Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
So using a Singapore IP address I did a google search for Global Damon. This what I found. The link is provided for verification - save your self the trouble of reading the article. I copied and pasted the relevant paragraph. The then CEO consulted on a deal between two other parties.
Global Damon Pharma is an established Korean pharmaceutical company with sales representatives covering both the ethical and over-the-counter markets. The company markets a wide range of products under distribution and marketing agreements with companies based all over the world. Some of the partners are: Amarillo Biosciences for natural oral interferon, Matritech for NMP 22, Cellegy for Retogesic, Devax for Y-Flex stent, Hayashibara for interferon injectable, Teraklin for artificial liver, MED EQ for Libido, Laphal for Ozothine and so on.
Global Damon Pharmaceuticals is a private corporation based in South Korea. It is a very old, private company that has no web site. It is a very large distributor of pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, functional foods and related products in Asia.
The contact information is below.
CONTACT INFO Global Damon Pharm Phone: (82) 2-3673-2367 Garden Tower Bldg., Ste. 1803 Wooni-Dong, 98-78 South Korea Thank you for your interest in Abattis. Kathleen Martin
I haven't found much on either Global Damon or CEO Don Ki Kim. He's listed as "DonKi Kim" in a 2011 publication, but it doesn't really relate to the GD Pharma operation, unfortunately. I'll keep looking, but not expecting to dig up much.
I sent an email inquiry to Abattis asking for a link to GD Pharma. There are several companies with the name "GD Pharma" that come up during a web search but they seem unrelated to the South Korean company.
I'll post their response as soon as I get it.
And to the individual who posted that they had been to Korea twice last year and to different airports and didn't see anything regarding GD Pharma, let me just say that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Tensions in Testing Procedures from Sampling Cannabis for Analytical Purposes Michelle Sexton, Steep Hill Lab Jeremy Ziskind, BOTEC Analysis BOTEC Analysis Corp. I-502 Project #430-1e Nov. 15, 2013
Many of the sampling policies described in this paper have significant implications on the price of testing. (To be clear, by price of testing we mean the costs levied on the producer, processor, and testing laboratory, as a result of specific policies regarding sampling methodology.) Since these regulations pertain only to the I-502 market, and not to the medical or black markets, minimizing the cost burden of testing and sampling-related policies is important to strengthening I-502’s ability to complete with these markets on price. Moreover, and for the same reason, even the most relaxed and least imposing testing and sampling policies discussed in this document will represent a cost increase over the current levels of testing expenditure as enjoyed even recently by the medical and gray markets. (However, these quality assurance regulations may also produce value, if consumers are willing to pay higher prices for cannabis with these assurances of potency and purity.)
The definition of a lot may have to evolve over time as the economy of scale evolves with the market. If it is projected that only large producers will be able to remain in the marketplace, then lot sizes will become much larger than what the existing framework may allow.
The suggested amount for a lot of plant material is not more than five pounds, based upon the approximate flower yield from an indoor grow facility using tables, or a 25 foot greenhouse row with mature plants spaced six feet apart (average yield estimated at 500 grams of flower per plant; Potter et al. 2012). The size of the greenhouse or area in which a particular variety is grown should determine what makes up the lot. A lot can be part of a larger unit that is a complete harvest. For instance, a harvest may include one lot or ten lots.
The decision on a maximum lot size entails a specific trade-off between cost and representativeness of the sample. As allowed lot sizes increase, producers and processors may separate products into a lesser number of individual lots, and testing laboratories may run fewer tests. Depending on required lot sizes, and based on the estimates of lot sizes in this document, a producer who produces a ton of plant material a year might have to pay as much as $65,000 a year for the required testing (excluding the possibility of bulk discounts). This would represent approximately 4% of gross income. (See Table 5).
