. In furtherance of those objectives, the Cole Memo provides guidance to DOJ attorneys
and law enforcement to focus their enforcement resources on persons or organizations whose conduct interferes with any one or
more of the following important priorities (the “Cole Memo priorities”):
|
•
|
Preventing
the distribution of marijuana to minors;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some form
to other states;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover or pretext for the trafficking
of other illegal drugs or other illegal activity;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated
with marijuana use;
|
|
•
|
Preventing
the growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental
dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands; and
|
|
•
|
Preventing
marijuana possession or use on federal property.
|
Deputy
Attorney General Cole is issuing supplemental guidance directing that prosecutors also consider these enforcement priorities with
respect to federal money laundering, unlicensed money transmitter, and BSA offenses predicated on marijuana-related violations
of the CSA.
FinCEN
The
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) provided guidance on February 14, 2014 about how financial institutions
can provide services to marijuana-related businesses consistent with their Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) obligations. For
purposes of the FinCEN guidelines, a “financial institution” includes any person doing business in one or more of
the following capacities:
|
•
|
bank
(except bank credit card systems);
|
|
•
|
broker
or dealer in securities;
|
|
•
|
money
services business;
|
|
•
|
a
person subject to supervision by any state or federal bank supervisory authority.
|
In
general, the decision to open, close, or refuse any particular account or relationship should be made by each financial institution
based on a number of factors specific to that institution. These factors may include its particular business objectives, an evaluation
of the risks associated with offering a particular product or service, and its capacity to manage those risks effectively. Thorough
customer due diligence is a critical aspect of making this assessment.
In
assessing the risk of providing services to a marijuana-related business, a financial institution should conduct customer due
diligence that includes: (i) verifying with the appropriate state authorities whether the business is duly licensed and registered;
(ii) reviewing the license application (and related documentation) submitted by the business for obtaining a state license to
operate its marijuana-related business; (iii) requesting from state licensing and enforcement authorities available information
about the business and related parties; (iv) developing an understanding of the normal and expected activity for the business,
including the types of products to be sold and the type of customers to be served (e.g., medical versus recreational customers);
(v) ongoing monitoring of publicly available sources for adverse information about the business and related parties; (vi) ongoing
monitoring for suspicious activity, including for any of the red flags described in this guidance; and (vii) refreshing information
obtained as part of customer due diligence on a periodic basis and commensurate with the risk. With respect to information regarding
state licensure obtained in connection with such customer due diligence, a financial institution may reasonably rely on the accuracy
of information provided by state licensing authorities, where states make such information available.
As
part of its customer due diligence, a financial institution should consider whether a marijuana-related business implicates one
of the Cole Memo priorities or violates state law. This is a particularly important factor for a financial institution to consider
when assessing the risk of providing financial services to a marijuana-related business. Considering this factor also enables
the financial institution to provide information in BSA reports pertinent to law enforcement’s priorities. A financial institution
that decides to provide financial services to a marijuana-related business would be required to file suspicious activity reports.
While
we believe we do not qualify as a financial institution in the United States, we cannot be certain that we do not fall under the
scope of the FinCEN guidelines. As such, as we engage in financing activities, we intend to adhere to the guidance of FinCEN in
conducting and monitoring our financial transactions. Because this area of the law is uncertain but expected to evolve rapidly,
we believe that following FinCEN’s guidelines will help us best operate in a prudent, reasonable and acceptable manner.
There is no assurance, however, that our activities will not violate some aspect of the CSA. If we are found to violate the federal
statute or any other in connection with our activities, our company could face serious criminal and civil sanctions. Moreover,
since the use of marijuana is illegal under federal law, we may have difficulty acquiring or maintaining bank accounts and insurance
and our shareholders may find it difficult to deposit their stock with brokerage firms.
Local
Laws
Local
laws at the city, county and municipal level add an additional layer of complexity to legalized marijuana. Despite a state’s
having adopted legislation legalizing marijuana, cities, counties and municipalities, within the state seem to have the ability
to otherwise restrict marijuana activities, including but not limited to cultivation, retail or consumption.
Zoning
sets forth the approved use of land in any given city, county or municipality. Zoning is set by local governments and may otherwise
be restricted by state laws, for example, under certain state laws a seller of liquor may not be allowed to operate within 1,000
feet of a school. There are and or will be similar restrictions imposed on marijuana operators, which will restrict how and where
marijuana operations can be located and the manner and size of which they can grow and operate. Additionally, zoning is subject
to change, properties can be re-zoned and a given zoning may be withdrawn. How properties are zoned will have a direct impact
on our business operations.
Cannabis
Commercial Real Estate
We
intend to generate revenue by owning and leasing specialized real estate to licensed cannabis growers. As such, we intend to actively
locate the best opportunities for real property acquisitions in the fast growing cannabis industry. The acquisition process will
follow the same general format and procedures that we already have in place with our non-cannabis related real property acquisitions,
which are described more fully below in this Annual Report. The purchase of specialized cannabis properties, however, will also
entail researching industrial zoned real estate where we believe state and local law now permits, or in the future permit may
permit, the legal cultivation of cannabis.
