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.
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.
GM all. Let's hope weakness turns back into strength when those who did tax-selling start returning!
GM all! Happy Holidays - thin tradnig day, early close.
GM all - Happy Holidays.
Don't leave out collusion, price fixing & anti-trust. Things will work fine as is - don't fix the free economy.
That's a normal Xmas time response...
I disagree with the notion that HESG and MJNA are competitors. My understanding is that they are working together. Frankly, I don't see their businesses overlapping much. Moreover, this market is large enough for more than a single successful company.
GM all. Sorry I was gone for a few days traveling. Still long and strong w/40mm. Let's get some green in our stockings!
Tommy - I agree it's cheaper to buy HESG than compete - but isn't it more likely they would be interested in CBIS which is more along their business line? Also, I don't think you can just multiply CA revenue times 50. CA has a GNP greater than France - Rhode Island on the other hand... Pfizer, Merck, etc. could buy this for next to nothing. But, I don't think big pharma will make any move until any stigma of marijuana is removed & there is wider acceptance. (Which is on a roll!)
GM all!
Rumor mill says he will sign on the 18th. I believe he left the country yesterday, but I forget where he went & why...
GM all! Let's hope this goes green today. BTW, are we sure it was gold farnkincense and "myrrh" the wise men brought? Just a thought... LOL
Nobody wants a gas station by their house either - and those can blow up! Nor do they want a funeral parlor, a McDonalds, etc. A dispensary, if done right, can appear innocuous. IMO it should be more like a health care facility in appearance than a smoke shop. That would go a long way towards avoiding the "not in my back yard" problems...
Not so. Using shares instead of debt makes sense when the cost of capital is less than the interest rate/cost of the debt. So, you must accept that Tom's use of stock for acquisition is either b/c he can't borrow, or because it is less expensive than borrowing. Further, you must accept that he is smart enough to have it either be accretive now or in the reasonable forseeable future or he would not make the purchase.
I'm sure he is a good CEO and can make these decisions and I trust him to do so on our behalf. Long & strong - go HESG!
Although signing the Omnibus Spending Bill applies only to DC (by allowing DC to fund Med/Mar which was passed by referendum in 1998 as Initiative 59), it will be a sign of acceptance furthering Obama's Atty Genl dictates not to pursue MJ charges in states where medical use is permitted.
Or, to put it simply, when a dispensary opens within walking distance of the White House or Capitol, then how long do you really think it will be until there is reform at the national level.
Good morning all. Keep the faith - it's always darkest before the dawn.
You were right, and with that, goodnight. -
:)
It means $400/hr x # of lawyers. And, the lawyers have an incentive to run up hours. It means that each hour = 1 mm. shs x # of lawyers.
I hate to be cynical, but I am both a lawyer and a CPA - I know that at least in some cases, that's how it works. I truly hope that it's not the case here. ATD/STD have the cards and they know it. The best solution may be to let the market operate (without the benefit of lawyers) and over time everything should work out to some reasonable equilibrium. Just a thought...
Ok folks. "Restricted" is amorphis if you don't know what the restriction is. (I used that just for Milton.) If the shares are locked in for a long period, great. Or, if they are locked in at a certain price, well above the current one, great. However, if it is, say, a 3 month restriction at $.0001, well, then it's not very restricted at all, is it? I would say that is dilution and I don't use the term lightly. My firm belief is that Tom issues shares if the purchase is accretive (at least over a forseeable period), or if it is necessary to meet current needs prior to latching on to a recurring revenue source.
At this time, I think I will give him the benefit of the doubt, but everyone has been clamoring for share count and there is really no reason he shouldn't release that immediately. The longer he waits, the more our faiths falter...
Odd, but I felt as you do that this was a totally different style of PR from what we usually get.
I have a coupla' general points for discussion -
1. Who says HESG is the first Med/Mar to look for a profit. Leaving aside the several european drug companies (Savitex, Marinol, etc.) what about MJNA & CBIS? After the PR, I think MJNA is light years ahead. The are not foundering in indecision - they are consistent with their business plan and are attempting to execute.
2. I think the MMs have already saved themselves due to weak hands and panic. I am hoping that this starts up, but I don't think it will be tomorrow or the next day. I think Tom will have to give us a business plan AND some execution. All I've seen so far is we tried or we are trying. Whether it is not closing the touted Montana purchase - without reasons, or the failure to announce or address the potential NY relocation, the company really has to address a business plan other than it's a great industry. Right now, the business plan appears to be issue stock, pay ourselves, ...
Where's the beef?