Another option to reduce the cost burden of these policies would be to allow growers to access semi-quantitative methods for potency results, and provide this along with pesticide testing data as part of the grower’s certificate of analysis. Then, producer-processors would absorb some of the costs for quantitative potency and microbiology testing of product that will be distributed for retail sale. For instance, HPTLC or infrared (IR) can be used to estimate potency and help growers conduct their own experiments with growing methodologies and harvest times. A semi-quantitative result can qualify for a certificate of analysis for the producer/processor. At the next stage of packaging and finishing the product, the quantitative analysis could occur (HPLC, GC).
Finally, we might expect some decrease in the cost of testing as the volume of demand for testing increases. For instance, a common blood test for total cholesterol has a retail price of five dollars in California, yet preparing a blood sample is more time-consuming and expensive than preparing a cannabis sample. One important factor that distinguished the cholesterol test from the cannabis test is the volume of sales activity to the vendor. As demand for testing increases, testing companies will be able to make more efficient use of capital and overhead, and thus costs for testing may sink across the board. Financial Feasibility for Raw Plant Material Twenty grams per kilogram from the producer equates to a net loss of an estimated 60 dollars in sales for the grower, or about 1% of the total lot price. With large-scale growing facilities, a 2% sample represents a cost of about $100, and at this time with the grower performing all of the required tests, another $200. $300 per kilo of plant material over a year, if producing a ton would cost the grower about $125,000 a year. If the lot size is increased to 5kg, costs would be reduced, but it will be necessary for laboratories to decrease the cost of running the test by improving high-throughput procedures. Estimates are provided in Table 5.
Table 5:Comparing the cost of testing cannabis flowers with respect to size of the grow facility. ..."
A article came out a few weeks ago ....No need to open the offices until July ....But that will really increase sales ...They also applied for a lvl 6 license, currently its lvl 3 ... They will need that before they can increase testing and sales ...I miss typed, that is a 40000 sg foot indoor green house ...
Abattis is a distributor. Which means they might be able to get a 10% mark up on the sales price. Raybot is still the one that makes the profit on the machine cost, Abattis gets some kind of distributor fee.
If a functional machine is in their building, they could probably get a couple hundred bucks per batch, I assume.
"So far, six machines have landed in Canada, of which some will be installed at Northern Vine's lab, while others will be demonstrated for strategic partners that Abattis is working with. The landed machines are capable of processing 72 kgs per day of raw material. "
so assuming that 72 kg per day is for all 6 machines combined that means one machine can process 12 kgs/day. If however this statement means 72 kg per machine/day..then that's much better.
to have a facility process 5000 kg a day; in the first scenario (12kg per machine/day) they would need 417 machines (ouch) and the second scenario (72kg per machine/day) they would require 70 machines.
this is where its very important to have some clarification on this "raybot" technology and exactly what the cost per machine is...or if they are going to rent the machines and service them...
Anyone know the amount of CASH is left for ATTBF ? I see they are going to expand to 10 to 15 offices for TESTING and SELLING and build a 400000 sq ft green house ....
Right, definitely involves more than 1 machine. Wish I could sit in on a sales demo or something. It'd be even better to see them come out with video demonstrations and overviews of the product.. of course, that type of project would probably be months away.
They are talking about "... For example, a processing center with a 5,000 kilograms per day processing rate could produce CBD at just $0.20 per gram using the technology. ..." A center will probably not consist of just one machine, right? This is, in my opinion, an ideal case calculation example. Also the purchase price is an important point, as well as the size and whether the machines are easy to use, etc. etc. However, I see the future with optimism.
Appreciate the info, but I'll be frank.. These scientific studies are a bunch of gobbly-gook to me haha. I'm giving Abattis the benefit of the doubt and assuming the technology is sound and can deliver, based on what they've already claimed in PR's.
But when they say "5000 kg" in a day is possible in 1 facility, I want to know what it takes to achieve that number? How long until such a facility could be properly built and prepared? What kind of investment is required? What would a client have to commit for Abattis to provide this level of production? And after that commitment, all costs summed together, is there a significant cost savings to the client?
