Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Ethan Nadelman, and this is Psychoactive, a production
Speaker 1: of I Heart Radio and Protozoa Pictures. Psychoactive is the
Speaker 1: show where we talk about all things drugs. But any
Speaker 1: views expressed here do not represent those of I Heart Media,
Speaker 1: Protozoa Pictures, or their executives and employees. Indeed, Heed, as
Speaker 1: an inveterate contrarian, I can tell you they may not
Speaker 1: even represent my own and nothing contained in this show
Speaker 1: should be used his medical advice or encouragement to use
Speaker 1: any type of drugs. Hello, Psychoactive listeners. So today our
Speaker 1: guest is Boris Jordan's. He is the founder and a
Speaker 1: major shareholder in the company cure Lee, which I think
Speaker 1: is either the biggest or one of the biggest cannabis
Speaker 1: companies in the world. Right It's a major multi state operator.
Speaker 1: He also has a hedge fund called Measure eight uh
Speaker 1: and just took a sense how big it is. He's
Speaker 1: got almost six thousand people working for him now, he's
Speaker 1: got a hundred and thirty seven dispensaries. Last I looked
Speaker 1: in in twenty one states. He's got over two dozen
Speaker 1: cultivation sites. I mean, this is a major, major operation
Speaker 1: it's valuation is in the billions of dollars on the
Speaker 1: Stock Exchange. Uh. He's a major player in cannabis industry
Speaker 1: circles and also deeply involved in the politics of all
Speaker 1: of this. And he's got a fascinating life even before
Speaker 1: he got into cannabis. So Boris, thank you ever so
Speaker 1: much for joining me on Psychoactive. I'm super excited to
Speaker 1: be here. Okay, well listen more so let's just jump in.
Speaker 1: He do need to talk a bit about what's going
Speaker 1: on in Congress right now. So this Safe Banking Act, right,
Speaker 1: you know, having married people in the industry and businesses
Speaker 1: to get access to safe banks, and and the whole
Speaker 1: discussion about can or should this go through, you know,
Speaker 1: without there being all sorts of racial equity racial justice
Speaker 1: provisions that we both include a sponge been that would
Speaker 1: also include, you know, ensuring a better level of access
Speaker 1: or some preferential access for a minority business owners. You know,
Speaker 1: can this happen? I mean Schumer, you know, on on
Speaker 1: the show and since then it said I don't want,
Speaker 1: you know, any state banking going through unless it's got
Speaker 1: some racial equity provisions. In Corey Booker from New Jersey
Speaker 1: has been even stronger on that. So what is the
Speaker 1: state of play from where you see? Well, even it's
Speaker 1: it's it's not a simple, uh, you know, piece of legislation.
Speaker 1: I'm sure you more than anybody knows that. Um you know,
Speaker 1: it's been I don't know, you know, fifty some odd
Speaker 1: years of repression on the sector and we've come to
Speaker 1: a situation now where, you know, I actually believe we're
Speaker 1: closer than we've ever have been for potentially getting a
Speaker 1: piece of federal legislation that at a minimum recognizes the
Speaker 1: existence of cannabis as a substance that can be consumed
Speaker 1: in various forms by the popular lation at large. So
Speaker 1: the short of it is, I think we have a
Speaker 1: piece of legislation as being worked on now that has
Speaker 1: obviously the safe banking component, and the safe banking component
Speaker 1: means that cannabis companies would have access to basic banking
Speaker 1: for their businesses. And I think it will also have
Speaker 1: a safe harbor provision that would allow investors to invest
Speaker 1: in the sector. And I think it will also have
Speaker 1: some level of what we call plus love you know,
Speaker 1: whope act issues like expungement and potentially and I think
Speaker 1: this is the issue that Booking wants the most, and
Speaker 1: that is some level of money to help these states
Speaker 1: with closing these expungements, because the one thing is you
Speaker 1: can come out and say, okay, we have you know,
Speaker 1: we've expunged these these these felonies or these misdemeanors. But