We
do not grow, harvest, cultivate, possess, distribute or sell cannabis. We do not plan to obtain a license to do so, or in any
way engage in such activity, now, or in the future. However, because we may act as landlord to licensed tenant entities who do
directly engage in the cultivation, distribution and sale of cannabis, we plan to exercise appropriate and reasonable care to
screen our tenants and verify that our tenants maintain proper licenses which require them operate in compliance with the state
and local rules and in a way that does not interfere with the Cole Memo priorities.
We
are mindful of the risks involved in leasing property to those involved in the cannabis industry. The Obama administration has
effectively stated that it is not an efficient use of resources to direct federal law enforcement agencies to prosecute those
lawfully abiding by state-designated laws allowing the use and distribution of medical marijuana. However, there is no guarantee
that the administration will not change its stated policy regarding the low-priority enforcement of federal laws. Additionally,
any new administration that follows could change this policy and decide to enforce the federal laws strongly. Any such change
in the federal government’s enforcement of current federal laws could cause significant financial damage to us and our shareholders
.
Further,
and while we do not intend to harvest, cultivate, possess, distribute or sell cannabis, by leasing facilities to growers of marijuana,
we could be deemed to be participating in marijuana cultivation or aiding and abetting, which remains illegal under federal law,
and exposes us to potential criminal liability, with the additional risk that our properties could be subject to civil forfeiture
proceedings.
In
addition, because the scrutiny FinCEN placed on financial institutions, it may be difficult for tenants to acquire and maintain
bank accounts. This could greatly interfere with our business operations.
Financing
Cannabis Related Operations
We
are actively pursuing investment opportunities in the rapidly growing cannabis industry in the United States and Canada. We intend
to invest in companies positioned to make a significant impact within the licensed cannabis industry. We believe these early stage
investments provide emerging companies with access to larger capital sums to help elevate their status from start-ups to mature
and durable brand leaders.
Since
2001, Health Canada has granted access to marijuana for medical purposes to Canadians who have had the support of their physicians.
Once approved under the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR), individuals have three options for obtaining a legal supply
of dried marijuana: 1) they can apply under the MMAR to access Health Canada’s supply of dried marijuana; 2) they can apply
for a personal-use production licence; or 3) they can designate someone to cultivate on their behalf with a designated-person
production licence.
In
response to concerns from stakeholders that this system was open to abuse, and after extensive consultations, the Government of
Canada introduced the new Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations that were published on June 19, 2013. The new regulations
aim to treat marijuana as much as possible like any other narcotic used for medical purposes by creating conditions for a new,
commercial industry that is responsible for its production and distribution.
During
the transition period, the new Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations and the current Program will operate concurrently. Authorized
individuals have the option to remain with the current Program until March 31, 2014, or to switch to a licensed producer as soon
as they become available. The production of marijuana for medical purposes in private residences will end March 31, 2014, as will
the Health Canada supply.
As
of April 1, 2014, the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations will be repealed and the only way to access marijuana for medical purposes
will be through commercial, licensed prod
ucers. At this time the Marijuana Medical Access Program will also end.
The
MMAP is committed to providing seriously ill Canadians with effective and efficient services. As part of this commitment, the
MMAP strives to meet the following service standards:
|
•
|
Processing
applications within 10 weeks of receiving a complete application, including new applications,
applications to renew, or applications to amend an existing authorization/licence.
|
|
•
|
Shipping
Health Canada supply orders (dried marijuana and/or marijuana seeds) to program participants
within 14 days of receiving the order; and
|
|
•
|
Returning
calls within 5 business days.
|
Licensed
producers can be authorized to possess, sell provide, ship, deliver, transport, destroy, produce, export and/or import marijuana
for medical purposes under the Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations.
We
recently made a US$187,000 loan to Organigram, Inc. in connection with its licensed medical marijuana operation in New Brunswick,
Canada.
On
March 26, 2014, Organigram, Inc. obtained a license from Health Canada under the MMAP. The license is effective as of March 26,
2014. and is valid until June 26, 2014. The license is for medical marijuana only for the site specified in the company’s
license. The company expects to get a longer license covering five years once a single condition of the license has been met,
which the company expects to occur in the coming weeks.
We
intend to search out investment opportunities such as this that we believe will capitalize on the fast-growing cannabis industry.
Real
Estate Activities
A
weakened economy, a record number of foreclosures, and rising unemployment claims in certain geographic areas has created “the
perfect storm” for both the real estate market and to the economy at large. We see the current maelstrom as a prime opportunity
to acquire, renovate, and resell or rent properties. We intend to purchase distressed properties, perform renovations on those
properties to increase their value, livability, and attractiveness, and then sell the properties or keep them for value as rental
properties.