The so-called new technology which is to be applied here does not refer to the method itself. Theoretically, extraction technologies in combination with polymers have already been considered and already applied. I suppose - this is only my opinion and a guess - "the new" is the extraction machine itself in combination with Molecularly Imprinted Polymers. This will be the reason for the secret-mongering. The fact is that in the food industry polymers have been used for some time now for removing specific agrochemicals. This is nothing new. http://www.ligarpolymers.com/index.php/our-polymers/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecularly_imprinted_polymer
Fair points. I'm interested in answers to those questions too. The problem is.. It's difficult to tell if it even sounds "too good to be true," because the technology's potential has been described in PR's via numbers that are somewhat ambiguous.
Only thing I'll caution you - this proprietary technology comes out of China. Who is Raybot? Who is this researcher? What are her publications? What are her qualifications. If a "new" technology sounds too good to be true... Maybe the correct question to ask of the company - how many runs of the column have been made in Canada? Has anyone from the company actually seen the machine running?
ATTBF can run back to the mid-20's on industry hype and creative PRs alone (I'm not making a prediction.. I'm just saying "can" because it's happened many times before). If they can sell and sign contracts, we could finally see the price reaching that high-in-the-sky 30's that we've been waiting for.
The time of the so-called Abattis-interested in the last years, which earned themselves a "golden nose" with the (celebrated and cheered) falling share price, finally ends. The next months, they will either turn to other "games" or change their alias names ... glutons with turncoats ... summer2018 - ATTBF
Okay, I have some more reading to do on CO2 extraction, but I'm comparing Abattis' claims to other companies and websites, like Eden Labs, LLC. They discuss "supercritical" extractions in which 70-80% of the plant oils will come out on the first run, and then if you want the remaining 20-30%, you have to run the machine twice as long.. and it becomes a more complex decision of tradeoffs. If your supply is limited and expensive, it's probably worth doubling the processing time and paying the extra cost for the bonus 20-30%.
But I think another key takeaway here is Abattis' bit about high production capabilities. Most manufacturers have machines capable of generating 15-30 grams of plant oils per hour. Eden Labs boasts an "advanced system" that can achieve 400 grams per hour. While Abattis teases at a future facility that may be able to produce 5000 Kg a day.. and being conservative, dividing that by 24 hours a day (perhaps ATTBF actually had a 8-12 hour day in mind when they calculated this?) is about 200,000 grams per hour.. all at a reasonable cost. What's missing here is the amount of Raybot machines and initial capital necessary to produce that kind of output.
At least I'm starting to see the pieces fitting together and how they can start posting positive numbers in the "revenue" column..
And the running sales demos are imperative. Because the previously valid expert view is that:
"... CO2 the cleanest method of extraction is a pure cannabis oil extract ..."
Source: Page 27 from the report The Value Case For Investing In The Cannabis Sector – July 26, 2017 – by VIII EIGHT CAPITAL docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/51c183_34348813c00846869dd1012695a33cf1.pdf
So if Abattis through the demos proves that:
"... Raybot’s proprietary extraction technology is capable of extracting CBD from hemp at a greater than 99% purity level. While the current methods use multi-staged CO2 extraction, the Raybot technology is significantly more cost-effective and can be customized to any factory production scale. For example, a processing center with a 5,000 kilograms per day processing rate could produce CBD at just $0.20 per gram using the technology ..."
"... Raybot’s proprietary extraction method is currently one of the only toll processing technologies that can extract high purity CBD on an industrial scale. Furthermore, it could lead to the full separation of individual compounds and derivatives at significantly lower costs than today’s widely used methods ...”
What impact will probably have the following statement to the PPS then?:
"... Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Abattis has obtained exclusive rights to sell the machines, receive royalties and service licensed producers by offering toll processing and extraction. The distribution is exclusively licensed to Abattis in the territories of North America and Europe ..."
