Tag Archives: enterprise

Cannabis Receiverships: A Viable Alternative to Bankruptcy

By Oren Bitan
No Comments

Doing business in California’s legal cannabis industry remains a risky endeavor. The majority of the industry is still unlicensed, tax rates at the state and local levels are high (notwithstanding a recent reprieve from California’s cultivation tax) and there are not enough licenses to meet geographic demand throughout the state. Outside financing remains difficult to secure for equipment, tenant improvements, account receivables and working capital because, under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), cannabis remains a Schedule I narcotic. Therefore, entrepreneurs, investors and lenders who have stakes in state-sanctioned cannabis enterprises expect to see returns that justify the higher level of risk, which places additional financial pressure on cannabis businesses. In addition to the industry specific challenges, the United States economy is on the verge of a recession that may further hamper the industry notwithstanding the industry’s resiliency during the pandemic when it was deemed to be an “essential” industry that benefited from consumer spending of stimulus monies.

These outside pressures increasingly lead to ownership disputes and creditor defaults that result in litigation and the need for restructuring. In some instances, business partners cannot agree about control and finances of the licensed businesses and in other instances unpaid creditors file suit to enforce their interest in a company’s assets. And sometimes a local municipality discovers wrongdoing by an operator and initiates a health and safety lawsuit to cease the illegal condition.

Bankruptcy reorganization is an option typically utilized by struggling businesses to shed or restructure debt. Cannabis businesses, however, cannot take advantage of bankruptcy remedies because bankruptcy is a product of federal law and federal law still prohibits the sale of cannabis.

As a result, stakeholders in legal California cannabis enterprises must consider alternatives to bankruptcy to collect what they can on their loans and investments in the event the enterprise becomes insolvent or requires restructuring. A well-established alternative to bankruptcy is a state court remedy – the appointment of a receiver over the assets of a business or over the entire business operations. Through the receivership process, stakeholders may obtain many of the same protections available to them through bankruptcy

A. Federal Illegality Bars Access to Bankruptcy Protection

Over the past ten years, bankruptcy courts have routinely prohibited licensed cannabis businesses from seeking bankruptcy protection because cannabis remains illegal at the federal level under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Bankruptcy trustees are typically charged with managing and operating property in the same manner that the owner would be bound to do if in possession thereof. Because cannabis remains illegal at the federal level, trustees are not able to manage and operate licensed cannabis businesses.

B. Receivership as an Alternative to Bankruptcy

Under California law, a receiver is a neutral agent of the court appointed to preserve, control, manage and ultimately dispose of property that is subject to the litigation before the court.1 The receiver, therefore, holds property for the court, not the parties to the litigation.

Appointment of a receiver is a statutory provisional remedy. Other than corporate dissolutions under Code of Civil Procedure section 565, the law does not have a specific cause of action to appoint a receiver. Thus, the proponent of a receiver must have a valid cause of action in an underlying lawsuit.

1. The Appointment of a Receiver

The appointment of a receiver rests within the trial court’s discretion. Code of Civil Procedure section 564 contains the broadest statutory authority to appoint a receiver. Subdivision (b), details twelve possible situations in which a receiver may be appointed, most of which are beyond the scope of this article. The most common of these is a lender’s request to appoint a receiver when a borrower defaults on a loan and the lender seeks the appointment of a receiver over its collateral. The statute, however, clarifies that the situations listed in the statute are not exclusive: a court may appoint a receiver “[i]n all other cases where necessary to preserve the property or rights of any party.”

The receiver’s powers are limited by the statute under which the court appointed the receiver and those conferred by the court. The appointment order should, therefore, detail the duties the receiver owes to the court, and actions that the court authorizes the receiver to take to perform those tasks. The order should also specify the property that will be part of the receivership estate.

