Stand aside Canada! Events are moving in a strategically interesting way in Europe. And for once it is not news of the German bid.
In this case, implementation of the decision in Luxembourg would actually have two immediate effects.What, where, when? Luxembourg’s new center-left coalition of the Greens, Socialists and more traditional Democrats have put recreational cannabis on their ruling mandate and five-year agenda as of November 29, 2018.
In the comments of the same at the press conference held last week, the sentiments were pretty much of one tenor: “It’s way overdue.”
What does that mean, however, for the rest of the conversation across the continent?
Luxembourg: The First Recreational “State” Market In Europe?
While local advocates are quick to say that their ambition will make them the first EU country to completely legalize recreational cannabis, this is mostly true, but not entirely.
As much as it is fashionable these days to diss Holland, the fact of the matter is that the Dutch pioneered just about everything about the modern movement except clear cut regulation. Coffeeshop envy being what it is, however, it is true that the historical marker of the Dutch market was grey areas. That, however, has been in shifting territory for the last four to five years however. Hard as it is to believe that in just 2014 the Cannabis Cup held its last expo in Amsterdam. How the world has changed since then!
There is also this fact: Switzerland (true not an EU country but just next door geographically), is also poised to use this excuse to make its next move to fully leaded THC. The country has seen a sharp uptick in the consumer, OTC CBD market over the last two years. So much so that foreign (read American and Canadian in particular) enterprises are now looking to Switzerland as one of the more interesting “semi-EU” entry strategies at present. Taxes on a highly profitable industry are also in the public discussion. Adding a bit of THC to the mix, in other words, is likely to come fast in other places too.
Will This Move The Needle In Other Places?
The answer to that question is also, undeniably, yes. How fast that will happen in individual countries across Europe is another discussion. See France, which is now the largest member of the EU to have so far successfully ducked the cannabis question except for some basic decrim ideas that the now embattled French President Emmanuel Macron might, finally, put some enthusiasm into backing.
This could also certainly galvanize the UK. One way or the other, to stay or leave the EU itself. Full recreational won’t be in the cards, however, for quite some time.
Sound incredible? See Brexit so far.it will create the first deliberately regulated recreational market in Europe.
Many other EU countries have also been chafing at the slow pace of reform. Even after basic medical use has occurred. See German advocates who long to follow both the U.S. and Canada, and at present are for the most part shut out of the medical cultivation process. They are simply being outbid by the large Canadians.
But how fast such reforms will come even in Luxembourg, not to mention have a knock on effect elsewhere, no matter how momentous, is still an undecided question.
What Is The Biggest Immediate Impact Going To Be?
As is usually the case in Europe, things are rarely as straightforward as one country deciding to do (or not do) something. In this case, implementation of the decision in Luxembourg would actually have two immediate effects.
One, it will create the first deliberately regulated recreational market in Europe. How fast that could actually roll out is up for debate, considering that the country only legalized medical use as of this summer. As Colorado, California and certainly Canada have proven in spades so far, recreational reform always need some kind of medical base to start with. And implementation of both kinds of markets always seems, at least so far, to carry litigation. Especially in young, untested markets. See the German bid, most recently, just across the border.
However here is the second, and far more intriguing reality that really may be key to the entire enchilada. The legality of cannabis in Luxembourg also has everything to do with the German public cannabis market. Namely, the German stock exchange will only allow Germans to clear stock purchases of publicly listed cannabis companies on the Deutsche Börse if they are in line with not only German cannabis law but also that in Luxembourg, where they actually clear. That was a big issue this summer, only rectified when Luxembourg first changed its medical law.
It also meant, as of this fall, that Aurora went public in New York, not Frankfurt.
In the future, however, after Luxembourg goes full recreational Monty, this will no longer be the case. This will already be tested next spring as another company hopes to go public here. And when that happens, although certainly not for the next several years, the entire discussion of recreational reform will fully and finally be in the European room.
Cannabis businesses must not only protect their investments in their technical creations, but also must protect their brand identities. A cannabis producer can invest heavily in making a desirable, high-quality product, and can advertise and sell this product so as to generate customer interest and goodwill, but if the customer cannot distinguish the producer’s product from that of its competitor, this investment is for not. Trademarks become unenforceable when they are no longer distinctive.
A trademark provides its owner with the right to have the Court stop another entity from using the trademark, or using a similar trademark in a way that confuses the public. When the trademark is infringed, the Court can also make a monetary award in favor of the trademark owner.
Trademarks are identifiers of a particular source of manufacture and they can take virtually any form. Trademarks can be words, phrases, symbols, names, designs, letters, numbers, colors, three-dimensional shapes, holograms, moving images, modes of packaging, sounds, scents, tastes, textures, or any other distinguishing element. What a trademark cannot be is a mere descriptor of the goods or services themselves because such a trademark would prevent other entities from describing their products in their ordinary terms.
Trademarks can be registered, but they do not have to be. In choosing a trademark, the cannabis producer must balance competing impulses: the desire to choose a trademark that is suggestive of the product itself so as to have an immediate meaning to customers without need of an expensive marketing campaign; and the desire to coin a unique and striking trademark which is instantly eye-catching and memorable, but which must be advertised before customers can understand the product to which it refers.
For example, a depiction of cannabis leaf or a word that plays on the ordinary terms used to refer to cannabis will not make a strong mark that can be enforced against those who adopt something similar. On the other hand, a coined word, such as “Kodak”, may have no independent association with cannabis but, after a time, use of this mark in association with a cannabis product can create a very strong mark with a wider ambit of exclusivity.
All that said, even a very suggestive mark can serve as a trademark where the use of the mark is so longstanding and ubiquitous that the suggestive mark acquires a secondary meaning as an indicator of its source of manufacture. Cannabis producers can and should also consider adopting specific colors, scents or tastes of their products as trademarks, where appropriate.
Trademarks become unenforceable when they are no longer distinctive. For this reason, trademark owners must keep abreast of any use of trademarks similar to their own by third parties, and must act quickly to either license such uses or to restrain them.Cannabis businesses have been very busy applicants for trademarks. More than 1700 such applications are now on file, though a comparative few have yet been registered.
Trademarks can be registered, but they do not have to be. When a company’s product or service becomes known to its customers or potential customers with reference to a mark through ordinary business use, a trademark has been created.
