Vote NO to legalize cannabis....Or else

[LSWM]

There is no shortage of top shelf in California. There is a huge shortage in Colorado, however. You've got mid-grade weed flying off the shelves for top dollar in Colorado. It's hilarious.

There is definitely a shortage of affordable top shelf here in Cali, and no shortage of mids at rock bottom prices.

I wonder though, if a skilled grower moved to CO, where would he move his top shelf to? If the public doesn't care, and retailers can get mids at rock bottom prices and move it for top shelf prices, where is the motivation to buy from an illegal grower growing top shelf? Stepping into that market sounds like it would be hard to get a foothold.

 

[dnaprotection]

All interested hands on deck...here is a fleeting chance...Please help<
If you are interested in helping to shift the national discussion into the direction of human rights and discrimination rather than the 'good plant bad plant' framing of all this which has and will only further corporate control over the plants that naturally occur on this planet, then please forward this article to any and all national media you can think of...it is on the Associated Press feed:

http://freedomtogardenact.org/initiative

http://www.record-bee.com/news/ci_26119824/bos-places-initiative-measure-garden-november-ballot

BOS places initiative measure to garden on November ballot
By J.W. Burch, IV

jburch@record-bee.com @JWBurchIV on Twitter

UPDATED: 07/09/2014 05:13:54 PM PDT


LAKEPORT >> An initiative measure regarding people's right to grow and use plants for the basic necessities of life was discussed by the Lake County Board of Supervisors (BOS) Tuesday.

Nearly 5,000 signatures were gathered, according to Lake County Registrar of Voters Diane Fridley. Of those signatures, 3,282 were checked and 2,167 were found sufficient.

Despite the measure being an umbrella for the growing and use of all plants, the conversation between the supervisors and the public addressed the growing of marijuana specifically.

"This property use would be in conflict with a number of county ordinances, but it would also, to some degree, supersede them," County Counsel Anita Grant said.

The initiative aims to "exempt all Lake County residents residing within the unincorporated areas of the county from any ordinances that would limit an individual's outside and/or greenhouse home gardening efforts," according to Grant.

Additionally, "in the event any neighbor complaints occur the parties involved would be sent to mediation provided by the county" as long as the complaints are not related to specific, medically-verifiable toxic health risks to the public, Grant said.

"Our staff and this board has wasted so much time on this nonsense," District 5 Supervisor Rob Brown said. "I don't know that I want county counsel spending time that could be spent on something more important and not wasted on this."

"This is strictly a declaration of a human right," Ronald Kiczenski, who circulated the petition, said. "It is the only thing that I can figure that is going to solve the big problems. The high value of the stuff, which causes crime, all the environmental damages. It all comes out of this prohibition."

The BOS had the option to adopt the initiative with no changes, or place it on the Nov. 4 ballot.

With a 3-2 vote, the board approved putting the initiative before the voters. District 1 Supervisor Jim Comstock and Brown dissented.

The board had voted the same way on June 17 to place a former initiative measure on the November ballot.

The first initiative was drafted by the Emerald Unity Coalition, which would prohibit all collective marijuana cultivation, as well as limit cultivation to four plants on county parcels less than one acre in size, according to County Counsel Anita Grant. A fee of $50 per plant would be imposed by the initiative .

Contact J. W. Burch, IV at 900-2022.

 

[shaggyballs]

All interested hands on deck...here is a fleeting chance...Please help<
If you are interested in helping to shift the national discussion into the direction of human rights and discrimination rather than the 'good plant bad plant' framing of all this which has and will only further corporate control over the plants that naturally occur on this planet, then please forward this article to any and all national media you can think of...it is on the Associated Press feed:

http://freedomtogardenact.org/initiative

http://www.record-bee.com/news/ci_26119824/bos-places-initiative-measure-garden-november-ballot

BOS places initiative measure to garden on November ballot
By J.W. Burch, IV

jburch@record-bee.com @JWBurchIV on Twitter

UPDATED: 07/09/2014 05:13:54 PM PDT


LAKEPORT >> An initiative measure regarding people's right to grow and use plants for the basic necessities of life was discussed by the Lake County Board of Supervisors (BOS) Tuesday.