2. The Receiver’s Powers

The receiver has general statutory powers.2 The statutory powers include (i) commencing or defending litigation; (ii) taking and possessing property of the receivership estate, (iii) receiving rent, collecting debts, and making transfers, and (iv) acting in accordance with the court’s instruction with respect to the property.3 But the court’s authorization is necessary to sue the receiver and for the receiver to commence litigation.4 In the foregoing scenarios, the receiver is immunized personally from tort liability, but not in his or her official capacity as receiver.5

In addition to taking possession of property, the receiver may dispose of receivership property with the court’s approval.6 If the receiver is an equity receiver, the receiver may take possession and satisfy creditors from all the debtor’s assets.7

The court may further authorize the receiver to issue “certificates of indebtedness” to raise money to administer the receivership estate.8 This device permits the receiver to provide liquidity to the estate and gives the certificate holder an interest-bearing priority claim against the receivership estate.

3. Liquidating Cannabis Assets Through a Court Appointed Receiver

After the court appoints the receiver, the receiver should have sufficient powers to, among other things: (i) take over the management of the company; (ii) open bank accounts; (iii) borrow money by issuing receivership certificates; (iv) manage all of the company’s property; (v) hire counsel and other professionals; and (vi) sell the receivership estate’s assets for the benefit of the creditors. To maximize repayment to the creditors, the receiver may hold an auction to sell the assets and assist in facilitating the cancellation of company’s state license while the buyer of the assets secures its state license after the local license is transferred.

State cannabis licenses may not be sold or transferred.9 Yet, to maximize recovery for the creditors, the receiver may need to participate in the regulatory process to maintain a license during the pendency of the receivership and to assist in the amendment of a license while a prospective buyer seeks to obtain its own license. To do so, the receiver will first need to qualify as a licensee under state law to join as a licensee on the license and further the licensee as a going concern. Next, the principals of the prospective buyer will themselves need to qualify as licensees under the license. Then, once the sale of the company’s assets (including any interest in the license) to the buyer closes, the receiver and the company’s original owners will terminate their capacities as licensees of the license, leaving only the new owners as licensees. Thus, the proposed order should be written with attention to ensure the receiver has powers to further the foregoing and not diminish the value of the receivership estate.

After the conclusion of the sale of all assets, the receiver will need to obtain a discharge from the court of his or her duties as receiver. The receiver may do so by the parties’ stipulation or by motion. Together with the request for a discharge, the receiver should seek approval to pay: (i) any lenders to the receivership estate; (ii) professionals that the receiver hired; and (iii) him or herself for his or her services. Upon the court’s approval, the receivership will be terminated.

The conflict between federal and California law regarding cannabis continues to be an impediment for stakeholders in California’s cannabis market. Because of this conflict, stakeholders in California’s legal cannabis market lack access to vital traditional institutions, such as bankruptcy remedies. As a result, stakeholders must be prepared to consider alternatives such as a court appointed receiver, which can be a useful alternative to both secured creditors and unsecured creditors. Stakeholders who pursue a court appointed receiver will benefit from a long-established body of law and experienced professionals.

References

  1. Cal. Rules of Ct., r. 3.1179(a).
  2. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 568-570.
  3. Free Gold Mining Co. v. Spiers, 136 Cal. 484, 486 (1902); Steinberg v. Goldstein, 129 Cal. App. 2d 682, 685 (1954).
  4. Vitug v. Griffin, 214 Cal. App. 3d 488, 493 (1989).
  5. Chiesur v. Superior Court, 76 Cal. App. 2d 198, 201 (1946).
  6. Helvey v. U.S. Bldg. & Loan Ass’n, 81 Cal. App. 2d 647, 650 (1947).
  7. Turner v. Superior Court, 72 Cal. App. 3d 804, 812 (1977).
  8. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 568.
  9. See e.g., Cal. Code Regs. tit. 16, § 5023(c).