“... This technology has the potential to revolutionize the extraction process for THC, CBD, CBG and other cannabis derivatives globally ..." Robert Abenante, President and CEO of Abattis
"... Abattis and Northern Vine have commenced setting up prototype extraction installations with local licensed facilities to highlight the extraction capabilities of the proprietary extraction technology and machinery."
So, essentially, they're running sales demos for potential long-term clients? I hope I'm interpreting this correctly. because that's definitely a solid step in the right direction.
Northern Vine Have Commenced Setting Up Prototype Extraction Installations ... Abattis and Northern Vine have commenced setting up prototype extraction installations with local licensed facilities to highlight the extraction capabilities of the proprietary extraction technology and machinery.
So far, six machines have landed in Canada, of which some will be installed at Northern Vine’s lab, while others will be demonstrated for strategic partners that Abattis is working with. The landed machines are capable of processing 72 kgs per day of raw material.
The Company is executing on its plan to become the premier testing formulating facility to better serve the national cannabis industry.
The Momentum Case From the report The Value Case For Investing In The Cannabis Sector July 26, 2017 – by VIII EIGHT CAPITAL
The market has pulled back and we view this as an entry point. Recent capitulation of the cannabis sector stocks, particularly the Health Canada LPs, has largely been due to the lack of industry regulatory news. News in early 2017 of product recalls due to pesticide use, a large increase in the supply of publicly listed LPs, a sell-on-news mentally after the Spring 2017 tabling of the Cannabis Act (Bill C-45), and a lack of visibility to the next industry catalyst have all contributed to the shakeout we're seeing now. We believe the Summer will continue to be slow due to the lack of major industry catalysts, but we're bullish on the Fall and Q4/17 due to the potential domino effect of multiple industry catalysts; we expect a rising tide to float all boats. Progress on a variety of fronts including legislation, regulations, provincial distribution, and municipal involvement, would in our opinion move the industry forward, which is positive, pending no implications of major delays:
• House of Commons takes July/August off • Could get the 3rd reading of the Cannabis Act (Bill C-45) in the House in September • The Bill may move up to the Senate shortly after • Likely to get a “pre-publication” of Regulations in the Fall (details within the Act, i.e. chapters in the book) • Provinces then read details in the Regulations and start signaling towards desired distribution, particularly since half the provinces have provincial elections between June and November 2018 (start prepositioning for election cycle) • The Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Cannabis Legalization is expected to report by November 1, 2017 • Distribution channels start mobilizing or providing details • Cross provincial M&A when LPs start seeing which provinces are coming on faster or more favourably • Early 2018 calendar turn will get people excited that legal recreational sales are only 6-8 months away
Abattis Bioceuticals Corp. or How to Back The Right Horse – The Extraction of THC, CBD, CBG and Other Cannabis Derivatives
From the report The Value Case For Investing In The Cannabis Sector July 26, 2017 – by VIII EIGHT CAPITAL
Page | 9 "... We would like to draw a parallel between the growth in specialty versus traditional coffee and the growth in cannabis oil versus dried cannabis. The first cannabis oil sales data was available for the January to March 2016 quarter where cannabis oil accounted for 3% of amount sold to clients. In the last reported quarter (January to March 2017) cannabis oil had risen to 12% of amount sold to clients, representing an average quarterly growth rate of 82% compared to dried cannabis which grew at an average quarterly growth rate of 18% over the same time period. We believe that cannabis oils will continue to grow as oils and oil capsules are gaining in popularity among patients and physicians due to familiarity with taking medicine in capsule form, and being more comfortable with the ability to dose cannabis more precisely. An eventual roll-out of edibles and other derivatives (tinctures, sprays, creams) will only increase the popularity of "specialty" cannabis offerings ..."