Speaker 1: another thing is to actually get it off the actual
Speaker 1: physical record, and that takes money and time. Obviously, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of different advocacy groups that want whatever is
Speaker 1: that they want this piece of legislation. We could probably
Speaker 1: spend two hours talking about all the different things people
Speaker 1: wanting this piece of legislation. The way I look at this,
Speaker 1: and I think that's where we're heading, is that this
Speaker 1: is the first step in what will be a multi year,
Speaker 1: potentially multi generational move towards legalization of not only cannabis,
Speaker 1: but other drugs as well. And I think that we
Speaker 1: have to see it that way, and we have to
Speaker 1: put our I wouldn't say differences, because to be honest,
Speaker 1: I'm on the same page as a lot of the
Speaker 1: other people are in terms of all the things we'd
Speaker 1: like to get in this legislation, particularly on some of
Speaker 1: the racial social equity issues. But I think that what
Speaker 1: we need to do is get something that we think
Speaker 1: can get past, so that we could you know, break
Speaker 1: the glass ceiling, say um, and and actually get a
Speaker 1: piece of legislation on the books that then you know,
Speaker 1: we'll use every year to expand on, expand on, liberalized
Speaker 1: and liberalized and for the more spark. That's what happened
Speaker 1: in the States as well. A lot of the states
Speaker 1: are initially passed very restrictive legislation, and then eventually they
Speaker 1: liberalized that legislation. As the sort of the demons of
Speaker 1: cannabis came down and people realized it wasn't as bad
Speaker 1: as everybody thought it was, they started to liberalize. And
Speaker 1: I think that's where we are now. And so I
Speaker 1: see the activists saying, you know, what we should have
Speaker 1: in there is providing small business administration loans to new
Speaker 1: legal cannabis businesses trying to get started, or making sure
Speaker 1: that banks provide support for new minority owned enterprises. And
Speaker 1: I think the problem has typically been, you know, the
Speaker 1: Republicans on this thing, right, I mean, the Democrats, you know,
Speaker 1: all for safe banking. They love it. They even passed
Speaker 1: it as stand alans before. The Republicans are generally for
Speaker 1: stand alone. The Democrats are saying, put some of his
Speaker 1: other stuff in, and the Republicans keep you know, now
Speaker 1: we don't like that racial equity stuff, get rid of it.
Speaker 1: But are the Republicans going to move along on this
Speaker 1: stuff and drop their opposition to uh, you know, we
Speaker 1: don't like this racial equity stuff. Will do expungement, but
Speaker 1: forget all that other preferential preferential stuff. Listen. I think
Speaker 1: where we are right now is that we have, if
Speaker 1: it was purely safe, we have about eighty votes in
Speaker 1: the Senate. As you know, we need sixty votes to
Speaker 1: get this through. So the real issue is once you
Speaker 1: start adding veterans affairs, small business loans, racial equity expungements,
Speaker 1: and all these things, you start to lose votes, and frankly,
Speaker 1: not only Republican votes, but there are several Democrats that
Speaker 1: you lose votes on as well, the ones that typically
Speaker 1: cause a problem for Democrats and a lot of the
Speaker 1: legislation that they've been trying to pass. So we so
Speaker 1: what we've been trying to do is get Schumer and
Speaker 1: Booker to give us a final draft, per se draft.
Speaker 1: We understand it will get negotiated that we could go
Speaker 1: and cross to the other side and start talking to
Speaker 1: the Republicans about what they're prepared to accept and not
Speaker 1: prepared to accept. The problem is every time you add anything,
Speaker 1: you'll lose a couple of them, right, That's where the
Speaker 1: problem is. What happens if the Republicans take not just
Speaker 1: the House, which everybody expects, but they also take the Senate.
Speaker 1: Are things then dead because McConnell just doesn't want it.