Ask the Experts: The Business of Cannabis Meets the Law

By Cannabis Industry Journal Staff
No Comments

Practicing Law Institute Press’s Legal Guide to the Business of Marijuana: Cannabis, Hemp and CBD Regulation is a one-of-a-kind deep dive into the many regulations governing the industry. Aimed at attorneys representing clients in this space, the treatise offers guidance on a range of interrelated topics including state regulation of medical and non-medical cannabis; federal law, enforcement and preemption and their implications for employment, taxes and banking; and the various aspects of establishing and managing a cannabis enterprise, from growth to licensing, transport and distribution. We spoke with co-authors James T. O’Reilly, professor of Public Health Policy at the College of Medicine of the University of Cincinnati and author of leading references on food and drug law, and Edgar J. Asebey, a founding partner of Keller Asebey Life Science Law and a life sciences attorney with over twenty years of experience, about the intersection of the cannabis business and the law.

Q: From the legal industry’s perspective, how has this area of the law evolved over the past few years – and what would you advise clients in cannabis to look for when engaging legal assistance for their businesses?

James T. O’Reilly & Edgar J. Asebey: Over the past few years, we have seen a growing acceptance of the idea that lawfully serving the needs of cannabis consumers is a commendable business initiative. This evolution in thinking – tied to the myriad business opportunities cannabis presents – has given large, mainstream corporate law firms the incentive to grow practices and develop specialists in this area, which is a very positive development.

But it is not enough for lawyers to know their way around M&A and the capital markets; they must also have experience with federal regulatory bodies. As regulations continue to evolve, it is essential for practitioners to be familiar with the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act as well as the Federal Trade Commission Act. The framework for regulating cannabis products already exists, as can be seen in the Warning Letters sent to hemp and CBD companies by both the Federal Trade Commission and Food and Drug Administration (as well as, most recently, the FDA and CDC’s warning about delta-8 THC). If a client places their hemp or CBD product into the stream of commerce, that product will be subject to FDA, FTC and relevant state laws. We strongly recommend seeking out advisors who truly understand these regulations and how they align with the regulatory agencies’ procedures and agendas.

Q: What are the most urgent legal and regulatory topics the industry is watching these days?

O’Reilly & Asebey: Our treatise follows and analyzes the most pressing legal issues facing those in the cannabis and hemp space. In our most recent edition, we add discussion of the Final Rule for the establishment of a domestic hemp production program. We think this is a significant development in that it attempted to address some of the industry’s criticism of some provisions found in the Interim Final Rule, par­ticularly around issues of sampling and testing for THC content. The Final Rule clarified issues around THC percentage testing methodologies, but disappointed many in the industry by leaving in place the low 0.3% dry weight threshold for an acceptable hemp THC level. On the other hand, The Final Rule raises the threshold for a negligent violation from 0.5% to 1.0% total THC and limits the number of violations a grower can receive in one year to one, easing potential penalties for violations.

Of course, the regulation of CBD products is on the minds of many in the industry. Key questions remain about whether cannabinoids such as delta-8 THC can be lawfully sold. Since the FDA has provided no clear guidance with regard to the sale and use of CBD and other hemp-derived cannabinoid-containing prod­ucts, well-meaning businesses find themselves operating in a regulatory gray area. While some states have raced to place delta-8 THC on their controlled substances lists or otherwise regulate it, at the federal level it remains unclear. Our book provides a legal argument showing that current regulations support the lawful production and sale of delta-8 THC. To date, this and other legal arguments have not been tested in the courts and, without FDA guidance, the delta-8 THC sector will remain gray.

Editor’s Note: The Legal Guide to the Business of Marijuana: Cannabis, Hemp and CBD Regulation is now available for purchase here.

About James T. O’Reilly

James T. O’Reilly of the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine is former chair of the 8,000-member Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice of the American Bar Association and has been active in numerous ABA, Federal Bar Association, and state and local bar activities. He retired as Associate General Counsel of The Procter & Gamble Company to teach full-time, and served as a consultant to three federal agencies and to the Deputy Secretary General of the European Commission. He has authored fifty-six texts and more than 230 articles, and his work was cited numerous times in appellate opinions, including “The experts have written . . . ” in a March 2000 opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court (Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 120 S. Ct. 1291). He has received numerous honors and awards for his professional and electoral activities and has been listed in Who’s Who in American Law for twenty-five years. He is a graduate of Boston College and the University of Virginia School of Law.