Nearly 5,000 signatures were gathered, according to Lake County Registrar of Voters Diane Fridley. Of those signatures, 3,282 were checked and 2,167 were found sufficient.

Despite the measure being an umbrella for the growing and use of all plants, the conversation between the supervisors and the public addressed the growing of marijuana specifically.

"This property use would be in conflict with a number of county ordinances, but it would also, to some degree, supersede them," County Counsel Anita Grant said.

The initiative aims to "exempt all Lake County residents residing within the unincorporated areas of the county from any ordinances that would limit an individual's outside and/or greenhouse home gardening efforts," according to Grant.

Additionally, "in the event any neighbor complaints occur the parties involved would be sent to mediation provided by the county" as long as the complaints are not related to specific, medically-verifiable toxic health risks to the public, Grant said.

"Our staff and this board has wasted so much time on this nonsense," District 5 Supervisor Rob Brown said. "I don't know that I want county counsel spending time that could be spent on something more important and not wasted on this."

"This is strictly a declaration of a human right," Ronald Kiczenski, who circulated the petition, said. "It is the only thing that I can figure that is going to solve the big problems. The high value of the stuff, which causes crime, all the environmental damages. It all comes out of this prohibition."

The BOS had the option to adopt the initiative with no changes, or place it on the Nov. 4 ballot.

With a 3-2 vote, the board approved putting the initiative before the voters. District 1 Supervisor Jim Comstock and Brown dissented.

The board had voted the same way on June 17 to place a former initiative measure on the November ballot.

The first initiative was drafted by the Emerald Unity Coalition, which would prohibit all collective marijuana cultivation, as well as limit cultivation to four plants on county parcels less than one acre in size, according to County Counsel Anita Grant. A fee of $50 per plant would be imposed by the initiative .

Contact J. W. Burch, IV at 900-2022.

Did ya read that!
What a concept!

I am down for that!

 

[shaggyballs]

double post sorry

 

[Jhhnn]

California= you better bring your A+++++ game Colorado= you can get by just fine on a C- That's the way I see it. Clearly, given all the immigration to CO, I'm not alone.

You know that how, exactly?

That's an honest question. I certainly wouldn't speculate as to the quality of CA weed other than to say that what little I've smoked of Norcal outdoor was quite good, if not phenomenal.

OTOH, a friend recently brought some Blue Dream acquired from a local retailer that was excellent by anybody's standards.

I'm not prepared to extend those experiences to say that they represent the general case.

For anybody engaged in marijuana as a business in CO, what I have to say is this- Get it while you can, because it won't last. That, or be prepared to hunker down for the long run. The whole thing is changing very rapidly.

One of the presumptions of small scale growers that may not be true at all is that larger providers won't be able to grow top shelf. I think they'll try to fill every niche in the market other than the tiny ones. They'll grow & process what people will buy. The best Scotch doesn't come from a moonshiner's still, and the best champagne doesn't come from a few vines in the back yard.

Another presumption that may not hold is that growing under lights will remain profitable in the face of competition from large greenhouse growers. The CO market is shaping up to be extremely competitive- I see oversupply in our future, simply because A64 demands the issue of licenses to people who qualify. There is no limit to the number of people who can compete in a limited market, which means price cutting to gain market share. Only those who can grow in a highly cost effective manner will survive more than a few years. The only place there will be much margin at all will be at the high end- there always is regardless of the product. Being big in a greenhouse carries undeniable advantages from a strictly business POV. Everything you use is a helluva lot cheaper by the truckload & sunshine is free. With proper capital reserves & good staff, they'll come out on top every time. They're big enough to pay well enough to attract top staff & to obtain top genetics as well.

That's all part & parcel of the influx of capital that's obvious in the whole legalization package as delivered. Legal business with high margin will attract enough capital to drive down prices & reduce margins to what's merely acceptable from an investor perspective. That's true of any mass market, particularly one where the end product doesn't morph quickly into new & better, trendier, whatever. Cell phones are that kind of market. Marijuana isn't. We're not going to pack an ounce of weed with new features & functionality.