Speaker 1: Or when you say there's eighty votes for a straight
Speaker 1: safe banking, um that supplies that there's thirty Republicans out
Speaker 1: of the forty nine or fifty fifty who would be
Speaker 1: in favor of it. So is it conceivable that a
Speaker 1: straight out safe banking goes through next year if reblems
Speaker 1: have both houses or the Democrats gonna mobilize against it
Speaker 1: so much it won't happen on that end, McConnell. McConnell's
Speaker 1: the problem in this situation. So there are votes on
Speaker 1: the Republican side, but only under democratically controlled House because
Speaker 1: McConnell doesn't want to have on his record legalization of
Speaker 1: any kind in cannabis. But safe banking is not legalization.
Speaker 1: And if you're saying he's got you know, thirty out
Speaker 1: of fifty Republicans already saying they want it. I mean,
Speaker 1: I mean, you know what's the problem there. I mean,
Speaker 1: he did move around on him, maybe because it ran
Speaker 1: Paul's influence and being in Kentucky some years ago, but
Speaker 1: it's safe. Banking is not real. I mean, so he
Speaker 1: regrets ever passing the hemp built he thought it was
Speaker 1: he thought it was, you know, um, hemp for rope.
Speaker 1: He didn't think it was hemp for weed. And what's
Speaker 1: happened is, you know, he he did not think that
Speaker 1: what's happening now countrywide with delta eight and delta nine
Speaker 1: to th HC components that are being derived from hemp,
Speaker 1: and these products are spreading naturally, he's adamantly against that.
Speaker 1: And so he is very negative on anything to do
Speaker 1: with either CBD, hemp or cannabis. At this stage, I
Speaker 1: can't get into the guy's head, but I can tell
Speaker 1: you what he said. We are not going to put
Speaker 1: either into committee or on the floor vote with anything
Speaker 1: to do with cannabis at the Senate if he controls
Speaker 1: the Senate. Okay, boys, let me let me just embarrass
Speaker 1: He's just a little bit here, right, So I should
Speaker 1: tell our listeners full disclosure that you know, after I
Speaker 1: stepped down from running drug policy a lines five years ago,
Speaker 1: I thought about getting involved in the industry in some way,
Speaker 1: and it just felt unseemly to make a switch from
Speaker 1: advocacy into that. But last year I said what the hell,
Speaker 1: and I decided to make a significant investment for me
Speaker 1: in the hedge fund that Boris had set up called
Speaker 1: Measure eight. And like an idiot, I did it at
Speaker 1: the peak of the market last spring, a year and
Speaker 1: a half ago. I have anybody should have known better
Speaker 1: than that, And so my investment is now down in
Speaker 1: your hedge fund boards, although I understand would probably probably
Speaker 1: be down even more if I'd invested in some of
Speaker 1: the other funds. But that being said, so i'd go
Speaker 1: on a couple of your quarterly calls and I remember,
Speaker 1: like a year or ago, you were really optimistic. I'm
Speaker 1: talking to people people appreciate, so I'm taking what you
Speaker 1: say and you're optimism with a grain of salt. But
Speaker 1: why do you think you got it pretty wrong last year? Well,
Speaker 1: because I was speaking to you know, the powers that
Speaker 1: I had calls with Schumeran and others, and um you know,
Speaker 1: they were very optimistic they were gonna get this done,
Speaker 1: and they misled. To be honest, a lot of us
Speaker 1: and you know, we love to blame the Republicans, he said,
Speaker 1: on anything to do with cannabis or you know, liberalization
Speaker 1: of drug policy. But the fact is the Democrats of
Speaker 1: the Democratic President and two houses the controlled by Democrats,
Speaker 1: and they have done zero on this issue. And so
Speaker 1: you know today, obviously I'm positive because I can see
Speaker 1: the activity, but you know, I'm a person who tries
Speaker 1: to believe what I'm told, and I was told by
Speaker 1: the higher ups in the party that they were going
Speaker 1: to get this done and they didn't. Right. You know,
Speaker 1: it's my little suggestion giving the Democrats a little more
Speaker 1: loved before you hit him on that stuff, because I
Speaker 1: saw I'm watching your interviews in your slamming Schumer and Booker.
