Charlotte's Web Holdings Inc (CWBHF)

[jefra1965]

CWBHF fails by 50% in marketing/dosage comparison test. This is quite the lack of quality control from the 'industry leader.'

https://www.leafly.com/news/strains-products/cbd-oil-test-results

That has nothing to do with why cv wasn't on that list. Plenty of those companies have COAs available. CW for one. You guys just got excited because you were hoping for something negative to harp on about CW. It seems like that's all cv shareholders have to root for these days.

Leafly did poor research, and no one here even tried to do the proper DD by simply looking at the website. CW says there are 300mg of hemp extract in their balm. They do not say there are 300mg of CBD in their balm

.


Spin it any way you want. It's misleading at best (50%???) and then very expensive because people are looking for the best compound. Maybe a 5 to 7% difference complemented with another 10-15% OTHER cannabinoids, but 50.

Quote:
Deceptive advertising, also known as false advertising, refers to a manufacturer's use of confusing, misleading, or blatantly untrue statements when promoting a product. Advertising law will protect consumers from deceptive advertising through the enforcement of specific legislation.4 abr. 2015
Deceptive Advertising Definition | Consumer Law
https://consumer.laws.com › deceptive-advertising › deceptive-advertising-d...


Any customer can start legal proceedings. Or imagine a BIG SHORT getting a hold of this information and looking into it a little bit further with that inflated valuation would be a short's dream.

And the word will get out. You now how this works. CVSI is a clear example and the patent is inmaterial to the current operation.

Maybe there are risks associated with NOT using CBD in the label.

Dangerous position