In the interim, small time growers run much lower risks because the authorities have much less effective tools to stop them than ever before, as I've pointed out many times. Ultimately, the only reason they'll be pushed out is that the price will come down far enough that they won't make any money at it. That's not good for them, but it is good for Jack & Jill Stoner, which is who this is really about, anyway.

I honestly believe that small growers would go broke even if they were completely legal & the price of a growing license was $500/yr.

 

[shaggyballs]

Like all the small supermarkets are gone!
Now we have less choice.
And when walmart has its way you will only find products that they want to ship in!
Not what we want.
They lower the price so low they wont turn a profit to push mom and pop out then raise the price to what they wish, and we have no choice but to pay what ever they ask.
Their is something to be said about being the big dog on the block.
Most people on the block do not like the big dog.
The big dog couldn't care less if the little dogs eat.
As long as he has his!
Just look around you will see this everywhere you look in any market!!

 

[Jhhnn]

Like all the small supermarkets are gone!
Now we have less choice.
And when walmart has its way you will only find products that they want to ship in!
Not what we want.
They lower the price so low they wont turn a profit to push mom and pop out then raise the price to what they wish, and we have no choice but to pay what ever they ask.
Their is something to be said about being the big dog on the block.
Most people on the block do not like the big dog.
The big dog couldn't care less if the little dogs eat.
As long as he has his!
Just look around you will see this everywhere you look in any market!!

Not to defend WalMart in the slightest, but small groceries are gone because they can't offer the selection of a larger store.

Specialty groceries thrive in metro Denver, however. There are several Italian & Eastern European specialty shops along with an amazing Asian market on W Alameda. If you really want fresh fish, it's swimming in the tank behind the counter in the butcher section.

I think the place for the little guy in CO legalization will be at the retail storefront level. The fees aren't ridiculous-

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=Content-Type&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+filename%3D%22MED+Retail+Marijuana+Application+and+Licensing+Fees%2C+July+1%2C+2014.pdf%22&blobheadervalue2=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1252007504250&ssbinary=true

CO is full of small liquor stores who operate the same way. They tailor their selection to the neighborhood & name brand distributors deliver to their door on a schedule, even stock the shelves.

I expect the dispensary model of marketing, the visual inspections & snurfling of different wares, the ritualistic weighing & all of it to disappear as consistent brand name products become available. There's no reason to think that marijuana will be marketed only as loose herb, either. Expect quality pre-rolls in packs, pinners & otherwise, along with refill cartridges for your vaporizer, herb, dry sift & extract, even disposable vaporizers good for 8-10 hard hitting tokes & into the trash.

Consumers buy Marlboros & Bud Light because they know what it is & because they like it & can trust it to be the same every time they buy it. In the marijuana biz, that's never been true because there never have been brand names per se or the consistency for loyalty to develop.

In a market that's big enough there will be the other end- people who are dying to have the latest release from their favorite small vineyard & will pay top dollar to get it, too. That vineyard still needs to be big enough for everybody to make a living.

We're at the dawn of legal marijuana marketing. The one thing I'm sure of is that market forces will apply & that they have little resemblance to the forces of the black market that have shaped consumption up to this point.

 

[budtang]

I guess with the California vs Colorado quality of weed thing is that in 15 years of smoking I've never seen weed from Colorado that's as good as California weed. I think it's because Colorado is full of large operations that produce mid-grade and California is full of small operations that produce top shelf. The difference in laws has had and impact of the quality of weed in the two states. It's a pretty fascinating trend and tells you a lot about the nature of Cannabis horticulture.

One of the presumptions of small scale growers that may not be true at all is that larger providers won't be able to grow top shelf.

Then, why isn't it being produced on a large scale? I think people have conflicting views of what constitutes "top shelf." Can you link me to single photo of a large grow producing true top shelf quality weed? I keep hearing about it. I just never see it. I'm not just talking,"Oh this looks good." I want to see a large grow that produces weed that test at 30% THC. As that's the only weed I consider "top shelf." You guys keep claiming the grows producing upper mid-grade in the lower 20% range is "top shelf." That's not top shelf.

I think they'll try to fill every niche in the market other than the tiny ones. They'll grow & process what people will buy.