During
2013 and through the date of this report, we have raised $16,000,000 by selling low interest promissory notes (the “Notes”)
to accredited investors pursuant to the terms of Note Purchase Agreements. The Notes accrue interest at the rate of 5% per annum
and are due and payable twenty four months from the date of issuance, subject to acceleration in the event of default and may
be prepaid in whole or in part without penalty or premium. We have recently entered into a secured drawdown agreement that provides
us access to an additional $14,000,000 to finance our business operations.
During
2013 and through March 31, 2014, we have acquired 37 properties for a total cost of $11,094,641.00. 6 of the 37 properties have
been rehabilitated and sold or are under contract for sale. 5 of the 37 properties have been rehabilitated and are listed for
sale. The remaining 26 properties are in the process of rehabilitation. To date, we have achieved an average IRR% (internal rate
of return) of 32.43%. We project future IRR’s to be less than what we achieved, at roughly at 25%. With all our properties
we aim to immediately crystallize our gain by listing and selling the projects at the time we complete the rehabilitation. We
will however, reassess all properties at the time of completion and if there is an opportunity to earn a larger return by holding
the property long-term and leasing it as opposed to immediately liquidating the asset we would exercise that option. We would
also evaluate adding a leveraged facility in order to maximize the return. As of March 31, 2014 we now own three classes of real
estate: single family, multi-family and commercial, all of which are located in Florida, Illinois, California and Washington.
Some of these properties are held by us and some are held in our wholly-owned subsidiary, Praetorian Capital, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company formed on October 22, 2013.
Our
plan is to use monies invested in our company to purchase and/or develop further residential properties in the various US markets
that, while presently struggling, have historically demonstrated strong growth and positive general economic conditions. We have
a network of “in market partners” that consists of brokers, developers, builders, lenders, banks and other industry
contacts to identify and acquire real estate assets that have the potential for significant return on investment. Every asset
acquisition will be negotiated and analyzed by our management team and those we work with to assist with the selection, purchase,
rehabilitation and resale of all assets.. Asset selection will be based on several factors such as:
|
1.
|
The
acquisition price compared to properties that are similar in nature and location;
|
|
2.
|
The
likelihood of increase in potential value within the next one to five years;
|
|
3.
|
The
ability to generate income through leasing all or a portion of the asset;
|
|
4.
|
The
ability to successfully market and sell the asset in six months to one year;
|
|
5.
|
The
degree to which the asset is located in a favorable area with growth potential; and
|
|
6.
|
The
quality of workmanship condition of the asset (for improved buildings).
|
In
negotiating and analyzing each project, our management team will prepare pro forma financial analysis, gather and review ownership
information, comparable properties, income information, and general market analysis. Management will then determine if the property
should be purchased and any conditions of the purchase. For those properties that management deems worthwhile, we will then attempt
to negotiate favorable purchase terms and conditions.
We
will be responsible for maintaining and rehabilitating assets owned by the company. These responsibilities include the following:
|
1.
|
Paying
property taxes, Special Improvement District (SID) fees, and other fees or taxes;
|
|
2.
|
Maintaining
appropriate insurance coverage;
|
|
3.
|
Hiring
qualified property management professionals to manage income producing assets. Any such
property management arrangements will be paid from income generated from the asset;
|
|
4.
|
Managing
with consultants, engineers, developers and general contractors for any properties that
require additional development; and
|
|
5.
|
Securing
and guaranteeing (if necessary) any loans required for the property.
|
When
we determine that an opportunity exists to sell assets owned that we own, we will be responsible for managing the marketing and
sale of the property. This may include the following:
|
1.
|
Hiring
qualified real estate broker to list the property for sale and to find a buyer;
|
|
2.
|
Determine
the appropriate sales price;
|
|
3.
|
Negotiate
sales terms with potential buyers; and
|
|
4.
|
Oversee
the closing of escrow and disbursement of sale proceeds.
|
Typically,
if a 20% or greater return on investment can be achieved, the home will be liquidated. However, if greater profit can be realized
by holding the property we will lease it to a tenant. To date, we have liquidated assets and not held or tenanted any assets.
Both strategies are effective at maximizing returns. The short-term strategy can provide high returns and quick turnover, while
the long-term leasing strategy can provide strong capitalization rates and appreciation potential, so long as the United States
housing market normalizes back to pre 2007 pricing.
We
are currently active in both foreclosure/trustee auctions and regular private party sales. Our goal at the foreclosure auction
is to buy assets below their current market value, usually aiming for a 20-30% discount. We work with our in-market partners who
provide daily updates on properties as well as current market conditions through the use of analytics specific to each region.