About Edgar J. Asebey

Edgar J. Asebey, a partner at Asebey Life Sciences Law PLLC, is a regulatory and transactional attorney with over two decades of experience in federal regulation of pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, food, dietary supplement and cosmetics companies. Since 2015, he has been working on cannabis-related matters and transactions, and since 2018, he has provided regulatory compliance, business transactional, venture finance and international trade services to hemp/CBD companies. Mr. Asebey practices before the FDA, the USDA, the CBP, the EPA, and the FTC, representing client companies on regulatory compliance, product approval/registration and FDA enforcement defense matters. He founded and served as president of Andes Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a natural products drug discovery company, from 1994 to 2000, and has served as in-house counsel to two life sciences companies. Mr. Asebey is a member of the American Bar Association (Section on Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice: Food and Drug Committee and International Committee), the Food & Drug Law Institute (FDLI), the Dade County Bar Association, and BioFlorida.

Content sponsored by Practicing Law Institute

Strengthen Supply Chain Management with an Integrated ERP & CMS

By Daniel Erickson
1 Comment

Success in the cannabis industry is driven by a company’s ability to adapt to an ever-changing market and meet the demands of the evolving consumer. Selecting the right business management solution to handle the complexities of the growing cycle as well as daily operations and compliance requirements necessitates diligent research. Ensuring that the selected technology solution has a centralized database in a secure platform designed to reinforce quality throughout company operations is essential in today’s competitive industry. An ERP solution with integrated CMS capabilities helps businesses strengthen supply chain management by seamlessly incorporating cannabis cultivation with day-to-day company operations to efficiently deliver seed to sale capabilities and meet marketplace demands.

What are ERP & CMS?

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) is a business system in which all data is centralized – including finances, human resources, quality, manufacturing, inventory, sales and reporting. A cultivation management system (CMS) is an extension of an ERP solution to manage cannabis greenhouse operations, including growing, inventory and labor needs. A CMS maintains a detailed level of tracking to account for continuous cannabis growth periods that require extensive monitoring and incur a multitude of expenses. In an integrated solution, both the ERP and CMS data are managed under the same secure database to provide a forward and backward audit trail of all business processes. This visibility encompasses the entire supply chain from the management of supplier relationships to distribution – including growing, cultivating, extracting, manufacturing and shipping.

How do ERP & CMS strengthen supply chain processes?

Tracks individual plants and growth stages – By tracking plant inventories at the individual plant level in real-time with a unique plant identifier, greenhouse operations are optimized – monitoring the entire lifecycle of the plant throughout the germination, seedling, vegetative and flowering stages. Audit trails maintain regulatory compliance, including information such as terpene profiles and THC and CBD potency. Monitoring genealogy, mother and cloning, crossbreeding, plant genetics and clone propagation are key to success in this industry. Strain tracking is equally important, including identifying which strains are performing best, producing the most yield and how they are received by the marketplace. Tracking of the entire supply chain includes the recording of plant health, harvesting techniques, production, growth, costs, lab testing and batch yields – without any gaps in information.

PlantTag
A plant tagged with a barcode and date for tracking

Optimizes growing conditions to increase yields – By automatically documenting and analyzing data, insights into plant and greenhouse activities create streamlined processes for an optimal cannabis cultivation environment. This includes the monitoring of all growing activities such as space, climate, light cycles, moisture content, nutrient applications, fertilizer and other resources, which all have an effect on plant growth and yields. Most importantly, labor costs are monitored, as it is the highest expense incurred by growers. In an industry for which many companies have limited budgets, enabling efficient greenhouse planning, automation and workflows reduces overhead costs.