Speaker 1: They're screwing it up. They should have had this done before.
Speaker 1: And then you're saying in the States, the Democrat led
Speaker 1: governments in the States, they won't crack down on the
Speaker 1: illicit markets because because Biden bailed them all out with
Speaker 1: the big federal funding, and once they don't run out
Speaker 1: of money, they have to crack down there and they'll see.
Speaker 1: But meanwhile, the fact of the matter is, of course,
Speaker 1: it's Democrats, with a few major exceptions, who have really
Speaker 1: driven this thing nationally, right, It's it's democratic states, which
Speaker 1: basically on the places mostly where you're doing really good
Speaker 1: business is democratically leadership. In Congress, they led this thing,
Speaker 1: you know. It's it's Democratic voters who disproportionately voted in
Speaker 1: favor this thing. So I can agree with you to
Speaker 1: some extent about Schumer and Booker and how slowly been
Speaker 1: on getting their ship together. But on the other hand,
Speaker 1: you know, but for the Democrats, if the Republicans were
Speaker 1: running things, uh, you know, purely, if your business, the
Speaker 1: whole industry wouldn't be much of anywhere. And meanwhile, the
Speaker 1: Democrats they got what five or tennessee margin in the House,
Speaker 1: they got zero seat margin in the Senate. It's not
Speaker 1: like g f DR and a new deal so getting
Speaker 1: anything through. So anyway, my suggestion, give a little more
Speaker 1: love before you kind of smack them around. It's and
Speaker 1: I I spend more money and more love on the
Speaker 1: Democrats than on any party in Washington, and so we
Speaker 1: I can tell you this, I don't give very little
Speaker 1: credit to the federal government and Congress or the Presidency,
Speaker 1: both Republics and Democrats on these policies. I give them zero.
Speaker 1: I do however, do you have a high grade to
Speaker 1: our various governors and local governments that have been really
Speaker 1: brave and pushing these policies. But at the federal government,
Speaker 1: which you and I are talking about now, I give
Speaker 1: him an f So just a few other issues will
Speaker 1: wrap up this. Can you know current conversation to a
Speaker 1: d about allowing businesses Marijunia businesses take a tax to
Speaker 1: duck share that can happen anytime soon is that's still
Speaker 1: years away. So they're trying to actually put that into
Speaker 1: this current law that they're trying to get past in
Speaker 1: the Lame Duck. My concern with that, Ethan, this is
Speaker 1: that that's the trojan horse I worked on the Ways
Speaker 1: and Meets committe when we were doing tax reform. Kind
Speaker 1: of showing my age. But anyway, um, I can tell
Speaker 1: you that to change tax policy in the United States
Speaker 1: is very complicated. You have to score the tax, you
Speaker 1: have to find an alternative for that tax, for the
Speaker 1: revenue from that. I don't believe personally that we can
Speaker 1: get that done between now and the Lame Duck. And
Speaker 1: so my concern is that if they put that into
Speaker 1: the law, it's dead on arrival. Even though the publicans
Speaker 1: tend to be pro tax reduction, although I'd like to
Speaker 1: see what their position would be on cannabis tax reduction,
Speaker 1: but they tend to be pro tax reduction. So and
Speaker 1: we just say the same thing also about there's this
Speaker 1: climb Acts c l i MB that would basically, you know,
Speaker 1: provide a safe harbor so that you know, companies like
Speaker 1: yours could be listed on US stock exchanges or at
Speaker 1: least be able to access Wall Street funding. Same issue
Speaker 1: where it's going to be some years down the road
Speaker 1: and can't. Don't get things distracted now because I hear
Speaker 1: the activists are very worried about it. They see, you know,
Speaker 1: opening up the funding for you know, you guys to
Speaker 1: Wall Street just you know, enhance this consolidation of this
Speaker 1: whole industry. You know, your valuations will you know go
Speaker 1: through the ceiling. But the whole consolidation process which activists
Speaker 1: and some others are really trying to slow down to
