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.
Have to disagree I got the same documents as Firestream under a FOIA request and anything of value was blacked out. The reasons were blacked out, the notes blacked out in most cases only the single sentence result was not blacked out. They also sent pages that wete 100% blacked out.
I think you will loose liquidity too fast at a 100/1 I think a 10/1 is better for the long term of the company
Yes it is. Looking good. Some may want to get in before they miss out.
I knew what you meant, wasn't me
Im buying several names this week awaiting capital to clear. If it runs it will be of little consequence for me i am so far in the green i can wait for the dips
I will at tomorrow as long as it is below .20. I will double down if it goes below .15
I see an increase in my position in my future
And trends being what they are the MJ ETF will be a good long play also
You know I am looking this and I have the same feeling. This price point is worth adding more and if it goes down I will continue to buy.
KAYS may be volatile right now while they work on some things and grow, but like I have said before. I live here in Portland and KAYS is a good long term investment, charts, trends and PR's aside that is my long term call using my eyes here everyday.
Random fun fact was measure 94 passed in 2014, early rec sales were not legal until tbe end of 2015 and actual legal rec mj was not legal until Oct 15th of this year. That being said they basically stopped all enforcement after 94 passed.
I agree but I think a little breathing after this run up would be healthy to sustain it longer term
Youre right. I was trying to remember off the top of my head. I remember when the law first past there was a lot of confusion if it was per person or per house. The actual ORS is pretty confusing
Recreational is 3 plants per household, dont remember what medical is, i want to say 5 plants
This is good news for us
We will see if this creates a buying opportunity. Some anecdotal points i have not been to the KAYS in Portland but I have noticed that the shops that are highly dependent on outside supply seem to be the hardest hit by this, just an observation
I was going to ask if anyone knew if the lack of labs was affecting kays. This was actually front page news on our paper The Oregonian yesterday
Obama does not have the authority to do it. Read section 811 of the controlled substance act. Schedule 2 is just as illegal recreationally as 1,3,4 and 5. In Oregon Marijuana is illegal by federal law any federal agency can still arrest you
No if it is on any schedule recreational is illegal by federal law. Obama wont change it, in fact the controlled substance act section 811 specifically leaves the authority to add remove and chenge the schedule solely up to the attorney general of the united states but what would i know, i only have the required dea number to purchase scheduled drugs and a license to practice medicine in 4 states, but youre right you know more about it than anyone
Schedule 2 means its has a high potential for abuse and can only be used for accepted medical purposes by perscription only. To truly be legal as recreational it would need to be removed from the schedule altogether
Is Kaya a registered trademark or is Kaya Shack. If it is the latter than they could use Kaya Cannabis and not be in violation
Considering i own Kays i think your reply is misguided. I think wise investing happens when you invest after hearing all sides not just the side you want to hear
Interesting because Trump and all the people who have been named as potential attorney general all have stated they will enforce federal Marijuana laws. I also think people need to realize the president doesn't control what is on the schedule or not. The Controlled Substance Act section 811 states sole authority is granted to the attorney general, this is actually why i am not optimistic about it under trump even though he will be good for business. Also legal everywhere or not Kays is still only in oregon and until they expand outside the state everywhere else is subjective.
I agree, I am not at .50 in a year I am at .25, but I agree with your realistic and well stated estimate. May I add even if everyone votes it down elsewhere if Kays grow OR right and in a decent fashion we will still see the full upside less any potential price in
Future expansion plans are going to be my question and focus. I expect revenue growth will continue for awhile but will be offset by balance sheet growth for expansion
I seem to recall this issue brought up, discussed and put to rest a long time ago, this is old news that is long out of date here.
Yeah, while most people watch NOV 8 to see who the next president is, I think we are screwed either way so I am watching the MJ vote in every state.
So my thought FL is that it is a new market and with time like all other states I think it will go rec. CA though already has tons of medical facilities that need only file some paperwork to sell rec like Kaya in OR. Kaya will have big capital over head and lots of competition in CA, not that it cant be done though. AZ and NV also have rec on the ballot so the market is getting huge, we need to be looking at growth even if it has to go on the balance sheet a bit.
