Now the claims are being made that the other companies are better just because they have a higher market cap?
So, if you invest $1,000 in CVSI at a 600 million market cap, and it drops 90%, how is that better than investing $1,000 in a company with a $5 million cap that also drops 90%? Wouldn't your losses still be 90% either way?
Also, claims always being made that other products have a great retail presence, so that automatically makes them better... Those who have done DD will understand that CVSI is retail only, with a fledgling pharmaceutical division that is burning massive cash:
This is CVSI's own description:
"The Company has two operating segments; consumer products and specialty pharmaceutical. The consumer products segment develops, manufactures and markets products based on hemp-based Cannabidiol ("CBD"), under the name PlusCBD™ in a variety of market sectors including nutraceutical, beauty care and specialty foods. The specialty pharmaceutical segment is developing drug candidates which use CBD as a primary active ingredient."
What that reveals from DD, is they are fully dependent upon retail for all current revenue and growth. They even increased retail distribution by adding 20% more locations, and still declined 25% in revenue from the last quarter.
My point is not to discredit CVSI, they still appear to be a good company who is going through growing pains and maturing. However, they clearly mentioned in the last earnings report that retail has been tough due to competition.
The other companies are single dimensional as well.
From an investor point of view, would we want to invest in 30% revenue growth with another company, or Canb's 500% revenue growth and multiple subsidiaries that include full vertical integration in cannabis?