Integrates with regulatory compliance systems – Compliance is a mandatory part of the cannabis business, and many companies haven’t expended the effort to ensure their processes are meeting regulations. This has placed their licensing and business at risk. An integration that automates the transfer of required reporting information from the ERP to state government approved software such as METRC, Biotrack THC and Leaf Data Systems to ensure regulatory compliance is imperative. This streamlined process assures that reporting is accurate, timely and meets changing requirements in this complex industry.

Facilitates safety and quality control – With an ERP solution tracking all aspects of growing, manufacturing, packaging, distribution and sales, safety and quality are effectively secured throughout the supply chain. Despite the lack of federal legality and regulatory guidelines, proactive cannabis producers can utilize an ERP’s automated processes and best practices to ensure safe and consistent products. By standardizing and documenting food safety procedures, manufacturers mitigate the risk of cannabis-specific concerns (such as aflatoxins, plant pesticide residue, pest contamination and inconsistent levels of THC/CBD potency) as well as dangers common to traditional food manufacturers (such as improper employee procedures and training) for those in the edibles marketplace. Food safety initiatives and quality control measures documented within the ERP strengthen the entire supply chain.

Maintains recipes and formulations – In manufacturing, to achieve product consistency in regards to taste, texture, appearance, potency and expected results, complex recipe and formula management is a necessity – including monitoring of THC and CBD percentages. The calculation of specific nutritional values to provide accurate labeling and product packaging provides necessary information for consumers. Cannabis businesses have to evolve with the consumer buying habits and marketplace saturation by getting creative with their product offerings. With integrated R&D functionality, the expansion of new and innovative edibles, beverages and forms of delivery, as well as new extractions, tinctures, concentrates and other derivatives, helps to meet consumer demands.

Handles inventory efficiently – Established inventory control measures such as tracking stock levels, expiration dates and product loss are effectively managed in an ERP solution across multiple warehouses and locations. Cannabis manufacturers are able to maintain raw material and product levels, reduce waste, facilitate rotation methods and avoid overproduction to control costs. With the use of plant tag IDs and serial and lot numbers with forward and backward traceability, barcode scanning automatically links product information to batch tickets, shipping documents and labels – providing the ability to locate goods quickly in the supply chain if necessary in the event of contamination or recall. The real-time and integrated information available helps mitigate the risk of unsafe products entering the marketplace.

Food processing and sanitation
By standardizing and documenting food safety procedures, manufacturers mitigate the risk of cannabis-specific concerns

Utilizes user-based software permissions – Access to data and ability to execute transactions throughout the growing stages, production and distribution are restricted to designated employees with proper authorization – ensuring security and accountability throughout the inventory chain.

Manages supplier approvals – Assurance of safety is enhanced with the maintenance of detailed supplier information lists with test results to meet in-house quality and product standards. Quality control testing ensures that critical control points are monitored and only approved materials and finished products are released – keeping undeclared substances, harmful chemicals and impure ingredients from infiltrating the supply chain. When standards are not met, the system alerts stakeholders and alternate vendors can be sought.

Delivers recall preparedness – As part of an edible company’s food safety plan, recall plans that include the practice of performing mock recalls ensures that cannabis businesses are implementing food safety procedures within their facilities. With seed to sale traceability in an ERP solution, mitigating the risk of inconsistent, unsafe or contaminated products is readily maintained. Integrated data from the CMS solution provides greater insight into contamination issues in the growth stages.

An ERP solution developed for the cannabis industry with supporting CMS functionality embodies the inventory and quality-driven system that growers, processors, manufacturers and distributors seek to strengthen supply chain management. Offering a centralized, secure database, seed to sale traceability, integration to compliance systems, in-application quality and inventory control, formula and recipe management functionality and the ability to conduct mock recalls, these robust business management solutions meet the needs of a demanding industry. With a variety of additional features designed to enhance processes in all aspects of your cannabis operation the solution provides a framework to deliver truly supportive supply chain management capabilities.