Speaker 1: keep some elements of this industry a small business um
Speaker 1: that will go by the wayside. Well, I actually have
Speaker 1: a completely the opposite view. If if they don't get
Speaker 1: rid of two A D and if they don't allow
Speaker 1: eventral uplifting, I'm not the one that's to suffer, right,
Speaker 1: It's going to be the small entrepreneurs that are gonna
Speaker 1: suffer because there's no cheap funding for them. What's happening
Speaker 1: with those companies now is that they're having to pay
Speaker 1: you know, usually rates to start the company, kind of
Speaker 1: the way I had to write when I started this
Speaker 1: business to ten years ago. You know, we were paying
Speaker 1: you know, for our money to try to start the business. Now,
Speaker 1: the fact is we had an open playing field, so
Speaker 1: it was much less competitive. Now the market is much
Speaker 1: more competitive. Pricing is being squeezed, so the profitability levels
Speaker 1: are way down where you're paying basically a seventy tax
Speaker 1: rate on that, and so the small companies cannot survive.
Speaker 1: I want to reiterate this, without too without safe banking,
Speaker 1: and without uplifting, the small business owner is finished in Cannabis.
Speaker 1: So if we don't get this in the lame duck session,
Speaker 1: over the next two years, the five major companies in
Speaker 1: the U S will consolidate the whole industry underneath them
Speaker 1: because nobody else is gonna be able to get funding.
Speaker 1: Aren't the states kind of limiting how many you know, dispensaries.
Speaker 1: You guys can own it anywhere, but they're not gonna
Speaker 1: be able to But they're not gonna be able to
Speaker 1: keep doing anything because I'm telling you right now, we
Speaker 1: have something called three tiers of cannabis companies in the US.
Speaker 1: The top tiers the top five companies. Then there's about
Speaker 1: ten companies and what we call tier two, and then
Speaker 1: everybody else is in tier three, and then there's the
Speaker 1: private companies that are Tier four. Everything below Tier two
Speaker 1: is going to start going bankrupt because they can't refinance
Speaker 1: and there's no money available. Why would investors put money
Speaker 1: in the sector where there's no liquidity and they can't
Speaker 1: realize their upside. So what's gonna happen is the big
Speaker 1: companies will always be able to attract investment, although it
Speaker 1: will be more expensive. The medium and small companies are
Speaker 1: gonnatract no investment. So what is gonna happen. They're gonna
Speaker 1: start going bankrupt and shutting their doors. So what's gonna happen?
Speaker 1: We're gonna go to the states to the regulations and say, guys,
Speaker 1: here's your alternative. Either these companies shut down and we
Speaker 1: lose all those jobs, or you allow us to come
Speaker 1: in and consolidate them and at least save the jobs
Speaker 1: and business. So, you know, the states are gonna have
Speaker 1: to make a decision. Do they want to, you know,
Speaker 1: have this sector continue to expand or are they gonna
Speaker 1: want to shut it down. And if they decided to
Speaker 1: shut it down, they shut it down. But I don't
Speaker 1: think that's what's gonna happen. They're gonna want the tax revenues,
Speaker 1: so they're gonna want these businesses to keep going, and
Speaker 1: so they're gonna allow consolidation to take place in these states.
Speaker 1: They're gonna have to. It's inevitable. We'll be talking more
Speaker 1: after we hear this ad. Let me ask you about
Speaker 1: a particular state, Oklahoma, right, I mean, it looks like
Speaker 1: the total Wild West. Basically, it looks like they're giving
Speaker 1: out licenses like candy there, and the result is that
Speaker 1: you have, i know, massive numbers of dispensaries and outlets,
Speaker 1: you know, medical marijuana, but you know, basically anybody can
Speaker 1: get it. But when somebody was telling me recently, is
Speaker 1: that went ups night of that is that in basically
Speaker 1: every little city in town in Oklahoma, you have some
Speaker 1: local business people who set up their own little operation.