The key being,"what people will buy." I talked to a dispensary owner in CO yesterday. He said they started out focusing on growing top shelf and stocking nothing else in their dispensary at first. Over time, he realized the market up there demands lower quality bud for a cheaper price. He said his dispensary didn't really become profitable until they started focusing on the cheaper market because it makes up 90% of it. It gets to the point where it's not even profitable to focus on the higher quality strains because it's hard to compete on the quality with the smaller growers. Instead of dedicating 15-20% of their large grow space to fill that tiny little connoisseur market they'll pretty much ditch it all together and stick to the lower quality, higher quantity strains. It becomes a numbers game for big corporations. Do they waste money dedicating 20% of their resources to a product that doesn't demand a high enough dollar for the profits to exceed dedicating that space to lower quality strains? Or, do they ditch it, focus on the lower quality strains that they're experts at growing and make more money in the process? The numbers of this business add up to one thing... A long standing, stable profession for smaller growers providing true top shelf weed. Bigger corporations don't pursue less profitable ventures and higher quality weed is less profitable for bigger operations. It doesn't do a bigger operation any good to grow a pound per light of top shelf primo that sells for $3,000 when they can grow 3 lbs of mid-grade that sells for $1,200-1,500/lb. We're talking a $600-$1,500 decrease in profits per light. That's enormous for a large operation. A bigger operation will spend about 5 minutes growing top shelf and realize what a waste of time it was.

The best Scotch doesn't come from a moonshiner's still, and the best champagne doesn't come from a few vines in the back yard.

Scotch and champagne aren't weed. You can't grow the best Scotch and Champagne in the world in a closet. You can do that with weed.

Another presumption that may not hold is that growing under lights will remain profitable in the face of competition from large greenhouse growers.

Yea, I still don't believe the quality of greenhouse weed can match indoor. The calyxes just don't fill out and swell up the same on sun grown weed. If you can provide photos of a large operation along with THC tests of the weed produced in it that can actually get around 30% I'll sing a different tune. I still don't see greenhouses maintaining a level of quality void of pest and pesticides to treat for them. Growing in greenhouses is very difficult to do on a small scale without running into significant problems involving pest and those are the worst kinds of problems to have with weed growing.

Only those who can grow in a highly cost effective manner will survive more than a few years.

Under the current business model that means the larger operations will have to abandon even attempting to supply the top shelf weed market. The larger the operation the less profitable it becomes to focus on growing lower yielding, higher quality weed. It's a numbers game and the numbers for larger operations don't add up to success when focusing on the top shelf market due to it's miniscule size. The top shelf market will forever be controlled by small scale growers. The mid-grade market will be completely dominated by the big guys.

Everything you use is a helluva lot cheaper by the truckload & sunshine is free.

Spider mites are free, too.

That's all part & parcel of the influx of capital that's obvious in the whole legalization package as delivered. Legal business with high margin will attract enough capital to drive down prices & reduce margins to what's merely acceptable from an investor perspective.

Mind you, that's the mid-grade market that prices will be driven down in. Because, that's the weed that's most profitable to grow for a large operation. The higher quality stuff will sell for 3 times as much as the product produced by the bigger operations. Big investors with significant capital to back up the operation made that capital by making smart business decisions. Focusing on products that produce less profit isn't a decision bigger companies will make.

I honestly believe that small growers would go broke even if they were completely legal & the price of a growing license was $500/yr.

Key word "believe." Because, I'm not sure you any clue what you're talking about. You should try discussing the issue with a dispensary owner. They'll tell what I've told you here. There isn't a big enough market for top shelf weed to motivate the bigger operations to capitalize on it. It's more profitable for the bigger guys to grow mid-grade.

 

[budtang]

There is definitely a shortage of affordable top shelf here in Cali, and no shortage of mids at rock bottom prices.

It sounds like all the good growers are leaving.

I wonder though, if a skilled grower moved to CO, where would he move his top shelf to? If the public doesn't care, and retailers can get mids at rock bottom prices and move it for top shelf prices, where is the motivation to buy from an illegal grower growing top shelf? Stepping into that market sounds like it would be hard to get a foothold.