Aphria, Inc. Implements Quality Management Systems

By Cannabis Industry Journal Staff
1 Comment

According to a press release published today, Aphria Inc. has implemented Rootstock Software’s cloud Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) solutions and ComplianceQuest’s Enterprise Quality Management System (EQMS). Aphria, one of the largest cannabis companies in the world, trades on both the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange.

Rootstock’s cloud ERP software includes things like order processing, production management, supply chain management, lot and serial number trackability and traceability, compliance reporting, costing and financial management. ComplianceQuest’s EQMS software provides support for GMP compliance and can help improve efficiencies in operations. The EQMS focuses on quality and risk management across Aphria’s business platforms, from sourcing to manufacturing to supply chain management.

Aphria is using the entire EQMS platform, which includes software to handle documents, training, changes, inspections, nonconformance, corrective actions (CAPA) and customer complaints which integrates to Rootstock’s ERP. According to the press release, the company is currently working to roll-out audit, equipment, incident and supplier management functions and will be fully live with the entire quality system in the next few months.

According to Tim Purdie, chief information officer & chief information security officer of Aphria Inc., both platforms delivered on their implementation. “Grounded in the scalability of the force.com platform, CQ transformed our quality management operating capabilities overnight and we are delighted at the fully integrated partnership result,” says Purdie. “We now have fully digital real-time informatics and ability to implement change in a highly transparent manner to meet the demands of our high growth business.”

Adding that Rootstock ERP will help facilitate their company’s production, inventory and supply chain management, Purdie says both platforms will enable Aphria to be increasingly responsive to market needs. “Aphria is setting the standard as a worldwide leader in the cannabis industry through a diversified approach to innovation, corporate citizenship, strategic partnerships and global expansion,” Purdie says. “With these system implementations, we’re now technologically equipped to take our competitive advantage to new levels of market leadership.”

Branding for Cannabis Companies 101: Part 2

By Jennifer Whetzel
1 Comment

Editor’s Note: In Part 1, Jennifer Whetzel introduced the concepts of branding, marketing and advertising for cannabis companies. Part 2 takes a closer look at the benefits of branding. Stay tuned for Part 3 coming next month.

The Value of Branding

Think back: do you remember the very first Nike ad you saw? Probably not.

But when you see the swoosh, you immediately think of Nike. When you see the swoosh, you probably even think “Just do it.” A whole sensibility, one that signifies perseverance and athletic excellence, gets conjured up by that swoosh. A lot of people think that’s the power of advertising, but they’re only partially correct.

The fact that you don’t just know the swoosh but have thoughts and feelings that bubble up when you see it is due to branding. Companies like Nike don’t spend millions on branding reflexively. They do it because brand recognition and the feelings that come with it turn potential consumers into buyers. Branding success is necessary, measurable and valuable – especially for brands looking to establish themselves.Strong branding is what will increase the chances that your marketing and advertising will be effective, and it’s why branding must be one of your top priorities.

Branding: The Precursor to Advertising

You might not know specifically what ads work on you. But the ones that do work are driven by a strong brand.

For example, check out this ad campaign run by McDonald’s: Essentially, the fast food giant used fractions of its logo to make a wayfinding system on highway billboards. It’s clever and memorable, but it only works thanks to McDonald’s strong branding. McDonald’s has spent years building that shorthand because they understand that immediate recognition pays off in the literal and figurative sense.

Similarly, you know an Apple or an Under Armour ad when you see one. And you know this because there’s a consistent look and sensibility that these companies have worked to codify – that’s the branding piece. If you immediately recognize who these messages are coming from even before you engage with the ad, you’re more focused on the message rather than trying to suss out which company it’s coming from or what they’re selling.

This is why branding has to be a precursor to advertising. If you create ads before you build your brand, you may get a message out about what you’re offering. But if you do this, you’re talking at your customer rather than building a relationship with them. Strong branding is what will increase the chances that your marketing and advertising will be effective, and it’s why branding must be one of your top priorities.