Registration does however provide certain advantages. Under the amendments to the Trademarks Act coming in 2019, a registered trademark can be obtained for without any proof of use or goodwill. By contrast, and as noted above, an unregistered mark must be used and possess goodwill before it can be said to exist at all. A registered trademark provides protection for its owner across Canada. An unregistered trademark can only be enforced in the geographical area in which its owner has established its reputation. A registered trademark is protected from those who use it in a manner that is likely to depreciate the goodwill of the trademark. An unregistered trademark only protects against consumer confusion.
Registration under the Trademarks Act also makes it an offence to sell goods or services on a commercial scale in association with another’s registered trademark, or to traffic in infringing labels. Further, a trademark owner can request that the import or export of such goods in Canada be arrested. No similar rights accrue for unregistered trademarks.
Finally, a registered trademark is published at the CIPO web site, providing notice of its existence to new market entrants before these entrants commit to using a similar trademark. Unregistered marks are not always easily discovered and a new market entrant may commit to a mark before having any opportunity to discover that it is the unregistered trademark of another.
Registering a trademark is straightforward. The applicant prepares an application that identifies the applicant, the trademark and the goods and/or services with which the trademark is being used or is intended to be used. Once satisfied that the application complies with the Trademarks Act, CIPO publishes the application to allow potential opponents of the registration to come forward. If there is no opposition, or if an opposition proceeding is brought and dismissed, the trademark is issued.
There is an interaction between the Trademarks Act and the Plant Breeder’s Rights Act. As discussed above, when a denomination has been adopted for a plant variety under the Plant Breeder’s Rights Act, nothing similar can be adopted or registered as a trademark. This is so other traders may use the denomination in their sale of the variety after expiry of the plant breeder’s right.
Cannabis businesses have been very busy applicants for trademarks. More than 1700 such applications are now on file, though a comparative few have yet been registered. Trademark applications in this area are likely to increase further with the coming changes to the Trademarks Act and the removal of the requirement that applicants show use of the trademark prior to registration. Companies will be encouraged to apply for trademarks they may only be considering using, and for any trademarks that they think their competitors may be planning to use. There is some concern that the changes to the Trademarks Act will lead to the rise of trademark trolls.
Before adopting a particular trademark, the producer must do what it can to minimize the likelihood that a third party will assert that the trademark infringes the third party’s prior rights. Searches of Canadian and international trademarks, particularly United States trademarks, are advised. National intellectual property offices, such as CIPO and the United States Patent and Trademark Office, maintain easily searchable databases of registered and applied-for trademarks that should be reviewed. Search professionals can also assist in identifying trademarks that have never been the subject of a trademark application. With the result of the searches in hand, the cannabis producer can determine whether or not to proceed to adopt the contemplated mark and invest in its promotion.
In Part 5, Naiberg will explain how to use a copyright to protect works of creative expression. Stay tuned for more!
Tilray has long been seen as one of the market leaders in the global cannabis space. They are strategically placed in several critical areas to continue to do well, and put up major competition for just about everyone else (including German market entry first Canopy, plus the other big players in both Canada and Europe) ever since. See Aurora, Maricann and Aphria, to name a few. On the EU front, they are also certainly giving Dutch Bedrocan (with not only existing government contracts, but a newly increased ex-im medical allowance across the open Schengen border) a run for its money. And appear to have broached a monopoly long held by GW Pharma in the UK.
But first things first. Here is a brief list of accomplishments on the corporate CV so far.In the U.S., Tilray just scored a medical trial at the University of San Diego with a pill used to treat a nerve disorder.
Long (relatively speaking) before Europe was on the map for anyone but a couple of Canadian LPs, the company was exporting to Croatia (in 2016). Even the initial hiccups in delivery (a batch arrived in broken bottles), did not stop their foreign expansion plans.
When the first German cultivation bid was due, the company also, at least according to their spokesperson in Berlin at the time, considered applying. However, by late summer last year, Tilray was actually the first to publicly tip their hands that not only were they bowing out of the German tender, but had rather decided to import to Germany from cheaper EU climes. See their production facilities in Portugal. Plus of course a mass distribution deal to German pharmacies via local distribution.
Then there is their social media presence on Leafly, which also competes with Weedmaps as both an information portal and dispensary finder in key markets (California and Canada). TheGerman version of the website (Leafly.de), has created a reality, no matter where the server is located, of also connecting directly to patients in a market still finding its way.
Add all these elements together, and that puts the company behind it all in an unbelievably strong position to continue to gain both market access and market growth in multiple jurisdictions while carefully moving at literally the change if not bleeding edge of the law.
How much long term impact this will have, however remains to be seen. Why? The times are changing fast. And not everyone is following a policy of promotion timed around other large events (see Canadian recreational legalization and the timing of the company’s IPO).
Here is another example: the company’s most touted recent double victory, on each side of the Atlantic. Why? This is a place where cannabis companies are starting to compete. And while notable, particularly in it’s timing, is clearly indicative of the next stage in the development of the legitimate medical cannabis industry– not just Tilray.
Trials As Market Entry Tools
Medical trials in both the United States and Europe right now (including the UK for now at least), are the best way for cannabis companies to enter and gain market share. In the U.S., Tilray just scored a medical trial at the University of San Diego with a pill used to treat a nerve disorder.
Last week, Tilray also announced that they had essentially become the first Canadian LP to successfully challenge GW Pharmaceuticals on its home turf in the UK, even if for now limited to one patient application at a time. That won’t last, nor will such a tight monopoly.From a medical point of view, it is a very positive sign, at least for now.
That cross-Atlantic connection is even more interesting, however, given U.S. market entry recently for GW Pharmaceutical’s product, Epidiolex.
From a medical point of view, it is a very positive sign, at least for now. How it will end up in the future is anyone’s guess, including stock valuation.
Most advocates, of course, still hope for a medical market where patients are not restricted from deciding between the whole plant, oils or even the pharmaceutical products they choose to take.
Tilray of course is also not the only large LP engaged in medical trials. They are going on all over Europe right now (even if not as well strategically publicized). Health Canada is also committing to trials in Canada over the next five years.
However, what this very clearly demonstrates is that the global medical market is now ripe pickings for companies who approach the entire discussion from a “pharmacized” product point of view.Even if that means in Europe, and including for Tilray, entering the German and other medical markets with flower, oils and medical products.