We feel that in today’s real estate market it’s crucial to stay out in front of the market whenever possible. This
strategic advantage is crucial to our success in each market because it allows us to be selective in targeting specific assets
and each area. Furthermore, we go the extra mile on each property scrutinizing all things related to the property, area and the
market that could impact our success so that we mitigate the risk of loss or a low return.
Competition
We
believe that the current market for properties that meet our investment objectives is extremely competitive and many of our competitors
have greater resources than we do. We compete with numerous other entities engaged in real estate investment activities, including
individuals, corporations, banks and insurance company investment accounts, other REITs, real estate limited partnerships, the
U.S. Government and other entities, to acquire, manage and sell real estate properties and real estate related assets. Many of
our expected competitors enjoy significant competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital
and enhanced operating efficiencies. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable investments
may increase.
Compliance
with Federal, State and Local Environmental Law
Under
various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous real property owner or
operator may be liable for the cost of removing or remediating hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in such property. These
costs could be substantial. Such laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible
for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which
property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require substantial expenditures or prevent us
from entering into leases with prospective tenants that may be impacted by such laws. Environmental laws provide for sanctions
for noncompliance and may be enforced by government agencies or, in certain circumstances, by private parties. Certain environmental
laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for the release of and exposure to hazardous substances, including
asbestos-containing materials. Third parties may seek recovery from real property owners or operators for personal injury or property
damage associated with exposure to released hazardous substances. The cost of defending against claims of liability, of complying
with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of paying person injury claims could
significantly affect our operating results and financial condition.
Employees
Mr.
Llorn Kylo, our CEO, is our sole employee. We recently hired Munjit Johal as our new CFO and he will start on April 1, 2014. If
business is successful and we experience rapid growth, we may be required to hire new personnel to improve, implement and administer
our operational, management, financial and accounting systems.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
This
investment has a high degree of risk. Before you invest you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below.
If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed and the
value of our stock could go down. This means you could lose all or a part of your investment.
Because
we have no operating history in the cannabis industry, we may not succeed.
While
our CEO, Llorn Kylo, has experience in real estate transactions, we have no specific operating history or experience in procuring,
building out or leasing real estate for agricultural purposes, specifically marijuana grow facilities, or with respect to any
other activity in the cannabis industry. Moreover, we are subject to all risks inherent in a developing a new business enterprise.
Our likelihood of success must be considered in light of the problems, expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays frequently
encountered in connection with establishing a new business and the competitive and regulatory environment in which we operate.
For example, the medical marijuana industry is new and may not succeed, particularly should the federal government change course
and decide to prosecute those dealing in medical marijuana. If that happens there may not be an adequate market for our properties
or other activities we propose to engage in.
You
should further consider, among other factors, our prospects for success in light of the risks and uncertainties encountered by
companies that, like us, are in their early stages. For example, unanticipated expenses, delays and or complications with build
outs, zoning issues, legal disputes with neighbors, local governments, communities and or tenants. We may not successfully address
these risks and uncertainties or successfully implement our operating strategies. If we fail to do so, it could materially harm
our business to the point of having to cease operations and could impair the value of our common stock to the point investors
may lose their entire investment.
Because
we may be unable to identify and or successfully acquire properties which are suitable for our business, our financial condition
may be negatively affected.
Our
business plan involves the identification and the successful acquisition of properties which are zoned for marijuana businesses,
including grow and retail. The properties we acquire will be leased to licensed marijuana operators. Local governments must approve
and adopt zoning ordinances for marijuana facilities and retail dispensaries. A lack of properly zoned real estate may reduce
our prospects and limit our opportunity for growth and or increase the cost at which suitable properties are available to us.
Conversely a surplus of real estate zoned for marijuana establishments may reduce demand and prices we are able to charge for
properties we may have previously acquired.
Because
our business is dependent upon continued market acceptance by consumers, any negative trends will adversely affect our business
operations.
We
are substantially dependent on continued market acceptance and proliferation of consumers of medical marijuana. We believe that
as marijuana becomes more accepted the stigma associated with marijuana use will diminish and as a result consumer demand will
continue to grow. And while we believe that the market and opportunity in the marijuana space continues to grow, we cannot predict
the future growth rate and size of the market. Any negative outlook on the marijuana industry will adversely affect our business
operations.
In
addition, it is believed by many that large well-funded businesses may have a strong economic opposition to the cannabis industry.
We believe that the pharmaceutical industry clearly does not want to cede control of any product that could generate significant
revenue. For example, medical marijuana will likely adversely impact the existing market for the current “marijuana pill”
sold by the mainstream pharmaceutical industry, should marijuana displace other drugs or encroach upon the pharmaceutical industry’s
products. The pharmaceutical industry is well funded with a strong and experienced lobby that eclipses the funding of the medical
marijuana movement. Any inroads the pharmaceutical could make in halting the impending cannabis industry could have a detrimental
impact on our proposed business.
Because
marijuana is illegal under federal law, we could be subject to criminal and civil sanctions for engaging in activities that violate
those laws.