There are always people who care about getting top shelf. It will be true till the end of time. You would have to find the right dispensary with the right customer base. I'm sure there are dispensaries that only deal in Top Shelf and have a steady customer base who uses them for that reason. It would be matter of getting into business with the right one.

 

[budtang]

90% of weed smokers DON'T WANT TOP SHELF. It's a fact. Most weed smokers loading up a bowl in the morning before a complex day at work don't want 30% THC OG Kush dis-coordinating them. They don't want to be put on their ass before communicating with coworkers and colleagues over important issues. They want some mellow 15% THC shit that won't knock em out and make them forget where they put their keys. Corporations will focus on catering to these people as they constitute the vast majority of the market. They're not interesting in driving the prices down on lower quality, higher yielding strains by flooding the market with higher quality weed. That would be bad for business.

 

[Jhhnn]

Remarkable how you answer your own assertions in the negative & claim you were right from the beginning, Budtang.

You assert that larger growers can't produce top shelf, then explain why they don't. The difference seems lost on you entirely. You assert that CA growers have to produce A+, then point out that most of what's there is midgrade. Can't have it both ways.

You assert the existence of semi-mythological 30% weed as fact & common among Calif closet growers when it's about as likely as finding a diamond in a goat's ass, regardless of where it's grown. There's a lot more to what defines top shelf than sheer potency, anyway. DJ short asserts that the best he ever smoked tested at 7%. Go figure.

You attribute certain qualities to sun grown weed, then attempt to push the burden of proof of your claims onto others, to prove a negative.

You make similar assertions wrt greenhouses & pests.

It's like demanding that Saddam Hussein prove that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

I honestly don't expect to encounter the best CA weed unless I go there & somehow get hooked up with the right people. You shouldn't expect to encounter CO top shelf, either, except under similar circumstances. The very best never goes to market beyond a small circle of friends anywhere in this country.

CO top shelf is considerably rarer for an entirely different reason, as well. The population of CA is ~38M people while the population of CO is only ~5M. In that, CA could support a connoisseur retail market that CO may not be able to. As I offered earlier, the market has to be big enough for high end providers to get enough volume to make a living.

 

[Morcheeba*]

budtang,

maybe you have failed to see a proper greenhouse fully climate controlled w/pos. pressure entry vestibules and strict guidelines for employee's to follow prior to entry. no bugs there.

explain how indoor can prevent bugs and a proper greenhouse can not.


peace

 

[SooperSmurph]

Large producers can't currently grow top shelf because actual growers aren't running any of the larger operations.

Actual growers know that you can't rush botany, and things take time, and problems need to be controlled.

A business man sees the lack of rush as laziness, time as an excuse, and problems are something to be blamed on the grower.

Hence, anyone trying to grow good weed on a large scale will never keep their job longer than a year or two.

Anyone who claims they never see a bug is just arrogant. You don't run a lab, you don't have a clean room, it didn't cost $500,000 to build your grow, contamination is a fact.

 

[SirStynkalot]

"You assert the existence of semi-mythological 30% weed as fact & common among Calif closet growers when it's about as likely as finding a diamond in a goat's ass, regardless of where it's grown."

ROFLMAO that's pretty damn close to what I was thinking. You hear people spew nonsense like that every so often. Budtang, do you even grow bro?

And as far as the greenhouse vs indoor argument, why are we even discussing this? If you're still not sure whether a GH can compete on par with indoors then I suggest rereading the Grower's Bible. That question was answered about 40 years ago. C'mon. Close the mouth and open the brain.

 

[budtang]

You assert that larger growers can't produce top shelf, then explain why they don't.

I explained what the dispensary owner explained to me on top of offering my opinion on the ability of larger operations to produce top shelf product.

The difference seems lost on you entirely. You assert that CA growers have to produce A+, then point out that most of what's there is midgrade. Can't have it both ways.

That was the other guy.

You assert the existence of semi-mythological 30% weed as fact & common among Calif closet growers when it's about as likely as finding a diamond in a goat's ass, regardless of where it's grown. There's a lot more to what defines top shelf than sheer potency, anyway. DJ short asserts that the best he ever smoked tested at 7%. Go figure.