Beg to differ - the right time to get out was at .0024. I am hoping that fortune smiles upon all of us longs who remain! - GLTA
I agree with RetireEarly38 that a lot of our troubles are due to tax selling. However, I don't think it will come back in the first week of Jan b/c the wash sale rules are 30 days, so if people are selling for tax reasons, you must assume they know the wash sale rules and are complying with them as well.
I think a lot of today was people being spooked about issuance of more shares, as well as the failure to execute in Montana.
Issuing shares as currency makes a lot of sense depending on your cost of capital. For new ventures, it is probably the cheapest - or only - way to go. And, as concerns Montana, these things take time, and now that our stock is 1/2 of what it was when Tom was looking, it is only prudent NOT to rush into something at twice the cost it was without an investigation lasting longer than a week.
IMO - still long with 36 mm
Can anyone provide a L2 - I just want to know how many 6s are left.
GM all. Time to rise and shine... and I'm talking about the PPS !!! LOL
Even if illegal in CA, you can pay your costs off, i.e, the land cost, and acquire valuable land pending a change in the law.
And, although it is ok to have a for profit company in Montana, it is still illegal to cross state lines with the product, so I'm not sure how the Montana fix is really a fix...
Your discussion on per plant profit makes me wonder whether MJNA's announcement on Friday re 12 acres in Cal for growing wouldn't make HESG an even better fit with it. hmm...
Big tobacco won't drive HESG out of biz. Instead, think - PM will buy HESG. It has the land, the distribution system, the marketing platform, the accounting and administrative structure - even the shelf space arrangements at the retail level. And, almost no matter what the pps for HESG, the cost would barely be a blip in its cash flow. So, no, I don't think big tobacco will kill it, but it might buy it!
Don't forget DC!!!
If pps keeps dropping, I'll probably buy more. I just hope it's not getting flushed...
Thanks Hermso. There is also a ground-breaking provision which alludes to medicaid covering marijuana at 9a, below. I have posted the entire language of the initiative for those interested.
Ballot Initiative 59
Related Links
• Q&A: Initiative 59
This initiative, if passed, permits seriously ill individuals to legally use marijuana for medical treatment when recommended by a licensed physician. This initiative would:
• Allow marijuana to aid in treatment of HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, muscle spasms, cancer therapy, and other serious illnesses
• Legalize, for medical purposes, possession, use, cultivation, and distribution of marijuana for illnesses for which marijuana has a medical benefit
• Require the Director of Public Health to propose to the D.C. Council a plan providing for distribution of marijuana to qualified patients enrolled in approved programs.
Use of marijuana without a physician’s recommendation would be prohibited.
LEGISLATIVE TEXT
From the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics
BE IT ENACTED BY THE ELECTORS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, that this act may be cited as the "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998."
Sec. 1. All seriously ill individuals have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes when a licensed physician has found the use of marijuana to be medically necessary and has recommended the use of marijuana for the treatment (or to mitigate the side effects of other treatments such as chemotherapy, including the use of AZT, protease inhibitors, etc., radiotherapy, etc.) or diseases and conditions associated with HIV and AIDS, glaucoma, muscle spasm, cancer and other serious or chronic illnesses for which the recommending physician reasonably believes that marijuana has demonstrated utility.
Sec. 2. Medical patients who use, and their primary caregivers who obtain for such patients, marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a licensed physician do not violate the District of Columbia Uniform Controlled Substances Act of 1981, effective August 5, 1981 (DC Law 4-29; DC Code 33-501 et seq.) ("Controlled Substances Act"), as amended and in so far as they comply with this act, are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.
Sec. 3(a) Use of marijuana under the authority of this act shall not be a defense to any crime of violence, the crime of operating a motor vehicle while impaired or intoxicated, or a crime involving danger to another person or to the public, nor shall such use negate the mens rea for any offense.
(b) Whoever distributes marijuana cultivated, distributed or intended to be distributed or used pursuant to this act to any person not entitled to possess or distribute marijuana under this act shall be guilty of a crime and subject to the penalty set forth in section 401(a)(2)(D) of the Controlled Substances Act (DC Code 33-541(a)(2)(D).
Sec. 4 Notwithstanding any other law, no physician shall be punished, or denied any right, privilege or registration for recommending, while acting in the course of his or her professional practice, the use of marijuana for medical purposes. In any proceeding in which rights or defenses created by this act are asserted, a physician called as a witness shall be permitted to testify before a judge, in camera. Such testimony, when introduced in a public proceeding, if the physician witness so requests, shall have redacted the name of the physician and the court shall maintain the name and identifying characteristics of the physician under seal.