The Benefits of Branding

Branding is about building a lasting, positive relationship with your customer. When you present a consistent brand personality and identity to your audience, you build trust. Consider how you form any long-term relationship; it’s through repeated positive, consistent encounters that allow you to see the other party for who they are. You trust them because you feel that you understand them and that they understand you.

Strange as it seems, it’s also true of brands. Building that bond with your customers will give you an advantage against brands that aren’t very distinct. With proper branding, a company can build and solidify consumer trust, trust that pays off in the form of increased sales, loyalty and good reviews. These brands aren’t constantly introducing themselves to consumers because over time, the branding itself does the selling and makes it easier to introduce new products down the line. Companies that don’t build that trust will have to fight for recognition, and things only get worse with more competition.

The Dollar Value of Branding

And of course, there are numbers to back this up. Every year, Forbes puts out a list of the world’s most valuable brands, and they use complex math to determine the actual value of this intangible thing called a Brand. Based on their thinking, a branded product should earn an 8% premium over a generic product. You can see some of their findings in the table below for a few categories that are traditionally very well-branded.

Industry Brand Brand Value (Billions)[1]
Technology Apple $205.5
Technology Microsoft $125.3
Consumer Packaged Goods Coca-Cola $59.2
Restaurants McDonald’s $43.8
Apparel NIKE $36.8
Restaurants Starbucks $17.0
Apparel Adidas $11.2
Consumer Packaged Goods Kellogg’s $8.0

These numbers, however, make it difficult to compare how well a company’s branding works for them because the brand’s total value is influenced by the size of the company. After doing a few simple calculations, we compared the Brand Value to the total Enterprise Value of each company to determine what we will call their Brand Contribution, which demonstrates how their branding efforts paid off.

When you compare the percentage of total company value that solely comes from the value of the brand, we can see that Nike significantly outperforms competitor Adidas, McDonald’s has a stronger brand than Starbuck’s, and Apple comes close to doubling the brand performance of Microsoft — none of which is surprising.

What might surprise you is the brand at the top of the list when it comes to contribution versus overall company value. Kellogg’s is one of the smallest companies to make the list in terms of Brand Value, and it has the lowest enterprise value in our list. Yet, Kellogg’s has the highest brand contribution. This makes sense in the high-stakes world of consumer-packaged goods; the competition is fierce, well-funded and global, which means that branding that resonates with customers is extremely important.

Industry Brand Brand Value Enterprise Value[2] Brand Contribution[3]
Consumer Packaged Goods Kellogg’s $8.0 $28.4 28.2%
Apparel NIKE $36.8 $133.4 27.6%
Restaurants McDonald’s $43.8 $187.2 23.4%
Consumer Packaged Goods Coca-Cola $59.2 $254.8 23.2%
Technology Apple $205.5 $950.3 21.6%
Apparel Adidas $11.2 $59.0 19.0%
Restaurants Starbucks $17.0 $109.7 15.5%
Technology Microsoft $125.3 $990.9 12.6%

These companies are all massive and wealthy because they prioritize trust and consistency as part of their long-term plan to sell products. Branding promotes loyalty, but its ability to promote trust can be even more powerful by paying off in the long-term. And in this new legal cannabis market, trust is going to be just as critical as it is for traditional companies. After all, the power of branding isn’t just getting people to know who you are — it’s getting them to believe in you.

  1.  https://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/#tab:rank
  2. Enterprise value gathered from ycharts.com on 6/20/2019. Ycharts defines enterprise value as: Enterprise Value (EV) is a valuation metric alternative to traditional market capitalization that reflects the market value of an entire business. Like market cap, EV is a measure of what the market believes a company is worth. Enterprise value captures the cost of an entire business, including debt and equity. It is a sum of claims of all preferred shareholders, debt holders, security holders, common equity holders, and minority shareholders – unlike market cap, which only captures the total value of common equity securities.
  3. Ladyjane’s valuation of the strength of a brand. What percentage of the company’s overall valuation can be attributed to the brand? Brand Contribution = Brand Value / Enterprise Value