We're not talking about people's opinions. We're talking about how the market prices weed. Which, is based on a point system involving THC percentages that typically correlates to consumers opinion on the product produced.

You attribute certain qualities to sun grown weed, then attempt to push the burden of proof of your claims onto others, to prove a negative.

You attributed certain abilities to greenhouse sized mega-operations and claimed they could produce top shelf. I claimed they didn't.

I honestly don't expect to encounter the best CA weed unless I go there & somehow get hooked up with the right people. You shouldn't expect to encounter CO top shelf, either, except under similar circumstances. The very best never goes to market beyond a small circle of friends anywhere in this country.

True, I'm definitely hooked up with better people on the California side of things. I never said their wasn't top shelf in CO. I just don't believe it's as easily available because you don't ever see it outside of Colorado. And, it doesn't appear to be currently produced by these large operations, either. Specifically, OG Kush on the level of California OG. I've seen OG from Colorado numerous times and it was just never on the level of California OG. I'm sure it's there. I'm just waiting to see it.

CO top shelf is considerably rarer for an entirely different reason, as well. The population of CA is ~38M people while the population of CO is only ~5M. In that, CA could support a connoisseur retail market that CO may not be able to. As I offered earlier, the market has to be big enough for high end providers to get enough volume to make a living.

True. That probably won't ever happen in CO. Which, is why it will primarily stay a mid-grade market for the duration of the legalization period nationwide.

 

[budtang]

Close the mouth and open the brain.

How about you close the mouth and post a pic displaying the top shelf greenhouse bud grown in MASS QUANTITY. We're not talking about merely growing a few plants in your backyard greenhouse. We're talking about mass produced TOP SHELF. Even if the percentage isn't technically "30%" there is nothing "mythological" about the fact that potency is greater in one sample over another. Give me a break. Are you saying all weed is the same potency because the percentages given might not be an accurate reading?

 

[budtang]

Large producers can't currently grow top shelf because actual growers aren't running any of the larger operations.

Actual growers know that you can't rush botany, and things take time, and problems need to be controlled.

A business man sees the lack of rush as laziness, time as an excuse, and problems are something to be blamed on the grower.

Hence, anyone trying to grow good weed on a large scale will never keep their job longer than a year or two.

Anyone who claims they never see a bug is just arrogant. You don't run a lab, you don't have a clean room, it didn't cost $500,000 to build your grow, contamination is a fact.

This.

 

[SirStynkalot]

No, I'm saying 30% thc isn't genetically possible at this point. Not to my knowledge anyway.

And I don't have crap for pics of greenhouses. I grow indoors. Greenhouses aren't well adapted to my climate. You end up spending almost is much on HVAC as you would on lights indoors and only get good sun in summer. Gotta have tons of supplemental lighting. They can work but they're a huge headache to operate.

If you need more proof then just go look at one. Visit a commercial greenhouse for other plants and compare results. In my area they have to import the plants they sell in commercial greenhouses for the first half of the season because the late spring/early summer light is usually bad.

I'm totally with you and Sooper though. Lab style ops are 2-3x more expensive than commercial style farms. Means you gotta get AT LEAST double efficiency for it to be cost effective. Not many people are confident they can push around 1 gpw on that scale. That's why people aren't doing it right off the bat.

I figure higher efficiency ops are going to have an edge, but only if the markets are so flooded with GH and outdoor weeds that all the other indoor growers go out of business. Gonna take a lot longer for high efficiency ops to see ROI at current rates.

 

[Nodgman3087]

Wow pot heads who dont want pot to be legal? shits blowing my mind right now... Agreed there are downsides to full out recreational legalization, but fuck bro we have people doing LIFE!!! for WEED related charges.. uh give me the shitty government weed.... cause the only weed your going to get in jail is weed covered in shit after your celly had it stuffed in his ass... no thanks vote yes

 

[LSWM]

To compete in the California market you do need at least upper mid grade indoor. At least in Southern CA. Nobody will even look at your outdoor and greenhouse can easily go for under 16 ... if you can get anyone to look at it...

Which is why so much weed from CA gets exported to other states. It always amazes me the lengths people are willing to go...