Agreed but Im watching FL more for a possible effect with Kays, if they have enough capital to rapidly expand into other markets.
I don't know that would work. The laws are a bit different with MJ. For example a family can go into Starbucks and get coffee even though that starbucks may sell alcohol (some Starbucks have full bars in them now). However if you are under 21 you can not go in to an MJ store, period. So the two combined would still be a store that only caters to MJ customers and the last thing you want to do is provide an environment where a person may be tempted to chill out have a coffee and enjoy a piece of their edible because if they are caught by governing agencies the store can be shut down for the use and consumption of MJ on site.
I think the high end servicing stores that KAYS is trying to produce is the best approach for the time being and the foreseeable future
In addition Arizona is voting on rec sales and Montana has a ballot measure that would remove the restrictions that all but prevent medical sales, this is just the west coast. The east coast also has a bunch of states voting on the same. You can expect to see the cities in Oregon vote for the 3% sales tax on rec sales but with the addition of stores and hopefully rapid future growth I do not see this affecting the bottom line of Kays
I live there.
Acquisition is very possible and very realistic, however there are a few private dispensaries growing here that I don't think they will be able to get such as the Shango chain. They are nicer stores and would be more fitting of the Kaya Shack brand. The other stores may be to "lower class" for what they are doing and are not in the best areas or locations. That being said anything is possible.
I think the concept of KAYS would do well to look in the Hillsboro area and west Portland in addition to saturation of the Salem market. With full recreational sales started on October 1st growth now will pay off in the near future. Seeing lots of potential with this one.
So which method does a greater service to someone who needs something explained, ignoring semantics and articulating something that is factually untrue. Or a true and accurate statement. If someone does not already understand this one educates the other implies the trail of money is going somewhere other than where it is. One implies that the company is pocketing their cash directly the other explains the indirect way that a company in pocketing money. The details are not semantics in the world of investing they are imperative facts. like I said, I understood what you were saying, but if someone didn't know this from the get go it is an education not based in fact but implications that are untrue.
Take that for what it is worth and with a whole lot of salt. I am unaware of anything in any stock market that is "safe".
Ok I officially like the potential of where this company can go. I live in the Portland area so I have been watching. They have competition that is growing so they must grow as fast as possible. That being said I am opening a new long position today and if I still like what I see I will add as I go.
I am very interested in what is going on here and where they plan on going with this. Yes the dilution sucks and I question why they focus on trying to sell a company rather than grow and make a company. However.....
Hang with is a legit company ran by legit people with legit experience that has taken companies public with billion dollar valuations and so on. The hang with platform is legit as a business and I see no issue there.
The PR says integrate it into the app and a whole new product line so where are they going with this. Is it a talk to people you are meeting up with? That seems like a decent idea, or is it talk to celebrities through the app (you can already do that on other platforms and with Hang with) so I see that as a bad idea, too much competition already in that space. Is a new product an app that allows anyone with it to basically face time each other, that might not be a bad idea, that is something I would like to have on an android but face time is only on apple. I also do not know how periscope works into that space so it may be a competitive edge that will be hard to break into.
I would like more information beyond the constant PR to aid in dilution of shares buy dumping convertible notes.
That's not quite true. Unless you are buying the stock in an IPO, secondary offering or positive placement direct from the company your money NEVER goes back to them. It goes to the person or company that owned the shares you bought less commissions to brokers. So to say they are paying themselves with "our" money, while I get the intent of what you are saying is actually not fully correct or true. It makes it look like the company is literally taking a persons money and putting in in their pocket which is false and incorrect.
The money comes in, they take thier salary and fund operations. The creditors sell shares and get more than they invested back. The executives paid themselves in cash from the investment not shares so they do not benefit and they do not lose in either way.
Oh it has and i am watching closely. I opened a position the other week i am holding long and not trading as i have in the past. The potential is worth a speculative play on this.
Except the investment is simply another convertible note to the tune of almost another 200 million shares so while i was cautiously optimistic at first i fear this will not run as any potential advance will bemet with dilution every month for 4 months it seems