Sec. 5 (a) Any District law prohibiting the possession of marijuana or cultivation of marijuana shall not apply to a medical patient, or to a medical patient's primary caregivers, when a medical or primary caregiver possesses or cultivates marijuana for the medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation of a licensed physician. The exemption for cultivation shall apply only to marijuana specifically grown to provide a medical supply for a patient, and not to any marijuana grown for any other purpose. In determining a quantity of marijuana that constitutes a medical supply, this act shall be interpreted to assure that any medical patient protected by the act shall have access to a sufficient quantity of marijuana to assure that they can maintain their medical supply without any interruption in their treatment or depletion of their medical supply of marijuana.
(b) The prohibition in the Controlled Substances Act against the manufacture, distribution, cultivation, or possession with intent to manufacture, distribute, or cultivate, or against possession, of marijuana shall not apply to a nonprofit corporation organized pursuant to this act.
Sec 6. A medical patient may designate or appoint a licensed health care practitioner, parent, sibling, child, or other close relative, domestic partner, case manager/worker, or best friend to serve as a primary caregiver for the purposes of this act. A designation under this act need not
be in writing; however, any written designation or appointment shall be prima facie evidence that a person has been so designated.
A patient may designate not more than four persons at any one time to serve as a primary caregiver for the purposes of this act. For the purposes of this subsection, the term 'best friend' means a close friend who is feeding, nursing, bathing, or otherwise caring for the medical patient while the medical patient is in a weakened condition.
Sec. 7 Residents of the District of Columbia may organize and operate not-for-profit corporations for the purpose of cultivating, purchasing, and distributing marijuana exclusively for the medical use of medical patients who are authorized by this act to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes. Such corporations shall comply with the District's nonprofit corporation laws. Fees and licenses shall be collected by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs ("DCRA") in the same manner as other not-for-profit corporations operating in the District of Columbia. The Director of DCRA shall issues such corporations exemptions from the sales tax, use tax, income tax, and other taxes of the District of Columbia in the same manner as other nonprofit corporations.
Sec. 8 The exemption from prosection for distribution of marijuana under this act shall not apply to the distribution of marijuana to any person under 18 years of age unless that person is an emancipated minor, or a parent or legal guardian of the minor has signed a written statement that such parent or legal guardian understands: (i) the medical condition of the minor, (ii) the potential benefits and potential adverse effects of the use of marijuana generally and in the case of the minor, and (iii) consents to the use of marijuana for the treatment of the minor's medical condition. Violation of this section shall be subject to the penalties of the Controlled Substances Act.
Sec. 9 (a) The Director of the Department of Health of the District of Columbia must develop a plan, and submit it, within 90 days of the approval of this act, to the Council of the District of Columbia to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients enrolled in Medicaid or a Ryan White CARE Act funded program who are in medical need, who desire to add marijuana to their health care regimen and whose licensed physician reasonably believes that marijuana would be beneficial to their patient.
Just to clarify on this conf call concept, I think we should submit our questions publicly to the moderator(s) and only have them speak w/company. Too many people on a conf call always leads to confusion. (Or a c/f for you military folks!)
Bought another 400k. Now have 36.4 mm.
Nice chart.
Perhaps HESG just wants to have friends in high places! LOL
Was looking at the HESG Website and noticed at the top they are promoting MJNA .. Hmm has somthing already been worked out?
http://www.igohealthy.org/company-news/Health-Sciences-to-Retire-1-5-Billion-Shares.aspx
Its one of their many advertisements at the top.. Refresh page to see more advertisements until it comes up
Hermso, do you have the actual language of the bill, or link to it?
Did you guys notice that MJNA had news today? They're farming!
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&cb=1260569394&article=40736673&symbol=NO%5EMJNA
I did. 3 mm @ $ .0006
This peep will buy more at $.0006
Given the company's size, Frank is likely to be a Jack of all trades. However, I agree that it doesn't give me much comfort given that the CEO told us "midweek"...
Vic - excuse my ignorance, what is PSC ?
will HESG be on PSC?
Generally NO CEO responds to calls from retail investors. If you don't get info, get over it.
I thought the poetential Montana deal came pretty quickly after Tom's visit. That troubled me b/c it seemed like he was rushing it - paying too much, etc. Remember, after he works out a deal, the lawyers get involved... and it bogs down... and they get paid by the hour... and... well, let's just say it's no surprise that the deal is "snowed-in" Montana.
MJNA is in Cali where the weed is; HESG may go to NY where the money is!