There are many ironies along the path towards global cannabis legalization. Too many to count. But surely one of the oddest was always going to be the reacceptance and relegalization of cannabis in China.
During the 19th Century British occupation, the majority Muslim Xinjang region of the country was a major cannabis producer (and exporter) to British India.This was done legally and under tariff until 1934 when the communist government cut off legal trade.
Currently,punishment for possession yields10-15 days jail time and a 2,000-yuan (approximately $300) fine. Illegal sales, however, carry the death penalty. Last year, China executed 10 people convicted of drug trafficking in a public space to send a strong statement about the launch of a new anti-drug campaign. It certainly sent a message.
But to Westerners, in particular, a highly confusing one.
So where is the “market?” And how and where is cannabis being slowly reintroduced to the country in the age of global reform?In 2003, they issued regulations to normalize the industry.
Hemp Is Widely Farmed
Farmers in the northerly province of Heilongjiang province, near Russia, are producing hemp legally these days – bound for industrial, medical and edible commercial use. The crop is highly profitable for farmers – bringing in about USD $1,500 per acre.This is far more than other crops like corn. Chinese authorities had, until earlier this century, turned a blind eye to its production. In 2003, they issued regulations to normalize the industry.
This production region also accounts for half of all farmland currently under legal hemp production, globally.
That is not a typo.
More Than Half Of Global Cannabis Patents Are Chinese
During the 20th Century,as cannabis reform moved on, not to mention western medical knowledge expanded about the plant, no surprise, the Chinese government began to lend support to a burgeoning industry and medical research. That also began surprisingly early. During the Chinese involvement in the Vietnam War during the 1970’s, the government needed a source of cheap clothing material for soldiers. They also needed cheap, accessible medicines with strong anti-bacterial properties, particularly in the humid jungle.
Given the highly politicized nature of the plant itself, not to mention current geopolitical developments shaping the global industry, Chinese exports are likely to stir a global conversation.Approximately half of the world’s 600 cannabis patents are now held in China, rivalling the potential of Israel on both the cannabinoid medicine and medical device front.
These days, there is a greater appreciation than ever for “traditional” Chinese medicine,long stigmatized by Western approaches to the same, far from China. The discovery of the so-called “endocannabinoid system” of the body by Israeli scientists at the turn of the century also supports this sea change. Including not only the use of cannabisbut other natural herbs and procedures like acupuncture to stimulate it.
The Chinese domestic medical cannabis trade, in other words, is ready to take off in the world’s largest greying population. The horse has, obviously, left the barn in the West.
But what does all this mean for non-Chinese competitors not only in Chinabut outside of it, as the drug heads for export crop status?
Cannabis Trade Wars Are In The Offing
Given the highly politicized nature of the plant itself, not to mention current geopolitical developments shaping the global industry, Chinese exports are likely to stir a global conversation.
President Donald Trump’s administration, it should be remembered, allowed a British CBD import to enter the U.S. pharmaceutical market this summer (while still banning all U.S. producers from entering the same thanks to delays on rescheduling domestically). It is not an unreasonable prediction to make, certainly after Trump also struck a deal with Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu to delay the date of Israeli medical cannabis to the rest of the world in exchange for political support in moving the nation’s capital from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
A U.S. “ban” on Chinese-sourced cannabis would be one of the most natural responses in the world for the current American administration, which has not only used the cannabis trade card before (Israel, UK) but has yet to move on rescheduling the drug at home.
What To Expect If Considering Importing
Tread carefully. While Europe (at least to North Americans) has its eccentric quirks when it comes to international business, the situation in China is far different.Tread carefully, and find local partners where possible.
Beyond appalling penalties for getting the paperwork (or etc.) wrong, there aremany differences in business, medical and even broader culture that are completely foreign to Westerners (in particular).
Tread carefully, and find local partners where possible. Where to meet Chinese partners?
Chinese investors are beginning to enter particularly European markets via conferences. In the past several years, while they are still a trickle, Chinese doctors, investorsandscientists have begun appearing in the West. Particularly in more medically oriented forums in Europe.
As August comes to a close, it is clear that it has been one busy quarter for market development – all over the place. Developments in the UK and Germany in particular, however, have been dramatic. In turn, this is also starting to bring other countries online – even as potential producers move in on the market and before real domestic medical reform has occurred (in countries ranging from Turkey to Spain).
And, say no more, Canada finally announced its “due date” in October.
How all three markets will move forward is also very interesting. They are all interrelated at this point, and even more intriguing, increasingly in synch.
This trend is also one advocates should take note of to push forward on further legislative and access issues going forward.
In the future, no matter what happens with Brexit, developments in both the UK and Germany will continue to push the conversation forward in the EU, a region that is now the world’s most strategic (and globally accessible) cannabis market. Advocates, particularly in Canada and the U.S. right now, can also do much to support them.
Events here, while they may seem “slow” to outsiders, are in fact progressing – and as Cannabis Industry Journal has been reporting – quite fast even if the developments haven’t been (initially at least) quite as public. As this ‘zine wrote, breaking the news in July, the Federal German Drugs and Medical Devices Agency (BfArM) quietly posted the revised bid in July on a European tender site after refusing to confirm that it had sent out (undated) cancellation letters to previous hopefuls. Applicants for the new tender have until October 22 to respond. It is expected, given the new focus on “coalitions” that there will be many more applicants from global teams.
Even more interesting is the informal “reference price” that BfArM is appearing to set for bid respondents (7 euros per gram) and the impact of that on all pricing going forward across the continent.
Within a week, it also emerged that the Deutsche Borse, the organization that regulates the German stock exchanges, and working via its third party clearing arm, refused to clear any trades of any publically listed North American cannabis company that are also listed in Germany. This is an interesting development for sure – particularly now. How it will impact the biggest companies (read publicly listed Canadian LPs) is unclear, particularly because they can now raise capital via global capital markets – including the U.S.
Earlier in the summer, one of the largest public or “statutory” health insurance companies in Germany issued the “Cannabis Report.” It showed that cannabis has now moved out of “orphan drug territory” in Germany, and over 15,000 patients are now prescribed the drug. That said, over 35% of all claims are still being rejected. Most patients at this point, are also women older than 40.
It seems to be less than coincidence that the other big mover this quarter (and in fact most of the year) has been the UK. These two countries are linked by history and trade more than any other in Europe.