The
U.S. Government classifies marijuana as a schedule-I controlled substance. As a result, marijuana is an illegal substance under
federal law. Even in those jurisdictions in which the use of medical marijuana has been legalized at the state level, its prescription
is a violation of federal law. The United States Supreme Court has ruled in
United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop
.
and
Gonzales v. Raich
that it is the federal government that has the right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for
medical purposes. Therefore, federal law criminalizing the use of marijuana pre-empts state laws that legalizes its use for medicinal
purposes.
As
of January 31, 2014, 21 states and the District of Columbia allow its citizens to use medical marijuana. Additionally, voters
in the states of Colorado and Washington approved ballot measures last November to legalize cannabis for adult use. The state
laws are in conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act, which makes marijuana use and possession illegal on a national
level. The Obama administration has effectively stated that it is not an efficient use of resources to direct law federal law
enforcement agencies to prosecute those lawfully abiding by state-designated laws allowing the use and distribution of medical
marijuana. However, there is no guarantee that the administration will not change its stated policy regarding the low-priority
enforcement of federal laws. Additionally, any new administration that follows could change this policy and decide to enforce
the federal laws strongly. Any such change in the federal government's enforcement of current federal laws could cause significant
financial damage to us and our shareholders.
Should
such a change occur, our business operations would be affected. If our marijuana tenants are forced to shut their operations,
we would need to seek to replace those tenants with non-marijuana tenants, who would likely expect to pay lower rents. Moreover
if the marijuana industry were forced to shut down at once, it would result in a high amount of vacancies at once and create a
surplus of supply, driving leases and property values lower. Additionally, we would realize an economic loss on any and all improvements
made to the properties that were specific to the marijuana industry and we would likely lose any and all investments in the US
market that were marijuana related.
Further,
and while we do not intend to harvest, cultivate, possess, distribute or sell cannabis, by leasing facilities and financing growers
of medicinal marijuana, we could be deemed to be participating in marijuana cultivation or aiding and abetting, which remains
illegal under federal law, and exposes us to potential criminal liability, with the additional risk that our properties could
be subject to civil forfeiture proceedings. Moreover, since the use of marijuana is illegal under federal law, we may have difficulty
acquiring or maintaining bank accounts and insurance and our shareholders may find it difficult to deposit their stock with brokerage
firms.
Laws
and regulations affecting the regulated marijuana industry are constantly changing, which could detrimentally affect our proposed
operations, and we cannot predict the impact that future regulations may have on us.
Local,
state and federal medical marijuana laws and regulations are broad in scope and subject to evolving interpretations, which could
require us to incur substantial costs associated with compliance or alter our business plan. In addition, violations of these
laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our business and result in a material adverse effect on its operations.
In addition, it is possible that regulations may be enacted in the future that will be directly applicable to our proposed business.
We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, nor can we determine what effect
additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business.
FDA
regulation of marijuana and the possible registration of facilities where medical marijuana is grown could negatively affect the
cannabis industry which would directly affect our financial condition.
Should
the federal government legalize marijuana for medical use, it is possible that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would
seek to regulate it under the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938. Additionally, the FDA may issue rules and regulations including
cGMPs (certified good manufacturing practices) related to the growth, cultivation, harvesting and processing of medical marijuana.
Clinical trials may be needed to verify efficacy and safety. It is also possible that the FDA would require that facilities where
medical marijuana is grown be registered with the FDA and comply with certain federally prescribed regulations. In the event that
some or all of these regulations are imposed, we do not know what the impact would be on the medical marijuana industry, what
costs, requirements and possible prohibitions may be enforced. If we or our tenants are unable to comply with the regulations
and or registration as prescribed by the FDA, we and or our tenants may be unable to continue to operate their and our business
in its current form or at all.
Our
clients and our company may have difficulty accessing the service of banks, which may make it difficult to contract for real estate
needs.
On
February 14, 2014, The U.S. government issued rules allowing banks to legally provide financial services to state-licensed marijuana
businesses. A memorandum issued by the Justice Department to federal prosecutors re-iterated guidance previously given, this time
to the financial industry that banks can do business with legal marijuana businesses and “may not” be prosecuted.
The Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued guidelines to banks that “it is possible
to provide financial services"” to state-licensed marijuana businesses and still be in compliance with federal anti-money
laundering laws. The guidance falls short of the explicit legal authorization that banking industry officials had pushed the government
to provide and to date it is not clear what if any banks have relied on the guidance and taken on legal marijuana companies as
clients. The aforementioned policy may be administration dependent and a change in presidential administrations may cause a policy
reversal and retraction of current policies, wherein legal marijuana businesses may not have access to the banking industry. We
could be subject to sanctions if we are found to be a financial institution and not in harmony with FinCET guidelines. Also, the
inability of potential clients in our target market to open accounts and otherwise use the service of banks may make it difficult
for them to contract with us.
