"If the amount of shares grow and simultaneously the company's revenues and assets grow nothing was diluted."
Once again, I would refer you to the definition of dilution. The very act of increasing the share count is, by definition, dilution. That said, grasping the impact of the dilution is what matters ... while each share held now represents a smaller percentage of the company, was the value of the company increased enough to offset the impact of that dilution?
By what percentage did the number of shares increase?
By what percentage did revenue increase?
By what percentage did their assets grow? (remember, a lot of numbers get thrown around on posting boards that have no basis in reality, like greenhouses supposedly worth $1B cough cough)
More importantly:
By what percentage did present earnings, as well as potential future earnings increase?
What liabilities did they take on?
etc.
Aurora is more than the sum of the parts, however, the value of that whole is only going to be revealed in time. Let's face it: until some real revenues, earnings and costs become known in the year following legalization, it's all one big crapshoot.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