As of October, the country will not only reschedule cannabinoid-derived medicine to a Schedule II drug, but also allow more patients to access it. It is unclear how fast reform will come to a country in the throes of Brexit drama, but it is clear that this discussion is now finally on the table. What is also intriguing about this development is how far and fast this will open the door for other firms to compete, finally, with the monopoly enjoyed by GW Pharmaceuticals in the British Islands since 1998.
In one of the quarter’s biggest coups that stockholders loved but left the domestic industry with few illusions about the fight ahead, GW Pharmaceuticals also announced that it had managed (ahead of all U.S.-based producers and firms and even rescheduling in the U.S.) to gain U.S. federal government approval to import a CBD-based epilepsy drug (Epidiolex) into the United States from the UK and thus gain national distribution.
What is even more interesting is that the next formal “steps” in all three markets are now timed to coincide within weeks of each other in October this year.
Canadian producers of course are in the leading position to enter both German and British markets. Further their production centers now springing up all over Europe are supplying both their source markets and will be available for international distribution.
After a year of embarrassing missteps and revelations, along with two well-run advocacy campaigns by the parents of children with drug-resistant epilepsy, the British government is finally throwing in the towel on medical cannabis.
Sadly, politics rather than science has driven the pace of British cannabis legalizationIn the last week of July, a mere two weeks after announcing his review of the issue against mounting domestic pressure and outrage in the media, Sajid Javid, the home secretary, announced that cannabis medications will be rescheduled by the fall, allowing doctors to prescribe them more widely.
“Fall,” it should be noted, is not only when the Canadian government moves ahead with its own fully recreational market, but also when the German bid respondents need to file their paperwork to participate in the country’s first grow bid, Round II.
A Political Embarrassment Beyond Brexit
Sadly, politics rather than science has driven the pace of British cannabis legalization, just like it has in other places. However the UK is one of the best examples of how far medical knowledge has outstripped the pace of political change, and in this case, exposed bare the banal reason.
News broke this summer, as two families mounted a highly successful battle in the public for medical access, that the Prime Minister herself has personally profited from a status quo that is only now slowly going to change.
How and why?
It was bad enough in May that the publicly anti-pot reformer Victoria Atkins, the cabinet level British drugs minister, was married to the managing director of British Sugar, the company with the exclusive right to grow cannabis in the British Isles. British Sugar is also the sole cultivator for GW Pharmaceuticals, the only company with the license to produce cannabis medications in the UK (and export them globally). In June, however, it emerged that Prime Minister Theresa May’s husband, Phillip May, is employed by Capital Group– an investment firm that is also the largest shareholder in GW Pharma. This is against the backdrop of news that broke earlier this year that GW Pharma had made the UK the single largest exporter of cannabis-based medicine annually. Globally. Even more than all of the Canadian firms combined currently exporting to Europe and beyond. Even as the drug is largely denied to British residents.
You don’t even have to be British to think the entire situation is more than a bit of a sticky wicket.
Vested, If Not Blueblood Interests
This development also came to light right as GW Pharma’s newest focal epilepsy drug faltered to failure in Eastern European trials and as Epidiolex, the company’s drug for certain kinds of childhood epilepsy, was given the green light in the U.S. by the government as the “first” cannabis-based medication to be allowed for sale in America.
No one has yet defined exactly what kind of cannabinoids will be allowed to be prescribed in the UK come fall, but here is the most interesting development of all that still hangs over the British Isles like stale smoke: Will competitors to GW Pharma be allowed to sell their products to medical customers in the UK or will this new opening for patients just create more of a monopolized windfall for one company whose profits, at least, lie in “pharmatizing” the drug rather than creating greater access to the raw plant or its close derivatives? And those profits flow to women (and men) with the greatest political control over the development of the industry in the country.
Is This Really A “Legalization” Victory?
In the short term, no matter how limited, the answer is actually yes. Rescheduling the drug is a step that has not even been taken in the U.S., and will serve, medically, to reset the needle if not the debate about the circumstances under which cannabis should be used for patients.
It will also move the punishment discussion in a way that still has not happened in places like Germany where, technically, the drug has not yet been decriminalized even though doctors are prescribing it and public health insurers cover the costs for increasing numbers of patients. Large numbers of Britons, just like everywhere else, are incarcerated every year or obtain black marks on their records for mere possession that in turn can affect lives.
Finally, it will put recreational reform in the room, even if still knocking at the door. This discussion too has been gaining in popularity over the past year in particular as reform moves elsewhere. Like Germans, like Canadians and like Americans, reform in Colorado and Washington set loose a global revolution, which will clearly not be stopped.
Even if in places like the UK, it is still moving far slower than it should be. For political and business reasons, not driven by science.
It is old news that Canadian companies are entering the European market. And it is also no stop-the-presses flash that Germany is a big prize in all of this. But there are other Euro markets to watch right now. Switzerland is one of them.
Look for the Canadian influx here too.
One of the more interesting entrants this month? Green Relief – a Canadian LP with a really unique twist. They are the only company in the world to produce cannabis oil from flower grown with aquaponics. This unique method creates unbelievably “clean” cannabis with no pesticides – and no residue of them.
It also sets the company up for a really unique market opportunity on the ground outside Canada. Especially as they have now just announced a partnership with two Swiss companies– Ai Fame GmbH and Ai Lab Swiss AG. Both companies have been leading European pharmaceutical companies since the turn of the century. The idea is to leverage all three company’s intellectual capital with Green Relief’s additional and first international investment with an eye to the entire European cannabis market. Ai Fame specializes in cultivation, manufacturing, sales and distribution to both the food and medical sectors. Ai Lab Swiss AG operates as a laboratory and testing facility.Less than three weeks before Green Relief publicized their European announcement, there were also strategic developments afoot at home.
From this unique perch in the Swiss canton of St Gallen, the three companies are setting up to conquer Europe.
Why Is Switzerland So Strategic?
Switzerland has been on the legalization track since 2011. As of this date, the Swiss government began allowing adults to buy and use CBD-only cannabis. Shops were allowed to obtain licenses. A trickle of sales began. However, rather suddenly, as reform hit Europe, the craze took off. Last year, for the first time, the industry generated a significant amount of revenue (close to $100 million). That is $25 million for the government via taxes- just on CBD sales. Even more intriguing for those looking for market opportunity across borders? Less than a week ago, the German-based budget discount store Lidl just announced they were carrying smokeable CBD – in Swiss grocery stores. The leap across the border is imminent.