Page | 10 "... As for tobacco companies, cannabis is not yet listed in their risk sections but there have been a couple of interesting developments. In 2016, Philip Morris invested $20 MM into Syqe Medical, makers of a portable meter-dosed cannabis inhaler, with the intention of making a device that will reduce the harmful effects of smoking tobacco. Imperial Brands appointed Simon Langelier as a non-executive director. Mr. Langelier had extensive experience at Philip Morris but is now chairman of PharmaCielo Ltd, a company aiming to become a medical-grade cannabis oil producer and Imperial Brands will use his experience in “wider consumer adjacencies.” While this is no confirmation of a move into cannabis, it is worth noting that the company removed Tobacco from their name a while ago ..."
Page | 19 "... New customers would enter the market with the introduction of more diverse offerings. Though it's difficult to place value on the new products that could be introduced, given the lack of clarity on the framework, we can look to sales in recently legalized US states for insight. For example, only 50% of Colorado's first year's sales were comprised of flower or bud; the rest were derivatives, oils, edibles, tinctures, creams and the like. Canada is unlikely to unfold as quickly given we believe a more stepwise approach will be taken, but medical cannabis oils are starting to catch on ..."
Page | 26 "...Some LPs are developing cannabis-based products, including oral, topical, edible, and inhalable delivery methods. However, these products are subject to relaxation in the stringent concentration limits of the regulations and subsequent approval by Health Canada before being made available for sale. The company is focused on the innovation needed to develop new products, including best practices for cannabis production, oil extraction, purification, design, and formulation. Only 3 LPs have received clearance to sell cannabis oil capsules that are simpler for physicians to prescribe and better for patient compliance and health (over smoking). Extraction processes that protect cannabinoids from in - process oxidation and protect terpenes (other aromatic and therapeutically relevant compounds) from breaking down are important. Research has shown that terpenes work in concert with properly preserved cannabinoids for therapeutic effect ..."
"... Terpenes are fragrant oils secreted from the cannabis flower's resin glands that produce cannabinoids, but are not unique to cannabis plants since they are found in other plants, fruits and herbs. Each strain of cannabis has a unique terpene type and composition and over 100 terpenes have been identified. The key attribute of a terpene is its capability to act synergistically with cannabinoids and other compounds in the plant, sometimes referred to as "the entourage effect" ..."
Page | 27 "... The variety of ways that cannabis can be consumed is increasing, especially in mature markets, and this has led to many categories of products being available. Smoking remains the most popular method of consumption and is served by the flowers and pre-roll categories. Due to the concerns of adverse effects on the respiratory system, other methods are gaining popularity, especially concentrates and edibles. Concentrates encompasses oils, resins, waxes, hash, rosin and cartridges for vape pens. Vaporization has gained traction as a vaporizer uses lower temperatures than smoking and so produces fewer by-products. Oils can be consumed by themselves, as a capsule, or added to food and drink. CO2 is the cleanest method of extraction and results in a pure cannabis oil extract. Edibles include food and drink consumed orally. Other methods of cannabis consumption are tinctures (drops placed directly under the tongue), sublingual sprays (similar to tinctures but in spray form) and topical creams/sprays. Data from three mature markets with legalized recreational use (Colorado, Oregon and Washington) demonstrates that concentrates and edibles are the fastest growing product categories ..."
Page | 29 "... Our $3.0B flower & extracts medical market assumes 50% of patients only purchase flower and 50% of patients only purchase extracts, we assume no cross-selling though it is likely. We introduce other products into our medical market estimate in Figure 43 (green bar) , and look to two US states to draw comparison. In Oregon some "recreational-like" products have been made accessible to patients through prescription as that state transitions from medical to medical +recreational, and in the first two years of legalization in Colorado only ~50% of all sales were from flower, meaning the rest were from oils, extracts, edibles, creams, etc. ..."
We use the same 1.0g(eq)/patient/day consumption rate for extract products as smoked cannabis because we assume the much higher concentration in extracted products (60-80% THC for extracts vs. ~15% THC for smoking) is offset by their much lower bioavailability (4-12% for extracts vs. ~50% for smoking) (British Journal of Psychiatry, Feb 2001). For pricing we assume $15.00/gram (eq), which is roughly the implied price per 'infused edible unit' we calculated from the Colorado Department of Revenue, and in line with the pricing some of the LPs are charging for oils today.
