MMPR Grow op: Small Scale

Free market simply means that the prices will not be regulated and will be at the discretion of the LPs. This does not mean that it will be unregulated or unlimited. Most of Canadian agriculture is regulated, yet considered "free market". You can not just start farming chickens, you need to obtain the quota first. Same with Dairy, you are only allowed to produce your allotted amount.

Further, they never said anything about 50 LPs, that was no more than a rumor. In fact they denied any limits from the beginning (based on anything I read that came directly from HC). That being said, they would be foolish to license too much production, it would only lead to "diversion" and/or a lot of failed businesses.

Kron3007 said:

Further, they never said anything about 50 LPs, that was no more than a rumor.

Click to expand...

Technically, in a roundabout way they did. They said the MMPR program would result in 51 new businesses in the first period and then 10 more for a total of 61 new businesses over 10 years.

A "free market" implies a lot more than just unregulated pricing. A truly "free market" is one of competition. A "free market" has no unreasonable barriers to it, for either producers or consumers. HC clearly doesn't know what a "free market" is and should use the proper term, like oligopoly.

oddish said:

Technically, in a roundabout way they did. They said the MMPR program would result in 51 new businesses in the first period and then 10 more for a total of 61 new businesses over 10 years.

Click to expand...

They did change their stance on this initial position.

I highly doubt we will see more then the above numbers in the next few years. But then again I've been wrong on ish before.

j0yr1d3 said:

A "free market" implies a lot more than just unregulated pricing. A truly "free market" is one of competition. A "free market" has no unreasonable barriers to it, for either producers or consumers. HC clearly doesn't know what a "free market" is and should use the proper term, like oligopoly.

Click to expand...

You are correct, but the term is often used more loosely (incorrect or not). If they regulate milk, chicken, and tobacco production, why would you ever think they wouldn't limit marijuana production? It is naive to believe they intended to have a "free market" in the literal sense.

leaffan said:

They did change their stance on this initial position.

Click to expand...

I've heard these numbers (and other contradicting numbers) thrown around, but again I've never seen them in writing from HC. The only thing I have ever read from HC on this topic is that they are not placing a limit on the number of LPs. This is what they said from very early on.

rnr said:

the hc has stopped and put all future applications on hold, if any mistakes they return denied. if pt QA denied, they don't know what to do with all the apps that have come in and not enough staff with knowledge, to solve or work on files. they are still looking to keep under 200 LPs.
THE GOV DONT WANT THIS TO WORK OR HAPPEN! new apps aren't getting threw anymore

Click to expand...

HC has no issue with PT but they do want to know when your QA will be on site and that leads to all kinds of Bull Shit about when QA has to be there. What I do to get around the whole issue is make QA an employee and leave it at that, full/part time make no mention of it. Employee says it all.

Woo Hoo Free Meds for a year, I love it!!!

Drop in to liftmj and fill out the form to win free meds for a year. Sorry Canadian Patents only, great idea!!!

Based on the current selection and availability that prize is mediocre

Get what ya pay for

Here in Canadia

Pretty much a wall of silence in this thread lately. Are there any small-scale prospective LP's that have any news to report from the last few weeks, good or bad? Has anyone progressed through the application process at all lately or received a permit to build? Has anyone heard anything at all from HC lately?

Wishing the little guys luck, but the silence in here has been ominous......hoping some applicants have some news to share.

HC is still communicating with people, but the last I've seen has all been long-tail tied to the QA issue of not being able to share QA people. Now they're asking for schedules for part-time QA people, updated SOPs, etc.

I think they're taking everything they're learning from existing LPs and retro-actively applying it to the application process.
Also, they've virtually frozen all applications and nobody I've spoken with seems to know why beyond hearsay of issues with the existing LPs.

Interesting. So HC is now asking for all the SOP's as part of the initial application? This has not been a requirement for previous applicants.

I'm not sure why people are still trying to mess around with part-time QA people......it's already known that this is one of the main ways HC has been weeding out applicants, why throw up barriers for yourself by submitting with a part-timer? Just submit with a full-time QA person and try to progress through the application process, you have to give HC what they want to even give yourself a chance. By filing with a part-time QA person, LP's are only bringing scrutiny and hassle upon themselves IMO by having to provide detailed hours, SOP's, etc, and giving HC easy justification for denying or stalling the application.

The answer to the "why" is almost guaranteed, in most cases, to be cost.

And yes, HC asks specifically about SOPs all the time now.
They are an indirect requirement of the QA person. They must see the QA person's SOPs in order to validate that person, which is how they've made it a requirement. If you don't have SOPs then you haven't shown the ability to explicitly adhere to the regulations and they will start quoting sections a few at a time until you've documented responses to just about everything.

I can understand that, but unfortunately it is a cost of doing business in this type of industry. The small LP's that end up getting approved (if any), will be the ones that reworked their business model to include a full-time QA person. I'm amazed that with how vital the QA person is to the reputation and success of the company, that LP's are willing to leave all of that in the hands of a part-time employee that has little allegiance to the company. What happens when that part-time employee gets offered full-time with another LP and quits mid-application or right when production is about to start? Furthermore, I doubt that there are very many people that are qualified to be the head QA person and put together a full set of SOP's that are willing to only work part time.

Seems like poor business sense IMO. We've already seen 2 recalls, one of which would be enough to sink a small-scale LP. There are ways to cut corners and save money, but QA is not one of them if you want to get approved and run a successful business. A good QA professional is akin to a good insurance policy, and you get what you pay for.

I agree entirely.
The current goal of most applicants is to get approved. There are also full-time QA people who know enough about the situation that they don't want to tie themselves to an applicant that has no guarantee of getting approved.

And there lies the catch-22. Sadly, until HC gives some sort of idea of what their end-game is, it is hard for everyone involved to make these kinds of decisions......HC is making things up as they go and making a mess of the entire situation.

Bingo. HC is making things up, learning from their mistakes, delaying applicants and waiting out the storm.
Good luck to all applicants - I'll keep doing what I'm doing in the real world.