Because
we buy, sell and lease property, we will be subject to general real estate risks.
We
will be subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate, including: (a) changes in general economic or local
conditions; (b) changes in supply of, or demand for, similar or competing properties in the area; (c) bankruptcies, financial
difficulties or defaults by tenants or other parties; (d) increases in operating costs, such as taxes and insurance; (e) the inability
to achieve full stabilized occupancy at rental rates adequate to produce targeted returns; (f) periods of high interest rates
and tight money supply; (g) excess supply of rental properties in the market area; (h) liability for uninsured losses resulting
from natural disasters or other perils; (i) liability for environmental hazards; and (j) changes in tax, real estate, environmental,
zoning or other laws or regulations. For these and other reasons, no assurance can be given that we will be profitable.
Because
our business model depends upon the availability of private financing, any change in our ability to raise money will adversely
affect our financial condition.
Our
ability to acquire, operate and sell properties, engage in the business activities that we have planned and achieve positive financial
performance depends, in large measure, on our ability to obtain financing in amounts and on terms that are favorable. The capital
markets in the United States have recently undergone a turbulent period in which lending was severely restricted. Although there
appears to be signs that financial institutions are resuming lending, the market has not yet returned to its pre-2008 state. Obtaining
favorable financing in the current environment remains challenging. We recently entered into a drawdown agreement for $14 million.
In the event the lender is unable to finance on our drawdowns, we will not be able to implement our business plan and our financial
performance could be adversely affected.
Because
we will compete with others for suitable properties, competition will result in higher costs that could materially affect our
financial condition.
We
will experience competition for real estate investments from individuals, corporations and other entities engaged in real estate
investment activities, many of whom have greater financial resources than us. Competition for investments may have the effect
of increasing costs and reducing returns to our investors.
Because
there may be restrictions on the transfer and further encumbrance of our properties, there may be negative consequences that will
affect our financial condition.
The
terms of our drawdown agreement allow properties that we acquire to be collateral to secure the loans we receive. We may be prohibited
from transferring or further encumbering the properties or any interest in our properties except with a lender’s prior consent.
The loans may provide that upon violation of these restrictions, a lender may declare the entire amount of the loan to be immediately
due and payable. If we are unable to obtain replacement financing or otherwise fail to immediately repay the loans in full, the
lender may invoke its remedies under the loan, including proceeding with a foreclosure sale that could result in our losing our
entire interest in the properties subject to the loans.
Because
we are liable for hazardous substances on our properties, environmental liabilities are possible and can be costly.
Federal,
state and local laws impose liability on a landowner for releases or the otherwise improper presence on the premises of hazardous
substances. This liability is without regard to fault for, or knowledge of, the presence of such substances. A landowner may be
held liable for hazardous materials brought onto a property before it acquired title and for hazardous materials that are not
discovered until after it sells the property. Similar liability may occur under applicable state law. Sellers of properties may
make only limited representations as to the absence of hazardous substances. If any hazardous materials are found within our properties
in violation of law at any time, we may be liable for all cleanup costs, fines, penalties and other costs. This potential liability
will continue after we sell the properties and may apply to hazardous materials present within the properties before we acquire
the properties. If losses arise from hazardous substance contamination which cannot be recovered from a responsible party, the
financial viability of the properties may be adversely affected. It is possible that we will purchase properties with known or
unknown environmental problems which may require material expenditures for remediation.
Because
we may not be adequately insured, we could experience significant liability for uninsured events.
While
we intend to carry comprehensive insurance on our properties, including fire, liability and extended coverage insurance, there
are certain risks that may be uninsurable or not insurable on terms that management believes to be economical. For example, management
may not obtain insurance against floods, terrorism, mold-related claims, or earthquake insurance. If such an event occurs to,
or causes the damage or destruction of, a property, we could suffer financial losses.
If
we are found non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, we will be subject to significant liabilities.
If
any of our properties are not in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (the “ADA”),
we may be required to pay for any required improvements. Under the ADA, public accommodations must meet certain federal requirements
related to access and use by disabled persons. The ADA requirements could require significant expenditures and could result in
the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants. We cannot assure that ADA violations do not or will not exist
at any of our properties.
If
we are unable to manage growth, our operations could be adversely affected.
Our
progress is expected to require the full utilization of our management, financial and other resources. Our ability to manage growth
effectively will depend on our ability to improve and expand operations, including our financial and management information systems,
and to recruit, train and manage personnel. There can be no absolute assurance that management will be able to manage growth effectively.
If
we do not properly manage the growth of our business, we may experience significant strains on our management and operations and
disruptions in our business. Various risks arise when companies and industries grow quickly. If our business or industry grows
too quickly, our ability to conduct business in a timely and efficient manner could be challenged. We may also experience delays
in the turnover of properties and with activities on the cannabis side of our business.. Our failure to properly manage the growth
that we or our industry might experience could negatively impact our ability to execute on our operating plan and, accordingly,
could have an adverse impact on our business, our cash flow and results of operations, and our reputation with our current or
potential customers.