Our $9.0B total market estimate is derived from our $3.0B medical estimate above and the assumption that Canadian recreational sales drive 65% of total revenue. In Colorado's first year of legalization, medical and recreational sales were split 50:50, but in its second full year recreational sales outweighed medical 60:40, with sales of extracts accelerating. A summary of our estimates is in Figure 44 below, and we have also looked at the market using a bottom up approach in Figure 45 to back into our recreational estimate.
We believe the Canadian cannabis industry is likely to reach a similar point that other legalized jurisdictions have, where the medical program and the adult use or legal program coexist and contain a wide range of products. However, a slower stepwise approach with a best-in-class medical framework already in place, in a country that regularly fosters innovation, Canada has a chance to yield a flourishing recreational market ..."
Page | 47 "... In May 2016 the Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy published a survey that showed ~50% of Canadian hospital pharmacists who responded agreed that medical cannabis is safe and/or effective, yet there exists a large knowledge gap about how to prescribe since many of them work in institutions that don't have proper policies in place. Some pharmacists would need more published evidence to prescribe smoked cannabis, and may be more inclined to prescribe or dispense oil or extracts in a pill or capsule provided proper dosing regimens were outlined ..."
Abattis recently signed an exclusive distribution agreement with Suzhou Raybot Material Tech Corp (“Raybot”). Under the terms of the agreement, Abattis will use Raybot’s proprietary extraction technology in its own operations and have the exclusive rights to sell the extraction equipment and services to other companies. The agreement could open the door to mass produced cannabinoid products as well as licensing opportunities with other producers.
Raybot’s proprietary technology utilizes industrial column chromatography to extract and separate a wide range of materials in a continuous closed loop system. While the method is already used to mass produce extracts like Ginkgo Biloba and Stevia, the technology has been altered to extract legal cannabis derivatives like cannabidiol (“CBD”) and tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”) from marijuana or hemp.
The proprietary technology uses a process known as low pressure preparatory column chromatography, which involves passing a pressurized liquid through a proprietary and exclusive polymer. Each component of the sample material interacts slightly differently with the polymer, causing different frequencies depending on the polarization for each component, which leads to the separation of the components as they flow out of the pressurized column.
Significant Advantages
Raybot’s proprietary extraction technology is capable of extracting CBD from hemp at a greater than 99% purity level. While the current methods use multi-staged CO2 extraction, the Raybot technology is significantly more cost-effective and can be customized to any factory production scale. For example, a processing center with a 5,000 kilograms per day processing rate could produce CBD at just $0.20 per gram using the technology. Raybot is able to achieve these cost advantages due to their ability to reuse and replenish the polymers for the columns. Abattis has exclusive distribution and service rights to replenish the polymers for extractions machines sold in North America and Europe.
In addition to these cost and scalability benefits, the technology can be used with both wet and dry products, which eliminates the need to dry cannabis products. Drying of the cannabis flower is not only expensive and time consuming, but could also lead to loss of terpenes and other active ingredients. The Raybot technology isolates only the desired active ingredients and removes all impurities, such as pesticides, without chemically altering the cannabinoids that are extracted, resulting in the purest formulations.
“This technology has the potential to revolutionize the extraction process for THC, CBD and other cannabis derivatives globally,” said Abattis CEO Robert Abenante in a recent press release announcing the licensing agreement. “Raybot’s proprietary extraction method is currently one of the only extraction technologies that can extract high purity CBD on an industrial scale. Furthermore, it could lead to the full separation of individual compounds and derivatives at significantly lower costs than today’s widely used methods.”
“We are eager to bring this technology to Abattis to verify its capabilities in our labs,” says Dr. Will Panenka, Director of Abattis. Dr. Panenka, MD, is an assistant professor, neurologist, and psychiatrist with a pre-clinical and clinical academic research program focused on substance use and brain injury at the University of British Columbia.
Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Abattis has obtained exclusive rights to sell the machines, receive royalties and service licensed producers by offering toll processing and extraction. The distribution is exclusively licensed to Abattis in the territories of North America and Europe.
“This is the only extraction technology capable of processing industrial scale volumes of biomass and separation of individual compounds to any target purity levels,” said Dr. Shuang Xie, Director of Abattis. “With this technology, products containing phyto-cannabinoids can become more cost-effective which would enable the production of affordable natural, functional products for consumers.”
Please tell me a stock company on the same level, where there is less greed and the manager salaries are low - I can't see that "too much dumping". On the other hand, the big profit chances for greedy managers (and investors) are still ahead. Do you really believe that they neglect a cow that could give much more milk in the near future? Maybe they are a bit greedy, but stupid or even criminal? Who wants to claim that?
Plenty of shares have recently been issued to both new and old management. I think a more telling sign will be if we come across more reports of "X" Director dumping 50,000 shares here, "Y" Director dumping another 100,000 shares there.. and spiraling out of control. Sure, it's one thing to argue that management will sell "some" shares, just for safety's sake and to provide a small reward for their work in the meantime. But too much dumping indicates a lack of faith.. And if they don't have any faith in the long term of this company, why should we? I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for confirmations of dumping.
'guay' It's not a matter of chopping & changing, but predicated on the numbers you provided, it appears that the management of ATTBF, pays itself first, foremost & with both hands in the till, I see too much greed, never a good thing. GLTA Play it as you see it
Cannabis R&D Firms See Wild Growth Curve http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cannabis-rd-firms-see-wild-growth-curve-643941353.html ATT has diversified its operations into several segments, from research and certification in its testing and lab facilities, to formulations and extracts exclusive to Northern Vine Labs and to products provided by its Vergence subsidiary. Although relatively new as a fully operational cannabis sector company, ATT has managed to bring together valuable assets and tripled its price since one year ago. With the early interest and pent up demand for services, Abattis Bioceuticals looks like a real potential leader as this sector continues its major momentum drive.
Hi Shaark – you said ATTBF will probably re-adjust downward – sure, a little bit. I will hold my position. Chopping and changing is not my case. Hope to see you back - GLTY
'guay' The picture that is painted with these numbers, is rather bleak & does not bode well going forward. ATTBF will probably re-adjust downward, I sold my position & will take a wait & see attitude @ this time. GLTA Play it as you see it
Why Pot Stocks Stumbled five key causes for the recent largely-unexpected slump in Canada’s cannabis stocks. Fortunately, these sobering sell-off signals are counter-balanced by five compelling reasons for cannabis stocks to bounce back with a vengeance. http://www.cannabiscapitalist.ca/single-post/2017/08/09/Why-Pot-Stocks-Stumbled
Problem #5: Short Sellers Smell Blood Short selling day traders are taking advantage of industry-wide profit-taking by adding more selling pressure. This absence of any macro drivers to power the industry higher for the foreseeable future emboldens them and minimizes their trading risks. Also, the all-too-common and highly controversial practice of naked short selling –– especially by stock market professionals –– offers unfair trading advantages to the shorters. Typically, it’s ordinary retail investors who get fleeced this way.
Solution #5: A Trend Reversal Should Spook Short Sellers Starting this autumn, government lawmakers are due to provide legal cannabis growers with a clearer road map to the looming multi-billion dollar recreational market for cannabis –– which commences next summer. Once this legislation takes shape, cannabis stocks are destined to do an about-face by reversing their trading trends. Virtually all cannabis stocks should be beneficiaries of this renewed impetus, including the good, the bad, and the ugly. So caveat emptor! Ultimately, the better stocks will thrive while the shams, scams and other ill-conceived stock plays will fade away. The upshot of all of this is that most short sellers will cover their positions and start to look for easy prey elsewhere in other industries. They will not want to put up much of a fight against an aggressively ascendant industry trend.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