That has opened up other conversations, including the “legalize everything” push that makes an awful lot of sense to the ever tax-aware Swiss. This is a push afoot just about everywhere across the continent, including, of course, just across the border in Germany.
The cities of Zurich and the cantons of both Winterthur and St Gallen (home of the Swiss companies behind the new venture with Green Relief) have already indicated that they will not pursue possession fines for those busted with 10 grams or less– no matter what kind and even of the THC variety.
Read between the lines, and it is clear that the cannabinoid conversation locally has begun to attract the Canadians. And not just because of the many opportunities of the Swiss CBD market – but the huge medical and THC German and European opportunities now opening beyond that.
No matter which way Green Relief and their new partners slice it, they are now in the game – and across Europe – with a unique new play and product, and further one set to enter both the medical THC and “consumer,” albeit still CBD, market now burgeoning.
A Cross Market Play
Here is the truly interesting part about this new announcement. Less than three weeks before Green Relief publicized their European announcement, there were also strategic developments afoot at home. Cannabis Growth Opportunity Corporation also just announced an investment in Green Relief. The share purchase agreement netted Green Relief $750,000 in both cash and common shares.
With this, Green Relief seems to have set sail on its European expansion. Look for more interesting turns to this developing saga soon!
Disclaimer: Marguerite Arnold has just raised the first funds for her blockchain-based company, MedPayRx in Germany (and via traditional investment funding, not an ICO). She will also be speaking about the impact of blockchain on the cannabis industry in Berlin in April at the International Cannabis Business Conference.
You have probably heard of cryptocurrencies, tokens and smart contracts. You might have also heard, even if you did not understand the significance, that IBM recently suggested that the Canadian government use their form of blockchain, called Hyperledger, to track the recreational cannabusiness. Or that a large LP called Aurora is also looking at this space (as are other licensed producers large and small). Or maybe you have seen an item in the mainstream news about an ICO for a cannabis company that is now also going terribly wrong.
What on earth is going on?
These are all related issues, even if highly confusing and disjointed. Blockchain technology and cryptocurrency are hot right now and getting hotter – both in the mainstream world and in the cannabis industry globally. But for all its fans, the drumbeat for caution is also growing louder the more mainstream this technology (and the legitimate cannabis industry) becomes.
The many problems the entire cannabis vertical has with banking has make this current development almost inevitableOn the technology and finance side, that is why so many big names right now are urging caution. Nouriel Roubini, professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business, is just the latest to do so – and for reasons that everything to do with history. Including recent history ten years ago, when the world stood on the brink of a financial disaster thanks to unchained derivatives. The biggest worry in fact, right now, is about the financial implications of widespread adoption of the technology, beyond the tech itself and how it may (and may not) be legitimately used. Which itself is a huge question.
So why all the fuss?
This is revolutionary technology which is also being introduced into the market at a time when decentralized processing for automation is on the horizon. But also because blockchain can be used to create tokens or digital coins that act like financial instruments. And once created, such tokens can be issued much like money or even stock, to raise additional funds – for both start-ups and ongoing enterprises. The best thing though? This technology was invented to create a decentralized form of value exchange and trust-less, anonymized auditing and verification. No traditional financial institutions or even governments needed, wanted or should apply (at least in theory).
The many problems the entire cannabis vertical has with banking has make this current development almost inevitable. Not to mention accessing investment cash (although this is certainly changing outside the United States). Compliance issues in every direction are another wrinkle this tech will help solve. Starting with tracking product but also rapidly expanding to uses including protecting users’ privacy and facilitating access to high-quality, inspected product for qualified users and buyers. Not to mention other areas that are literally space-age but coming fast. Look for cool stuff coming soon involving both AI (artificial intelligence) and IoT (internet of things).
It is a fascinating, complex space. However, one aspect of this world, in particular, Initial Coin Offerings – or ICOs are getting attention right now. Why? They can be an incredibly efficient way to raise money for companies – both ones currently in business and start-ups with little more than a whitepaper or business plan and perhaps a working prototype. More and more of the successful ICOs are, however, for an existing company or are even attached to an asset, including a license, a prototype or a fund of money (or other combinations). They also rely on blockchain and alternative currency or tokens (sometimes also referred to as smart contracts) to work.
From a technology perspective, you can “mint” new coins relatively easily these days, sourced from a variety of different kinds of blockchain. Or even combinations thereof. You also can issue tokens or altcoins without an ICO.
In a world where there is vastly expanding cannabis opportunity, and many of these hopeful entrepreneurs are both digitally astute but without access to traditional capital, what could be better?
From a financial and investor perspective, ICOs are a hybrid form of an IPO meets social media. “Coins,” “tokens” and “smart contracts” –or cyber currency collectively– are digital forms of cash, contracts, membership cards, discounts or even authorizations for identity. There are many ways tokens can be used, in other words. This by way of saying there are also important differences too. Not all tokens are the same. Not all are used as “money.” Some are but have assets assigned to them (like real estate). Others, particularly smart contract tokens, are strictly functional (pay funds when product is delivered and verified). The one caveat here is that the exchange of any token or altcoin will also cost money. Why? It is the electricity cost of computer processing the request for transfer. Plus access and service fees. There is no such thing as a “free” token. How tokens are priced, sold, bought, maintain value and for what purposes, is a debate if not process function that will not be solved anytime soon. Starting with the fact that some blockchains are more energy efficient (and sourced from green energy) than others.
To add to all of this confusion, not all ICOs function the same way. Some do give investors ownership in the company or specific portfolios that even include real-world assets. Others offer to use pooled funds to buy assets (like real estate or an expensive license). Many rely on the “coin” issued as a kind of discount scheme, reward mechanism and in many cases, direct discounted payment for future goods and services, of both the digital and real world kind. Many offer banking services directly, including in the very near future, the ability to exchange cyber cash for the fiat variety at even remote ATMs. Sound futuristic? It is coming and soon.