Because
our majority shareholder owns an aggregate of 94% of our outstanding common stock, investors may find that corporate decisions
influenced by this shareholder are inconsistent with the best interests of other shareholders.
Miramar
Investors Inc., our majority shareholder, owns approximately 94% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Accordingly, it
will have an overwhelming influence in determining the outcome of all corporate transactions or other matters, including mergers,
consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, and also the power to prevent or cause a change in control.
While we have no current plans with regard to any merger, consolidation or sale of substantially all of our assets, the interests
of this shareholder may still differ from the interests of the other shareholders.
We
are an “emerging growth company” and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging
growth companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors.
We
are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act of 2012, and we may take advantage
of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies, including, but not limited
to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure
obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements
of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not
previously approved. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions.
If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common
stock and our stock price may be more volatile.
Under
the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, “emerging growth companies” can delay adopting new or revised accounting
standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves to
this exemption from new or revised accounting standards and, therefore, we will be subject to the same new or revised accounting
standards as other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies.”
Because
we are subject to additional regulatory compliance matters as a result of being a public company, which compliance includes Section
404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and our management has limited experience managing a public company, the failure to comply
with these regulatory matters could harm our business.
Our
management and outside professionals will need to devote a substantial amount of time to new compliance initiatives and to meeting
the obligations that are associated with being a public company. Llorn Kylo, our Chief Executive Officer and Director, has little
experience running a public company. For now, he will rely heavily on legal counsel and accounting professionals to help with
our future SEC reporting requirements. This will likely divert needed capital resources away from the objectives of implementing
our business plan. These expenses could be more costly that we are able to bear and could result in us not being able to successfully
implement our business plan.
We
expect rules and regulations such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 will increase our legal and finance compliance costs and make
some activities more time-consuming than in the past. We may need to hire a number of additional employees with public accounting
and disclosure experience in order to meet our ongoing obligations as a public company.
As
a smaller reporting company, our management will be required to provide a report on the effectiveness of our internal controls
over financial reporting, but will not be required to provide an auditor’s attestation regarding such report. Section 404
compliance efforts may divert internal resources and will take a significant amount of time and effort to complete. We may not
be able to successfully complete the procedures and certification of Section 404 by the time we will be required to do so. If
we fail to do so, or if in the future our management determines that our internal controls over financial reporting are not effective,
we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Furthermore, investor perceptions
of our company may suffer, and this could cause a decline in the market price of our stock. Furthermore, whether or not we comply
with Section 404, any failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations
and harm our reputation. If we are unable to implement necessary procedures
or changes effectively or efficiently,
it could harm our operations, financial reporting or financial results.
We
rely on key members of management, the loss of whose services could adversely affect our success and development.
Our
success depends to a certain degree upon certain key members of the management. These individuals are a significant factor in
our growth and ability to meet our business objectives. In particular, our success is highly dependent upon the efforts of Llorn
Kylo, our Chief Executive Officer, and Director, the loss of whom could slow the growth of our business, or it may cease to operate
at all, which may result in the total loss of an investor's investment.
Because
our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws and Delaware law limit the liability of our officers, directors, and others, shareholders
may have no recourse for acts performed in good faith.
Under
our Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws, and Delaware law, each of our officers, directors, employees, attorneys, accountants
and agents are not liable to us or the shareholders for any acts they perform in good faith, or for any non-action or failure
to act, except for acts of fraud, willful misconduct or gross negligence. Our articles and bylaws provide that we will indemnify
each of our officers, directors, employees, attorneys, accountants and agents from any claim, loss, cost, damage liability and
expense by reason of any act undertaken or omitted to be undertaken by them, unless the act performed or omitted to be performed
constitutes fraud, willful misconduct or gross negligence.
New
legislation, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, may make it more difficult for us to retain or attract officers and directors.
The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was enacted in response to public concerns regarding corporate accountability in connection with recent
accounting scandals. The stated goals of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are to increase corporate responsibility, to provide for enhanced
penalties for accounting and auditing improprieties at publicly traded companies, and to protect investors by improving the accuracy
and reliability of corporate disclosures pursuant to the securities laws. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act generally applies to all companies
that file or are required to file periodic reports with the SEC, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The
enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has resulted in a series of rules and regulations by the SEC that increase responsibilities
and liabilities of directors and executive officers. The perceived increased personal risk associated with these recent changes
may deter qualified individuals from accepting these roles. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain
qualified persons to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers. We continue to evaluate and monitor developments
with respect to these rules, and we cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such
costs.
Our
common stock is currently deemed a "penny stock," which makes it more difficult for our investors to sell their shares.