Most ICOs in the market now, however, rely on the following supposition: Issue a token with a unique name. Put up an ICO website. Encourage investors from anyplace on the planet with an internet connection, to use either crypto or fiat currency to buy tokens in the issuing startup as an investment that will give the new company funds to operate and build out services or the application (whatever that is). Also, plan to use the tokens for an exchange of some kind in the future (either for other coins or a good or service). Watch the value of the coin increase (for whatever reason) while informing investors (or contributors) that this is not really a security but a “utility” token that is expected but not guaranteed to become more valuable. Retire early with the prospect of having brokers of expensive real estate in places like London and Dubai come calling.The public tide of opinion, even if regulations are slow to move, is on the side of reform if not outright advocacy.
That will not be the case for the vast majority of ICOs, however, no matter what returns, goods or services they offer. Even if they also have vibrant communities already using their services (whatever those are). It will not be the case for most of the cryptocurrencies upon which such ICOs are based (most at the moment are based on Ethereum, NEO, Hyperledger or combinations of the three). There will be more of those too. And not every blockchain will make it (cryptocurrencies and tokens are based on an origin protocol or blockchain much like computer operating systems are either PC or Mac or mobile phones are Android or Apple). Some speak to one another well. Most do not “exchange” easily – even between themselves – let alone back into good old cash. And while nobody wants to be the Betamax of blockchain, there will, inevitably, be quite a few of them. When that happens, any economic value of the coins and even contractual relationships created with them disappear as well. Add in extreme price volatility in the current market pricing of these tokens, and you begin to get a sense of the risk profile involved in all of this.
The real hurdle, not to mention expense, comes when transferring back from the world of crypto to the one of fiat (regular money). Being a Bitcoin billionaire (there are about 1,000 individuals who own about 40% of the entire global Bitcoin issuance) is no fun if you have no place to spend it.
A Rapidly Changing Marketplace
In the past 18 months, cryptocurrency and ICOs have gotten increasing attention because of the increasing value of all kinds of cyber currency (far beyond Bitcoin). The total market cap for all forms of cryptocurrency itself zoomed past $700 billion at the turn of the year. That is impossible to ignore. You might have heard of some of these currencies too. There is ETH, Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash, Dash, even Dogecoin (created originally as a joke on an internet dog meme). Right now, in fact, at some of the most expansive exchanges, there are literally hundreds of these coins which are constantly bought and sold if not exchanged and used.
And then there are the sums ICOs are bringing in some cases, flagrantly flaunting regulatory agencies and doing end runs on the global banking system that cannot keep up with them. The top ICO of 2017, a company called Block.one and registered in the Cayman Islands, so far holds the record at $700 million and counting. Filecoin, the second largest ICO last year, raised $262 million in one month from August to September. And then, of course, there is the cannabis industry-specific case of Paragon – now headed for class-action lawsuit litigation over their $70 million pre-and ICO sale intentions.
It would be logical to assume, given the eye-watering sums potentially involved not to mention the large role a smart digital media footprint has to do with an ICO’s success, beyond its service or technology offerings, that this would be a perfect place for cannapreneurs to turn for funding. The global market is opening for cannabis reform at the same time the crypto craze meets Fintech Upheaval is occurring – in fact, these two things are happening almost simultaneously.
Thanks to regulatory realities and an ongoing stigma, there is still no institutional investment in the industry in the United States (that is rapidly changing other places). These are two new industries and dreams are large.
In the legit cannabis space, so are the expenses.
The price of opening a dispensary in most U.S. states tops a million dollars right now. In Europe, the price of entry is even more expensive. A GMP compliant grow facility in Western Europe, plus the money for lawyer’s fees and negotiations for the license itself will set you back anywhere from $20 million and up, depending on the location. Even staying afloat in the industry once the doors are opened is a challenge. And loans, even for outstanding invoices, are still tough to come by in an industry where banking services of the simple business account kind are a challenge. Particularly in the United States.
The public tide of opinion, even if regulations are slow to move, is on the side of reform if not outright advocacy. Why shouldn’t a reform-group-rooted ICO aspire to own or provide ongoing business financing to a community-minded canna farm in California, Canada, Germany, Israel or Australia? Or even Greece?
However, right now, with some noted exceptions, the cannabis business remains at minimum, a dangerous place to consider issuing altcoins that act like financial instruments or raise money with them. Why and how?
In rather shocking news out of Germany on the cannabis front, it appears that Canadian LP ABcann has not been selected as one of the finalists in the country’s first tender bid to cultivate cannabis domestically.
As reported in the German press, the company has not been invited to submit an offer in the final award procedures. The reason per a company spokesman as quoted in the German media? The company proved it met the required qualification thresholds – namely it could deliver the required amount of product as required by the German government. However the amount it could produce was less than other firms being considered.
That is a strange statement, especially because the ten licenses on offer only called for a total of 2,000 kgs of production total by 2019 and 6600 kgs by 2022.
Who Is ABCann?
ABcann has been in business since 2014 in Canada, when it received one of the first cultivation licenses issued by the Canadian government. It has also been aggressively positioning itself in the German and European market this year – and in multiple ways. It got itself listed on both American and German stock exchanges by summer. The company established a subsidiary headquarters in Schönefeld as of August 2017. As late as October, the company also was appearing at industry conferences, like the IACM medical conference in Cologne, as an expected finalist in the first bid.
However, the company’s plans to build a $40 million, 10,000 square meter plant somewhere in Lusatia are now also reportedly on hold. The exact location of the plant is unknown, per German government requirements that grow facilities remain secret. That said, with a year and a half to complete construction, if given the green light even by early next year, it may be that this was the reason the company has apparently not made the cut. Or perhaps the German government did not believe the company was adequately funded. A September exercise of warrants netted the company an additional $45 million in operating cash. But with expansion plans in not only Canada and Europe, but Australia too, did the company pass the German test for liquidity?
Management changes are also afoot. As of October 1, Barry Fishman, a former Eli Lilly executive took over as CEO of ABCann Global. Ken Clement, founder of the company, announced in mid-October that he was stepping down from his position as Executive Chair of the Board to be replaced by Paul Lucas a former President and CEO of GlaxoSmithKline Canada. John Hoff, the Geschäftsführer (or CEO) of ABcann’s German subsidiary, has also recently left the company. When asked by CannabisIndustryJournal about his reasons for doing so at the Cannabis Normal conference in Berlin at the beginning of November, Hoff cited “management and creative differences” with ABcann Canada as the impetus for his recent departure.
However with the news of ABcann’s apparent loss of a front-runner position in the pending bid, such news appears to herald a bit more of a shakeup at the company, if not a refocussing of overall global strategy.
A source within the company who wished to remain anonymous also said this when contacted directly by CannabisIndustryJournal. “Our top priority currently is to acquire an import license. We also fully intend to pursue all of our plans in the German market, but we have no firm dates on the construction front.”
The State of Medical Cannabis Reform Auf Deutsch
The German medical cannabis question has certainly jerked forward over the past several years through several rough patches. This year it has gotten even stranger. And nobody is quite sure where it will end up.
The news about ABcann is also the latest episode in a very strange story that has continued to develop mostly out of sight of the public.
That bid process, which was expected to announce the winners by late summer, has now dragged on through the fall.Germany began moving forward quietly on the cannabis issue in the first decade of the century. Patients could only access the drug in basically trial mode. Most patients who qualified with a doctor’s prescription and a special permit to take the drug, could also access only Sativex (which is very expensive) or the synthetic form of the drug, dronabinol, manufactured domestically in a facility near Frankfurt. All bud cannabis was imported from Holland by Bedrocan. Strictly controlled not by German, but rather Dutch law on cannabis imports.
In 2014, the first German patients successfully sued the government to grow their own plants if their insurance companies refused coverage of the drug and they proved they could not afford alternatives.
This year, in January, the German government voted unanimously to change the law to mandate public health insurance. The law went into effect in March. Mainly driven by a desire to halt home-grow, the rules changed again. Post March 2017, patient grow rights have now been revoked. Now patients are theoretically allowed to get cannabis covered under public health insurance. In reality, the process has been difficult.
In April, the German government created a new “Cannabis Agency” under the auspices of BfArM. And BfArM in turn issued a tender bid for the country’s first domestic licences in April.
That bid process, which was expected to announce the winners by late summer, has now dragged on through the fall.
When Will The Winners Be Announced?
That too is unclear. It is very likely that the final announcement will not be made by the government until the beginning of the year – after the new government is formed. The so-called “Jamaica Coalition” – of the mainstream CDU, the Greens and the liberals (FDP) is under major pressure to address the issue of access. So far Chancellor Angela Merkel has signalled her resistance for additional changes to the new cannabis law. That said, the current situation in Germany, which is untenable for patients and doctors, as well as companies trying to enter the market and investing heavily, is unlikely to hold for even the next several years.
Problems with finding doctors and medical reimbursement under insurance have kept this patient population from growing the way it would otherwise.In late October, the news broke that two legal complaints had been unsuccessfully filed against the bid itself. Both parties’ complaints were dismissed. Yet there also appears to have been a third complaint that has actually devolved in to a real Klage – or lawsuit. Lexamed GmbH’s claim directly addresses issues expressed by many German-only firms this year. Namely that they were unfairly left out of the bid process because of a supposed lack of experience. As such it is likely to be closely watched by other existing German hopefuls.
This lawsuit has now formally delayed the announcements on the bid decision until at least after December 20th of this year, when the oral arguments will be heard in the case. A decision about the bid will go forward when this has been decided, by the beginning of 2018.
In the meantime? Cannabis imports are starting to enter the country. In late summer last year, Spektrum Cannabis, formerly MedCann GmbH, located just south of Frankfurt, received the first import licenses from the German government to bring medical cannabis into Germany from Canada. Both Aurora and Tilray were granted import licenses this fall.
There are 16 different kinds of cannabis on the market right now. And about 170 kilos of cannabis were imported into the country in the last year. There are also currently about 1,000 patients although this number is artificially low. Problems with finding doctors and medical reimbursement under insurance have kept this patient population from growing the way it would otherwise. There are easily a million patients in Germany right now who would qualify for cannabis if the system worked as it was originally intended in the legislation passed in January.
That said, despite the recent news that ABcann is “out” – at least for this round– apparently the pan-European bid process is still very much alive, despite many recent rumours that it was dead in the water. And plans also seem to be afoot for a separate and additional cultivation licensing round potentially as soon as next year. Details however are unclear and nobody either in the industry or the government is willing to be quoted or give any further information.
Maintaining an environment that supports cultivation and keeps plants healthy is not an easy task. In cannabis growing, there are a variety of factors that greenhouse managers and personnel must monitor to ensure that their plants are in a healthy environment that fosters growth and development. Temperature, humidity, lighting and CO2 levels are a few of the conditions that need to be tailored to each cannabis greenhouse operation. However, it can be difficult to constantly monitor the status of your equipment and the greenhouse environment, especially after hours or during the off-season.
A remote monitoring system that’s properly selected and installed can help greenhouse managers keep their cannabis plants healthy, multiply their yields and increase return on investment. This type of system also helps operators identify patterns and trends in environmental conditions and get insight into larger issues that can prevent problems before they arise.
Here are some tips on key conditions to monitor and what you need to consider when selecting a monitoring system for your cannabis greenhouse operation:
Temperature plays a crucial role in any cannabis grow operation. The climate in your greenhouse must be warm enough to nurture photosynthesis and the growth of cannabis plants. Setting the incorrect temperature will significantly impact the potential yield of the plant and the rate at which it develops. A temperature too low will slow the growth of the cannabis, but too hot can lead to heat stress for your plants. The ideal temperature for a standard greenhouse is between 70 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit. However, depending on the stage of plant and desired growth densities, the temperature of the greenhouse needs to be adjusted accordingly.
Humidity directly affects plant photosynthesis and transpiration, so controlling humidity is vital in greenhouse growing. The ideal relative humidity (RH) for cannabis growth is around 60%. A low humidity level can cause water to evaporate too quickly for photosynthesis, while a humidity level that is too high can cause poor growth and possible mold and fungal disease. Monitoring the moisture content in the air of your greenhouse will help the plants during the transpiration process, increasing absorption of nutrients and overall health of the cannabis.
Your cannabis may be getting an abundance of natural light during the summer months, but maintaining adequate sunlight during the winter months can be a challenge. As a solution to this, many greenhouse managers equip their facilities with additional lights to supplement natural light during off-seasons or off-hours. To achieve the best possible yield, a cannabis plant in the budding stage should receive twelve hours of light each day, while other stages could require additional lighting. For example, the growth stage could require your cannabis to be exposed to sunlight for up to eighteen hours a day.