Our common stock is subject to the "penny stock" rules adopted under Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act. The penny stock
rules generally apply to companies whose common stock is not listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market or other national securities exchange and trades at less than $4.00 per share, other than companies that have had average revenue of at least $6,000,000 for the last
three years or that have tangible net worth (i.e., total assets less intangible assets and liabilities) of at least $5,000,000 ($2,000,000 if the company has been operating for three or more years). These rules require, among other things, that brokers
who trade penny stock to persons other than "established customers" complete certain documentation, make suitability inquiries of investors and provide investors with certain information concerning trading in the security, including a risk disclosure
document and quote information under certain circumstances. Many brokers have decided not to trade penny stocks because of the requirements of the penny stock rules and, as a result, the number of broker-dealers willing to act as market makers in such securities
is limited. If we remain subject to the penny stock rules for any significant period, it could have an adverse effect on the market,if any, for our common stock. If our common stock is subject to the penny stock rules, investors will find it more difficult to
dispose of our common stock.
Volatility
in our common stock price may subject us to securities litigation
.
The
market for our common stock is characterized by significant price volatility when compared to seasoned issuers, and we expect
that our share price will continue to be more volatile than a seasoned issuer for the indefinite future. In the past, plaintiffs
have often initiated securities class action litigation against a company following periods of volatility in the market price
of its securities. We may, in the future, be the target of similar litigation. Securities litigation could result in substantial
costs and liabilities to us and could divert our management's attention and resources from managing our operations and business.
We
have never paid dividends on our common stock and we do not expect to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
We
have never paid dividends on our common stock and we intend to retain our future earnings, if any, in order to reinvest in the
development and growth of our business and, therefore, do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable
future. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our financial
condition, results of operations, capital requirements, and such other factors as our board of directors deems relevant. Accordingly,
investors may need to sell their shares of our common stock to realize a return on their investment, and they may not be able
to sell such shares at or above the price paid for them.
Our
board could issue "blank check" preferred stock without stockholder approval with the effect of diluting existing stockholders
and impairing their voting rights, and provisions in our charter documents could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider
favorable.
Our
certificate of incorporation authorize the issuance of up to 50,000,000 shares of "blank check" preferred stock with
designations, rights and preferences as may be determined from time to time by our board of directors. Our board is empowered,
without stockholder approval, to issue a series of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion, voting or other rights
which could dilute the interest of, or impair the voting power of, our common stockholders. The issuance of a series of preferred
stock could be used as a method of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control. For example, our board of directors
issued preferred stock with super voting rights. This action could impede the success of any attempt to effect a change in control
of our company.
Because
there is no established market four our stock and our common stock is not listed on a stock exchange, stockholders may not be
able to resell their shares at or above the price paid for them.
There
is not established market for our common stock. Our common stock trades on the OTC market under ticker symbol CANA. Stocks which
trade on the OTC markets tend to be illiquid and volatile and could be subject to significant fluctuations due to changes in sentiment
in the market regarding our operations or business prospects, among other factors. Further, our common stock is not listed on
a stock exchange, nor do we currently intend to list the common stock on a stock exchange. There are no assurances that an active
public market for our common stock will develop. Therefore, stockholders may not be able to sell their shares at or above the
price they paid for them.
Among
the factors that could affect our stock price are:
|
•
|
industry
trends and the business success of our vendors;
|
|
•
|
actual
or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly financial and operating results and operating
results that vary from the expectations of our management or of securities analysts and
investors;
|
|
•
|
our
failure to meet the expectations of the investment community and changes in investment
community recommendations or estimates of our future operating results;
|
|
•
|
announcements
of strategic developments, acquisitions, dispositions, financings, product developments
and other materials events by us or our competitors;
|
|
•
|
regulatory
and legislative developments;
|
|
•
|
general
market conditions;
|
|
•
|
other
domestic and international macroeconomic factors unrelated to our performance; and
|
|
•
|
additions
or departures of key personnel.
|
Requirements
associated with being a reporting public company will require significant company resources and management attention.
We
are a voluntary filer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as a result of having filed a Registration Statement on Form
S-1, pursuant to section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. As a voluntary filer we intend to continue to file periodic
reports to maintain current information with the SEC on Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K as prescribed by the rules and Regulations of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. We work with independent legal, accounting and financial advisors to ensure adequate disclosure
and control systems to manage our growth and our obligations as a company that files reports with the SEC. These areas include
corporate governance, internal control, internal audit, disclosure controls and procedures and financial reporting and accounting
systems. However, we cannot assure you that these and other measures we may take will be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our
obligations as an SEC reporting company on a timely basis.
In
addition, compliance with reporting and other requirements applicable to SEC reporting companies will create additional costs
for us. It will require the time and attention of management and will require the hiring of additional personnel and legal, audit
and other professionals. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur, the timing of such costs
or the impact that our management's attention to these matters will have on our business.