Like any other plant, cannabis requires CO2 to breathe. Greenhouse managers must set and monitor the CO2 levels in their facility to make sure that there is an adequate amount for the plants to develop, grow and be healthy. The amount of carbon dioxide required for your cannabis depends of the size of the facility and the amount of light the plants are receiving. However, a standard grow area for cannabis can maintain a CO2 range from 1000 to 1500 parts per million (PPM). A level below that threshold can result in slower growth of the plants, while a level above would lead to unused and wasted CO2.
Irrigation and Soil Moisture
One way to ensure a good yield from your cannabis is to water it regularly and monitor your soil moisture. Overwatering your plants can have the same effect, if not worse, than letting the soil become too dry. Plants’ roots need oxygen to survive, unlike leaves that breathe CO2, and when the soil is waterlogged the roots can’t provide their function. The lack of oxygen interferes with the roots’ nutrient uptake and photosynthesis causing the cannabis plant to wilt. The exact moisture content of the soil depends on the size of your greenhouse, temperature and humidity. Whether you hand water or are using a drip irrigation system, being aware of your soil moisture is vital to the long-term health of your cannabis.
Your greenhouse environment should mimic the ideal conditions in which cannabis plants flourish. With an indoor facility, you have the ability to control air circulation by venting hot air out and blowing fresh air in. Creating a circulation of air inside your greenhouse will increase your cannabis plant’s growth speed and yield. Additionally, an exhaust system helps control the temperature and humidity, while also preventing the invasion of mold and pests that thrive in hot, stagnant air.
When growing something of value, like cannabis, there will always be a threat of intruders. Whether your greenhouse is in a populated area or around hungry wildlife, any intruder could be detrimental to your overall yields and profit. Remote monitoring systems can give you peace of mind and instantly alert you when there is an unwanted presence in your greenhouse.
Knowing all the possible threats to your cannabis greenhouse helps you evaluate your specific needs, and ultimately identify the proper remote monitoring system.
Selecting the Right Monitoring System
Other factors to consider when choosing a monitoring system right for your operation include:
Base unit and sensors
Wireless or hardwired sensors
Communications to your site (Phone, cellular, Wi-Fi, etc.)
Programming and status checks
Return on investment
Base Units and Sensors
Each condition in your greenhouse that you want to monitor requires its own input on the base unit of the monitoring system. You must match your needs with the number of inputs available. A good fit for a smaller cannabis greenhouse may be a lower-cost, non-expandable monitoring system. However, larger facilities have many monitoring points and more people to alert when there’s a problem. If your cannabis operation is poised for growth, purchasing an expandable system could add value to the initial purchase because you wouldn’t have to replace your entire system in the future.
Your monitoring system should also have an internal rechargeable battery backup to ensure continuous monitoring and alerts in the event of a power outage. It is also recommended to have each base unit in a sheltered enclosure to protect it from moisture, dirt and other hazards.
Placement of sensors is also crucial. For example, temperature sensors in your greenhouse should be placed throughout the facility. They should be next to your thermostat and in the center of your greenhouse, preferably away from direct sunlight.
Wireless or Hardwired Sensors
Remote monitoring systems offer the option to have sensors hardwired directly to the base unit or sensors wirelessly connected. A hardwired monitoring system connects the sensors to the base device with wires. Generally, trenching long distances for wires is time consuming and costly. So alternatively, a wireless system uses built-in radio transmitters to communicate with the base unit. Some monitoring systems can accommodate a combination of hardwired and wireless sensors.
Communications to Your Site
Monitoring devices that use cellular communications must be registered on a wireless network (like Verizon or AT&T) before you can send or receive messages. Because cellular devices perform all communications over a wireless network, it is important that there be sufficient signal strength at the greenhouse. It is a good idea to check the signal quality in the area before purchasing a cellular product. If the cellular network has less than desirable coverage, it is possible to install an external antenna to help increase cellular signal.
When monitoring systems identify a change in status, they immediately send alerts to people on the contact list. If you don’t want all of your personnel to receive notifications at the same time, certain devices can be programmed to send alerts in a tiered fashion. It is important to consider the reach of the communications, so that you’ll be notified regardless of your locations. Multiple communications methods like phone, email and text provide extra assurance that you’ll get the alert. Also, note of the number of people the system can reach and if the system automatically cycles through the contact list until someone responds. Make sure the system allows for flexible scheduling so that it doesn’t send alarms to off-duty personnel.
Programming and Status Check
If you’re responsible for maintaining a commercial greenhouse facility, you want a system that will provide real-time status of all monitored conditions on demand. There are a few different ways to access your sensor readings. Options include calling to check status, viewing a web page, either on a local network or on the cloud, or accessing the information via an app on your mobile device. With a cloud-based system, the devices supervise themselves. This means if the internet or cellular connection goes down, the device will send an alarm to alert the appropriate personnel.
If you don’t select a cloud-based system, you will be limited to logging in through a local area network, which will allow you to make programming changes, access status conditions and review data logs. If internet connectivity is not available at your location, you will want to choose a cellular or phone system rather than Ethernet-based option.
Data history is valuable in identifying patterns and trends in your cannabis greenhouse conditions. Manually monitoring and recording environmental parameters takes a significant amount of personnel time and detracts from other important workplace demands. However, many monitoring systems automatically save information, recording tens of thousands of data points, dates and times. Cloud-based logging provides an unlimited number of records for users to view, graph, print and export data trends.
Analyzing data samples may lend insight to larger issues and prevent problems before they arise. For example, if the data log shows power fluctuations occurring at a regular time, it could be indicative of a more serious problem. Or, if the data shows signs of a ventilation fan or supplementary lighting beginning to malfunction, they can be repaired or replaced before total failure occurs.
Return On Investment
When deciding how much you should pay for a remote monitoring system, tally up the entire cost, fully installed with additional peripherals and sensors and any labor fees for installation. Then consider the value of your cannabis plant inventory and greenhouse equipment. Finally, factor in the cost of downtime, should an environmental event shut down your operation for a period of time.
Choosing the right greenhouse monitoring system and sensors could mean the difference between life and death for your cannabis plants. Understanding the conditions you need to watch and monitoring systems’ capabilities are they best way to protect your investment.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
We use tracking pixels that set your arrival time at our website, this is used as part of our anti-spam and security measures. Disabling this tracking pixel would disable some of our security measures, and is therefore considered necessary for the safe operation of the website. This tracking pixel is cleared from your system when you delete files in your history.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.