Speaker 1: And if you go to a black town, it's going
Speaker 1: to be a black owned dispensary in a white town.
Speaker 1: This and and the question what do you think about
Speaker 1: that model or is it inevitable that will be consolidation
Speaker 1: in Oklahoma as well? They won't be able to survive.
Speaker 1: They'll all have to consolidate because there's too many of them.
Speaker 1: We saw this in Oregon, we saw this in California.
Speaker 1: There's too many of them. There used to be two thousand,
Speaker 1: eight hundred dispensaries in California. There's less than eight hundred
Speaker 1: now because what happens is they all go out of business. Capitalisms,
Speaker 1: capitalism ethm right. You know, you have to make a
Speaker 1: great product, you have to invest in that product, you
Speaker 1: have to build your distribution. To do these things, you
Speaker 1: need a lot of money. This is not a capital
Speaker 1: light industry. This is a capital heavy industry. In other words,
Speaker 1: you have to invest a lot to get a result,
Speaker 1: and people want to return on that investment. I mean,
Speaker 1: we've seen this for two hundred years in the United States, right,
Speaker 1: lots of small brewers, lots of small um alcohol companies,
Speaker 1: cigarette companies, other things. They eventually all merged into these
Speaker 1: large conglomerates because of the nature of the way the
Speaker 1: system is, of course. I mean, I'll be frank with
Speaker 1: you and our listeners here. I mean, you know, on
Speaker 1: the one hand, you know, I'm the kind of smallest,
Speaker 1: beautiful kind of guy, you know, ideologically, you know, I've
Speaker 1: been on records saying I'm not in this whole thing,
Speaker 1: the fight for the Marlborization or bud Wiserization of marijuana.
Speaker 1: I do think there's a moral obligation to try to
Speaker 1: get racial equity provisions and to make them work. But
Speaker 1: the other part of me knows we live in, you know,
Speaker 1: perhaps the most dynamic capitalist society in history. I look
Speaker 1: at when I moved to New York City thirty years ago,
Speaker 1: and they're all sorts of different little you know, coffee
Speaker 1: shops out. Then Starbucks come along and they all get
Speaker 1: wiped out. But now I walk around New York City
Speaker 1: and I see more small ownership, the single store, a
Speaker 1: few of the three or four stores, and there's been
Speaker 1: a proliferation and so the non Starbucks niche seems to
Speaker 1: be slowly growing and growing, not unlike what's happened with
Speaker 1: micro breweries in the beer area, not unlike has happened
Speaker 1: with you know, the microdistilleries. And you see it's still
Speaker 1: under ten percent, but it's growing quite dramatically in many places.
Speaker 1: And I wonder, you know, when all of sitting done,
Speaker 1: is that going to be the inevitable future of the
Speaker 1: broader cannabis industry. I agree with you, actually, and I'll
Speaker 1: tell you what it is. What happens is the big
Speaker 1: companies get lazy, They start to manufacture a product which
Speaker 1: is not uh, you know, interesting, They don't innovate, and
Speaker 1: the consumer is always looking for the next great thing,
Speaker 1: right Ethan. And you know, if I can get a
Speaker 1: cup of coffee from a local brewer of coffee that's
Speaker 1: much nicer than a Starbucks coffee, I'll even pay up
Speaker 1: for that to get that cup of coffee. And I
Speaker 1: think that that's what we're seeing. And we're not only
Speaker 1: seeing that in the US, particularly in the coffee industry.
Speaker 1: We're seeing that across the whole world. If you'll go
Speaker 1: to the UK, you've got you know, Cafe Nero, You've
Speaker 1: got You've got a whole bunch of these different companies
Speaker 1: that are coming up, and they're starting to challenge the
Speaker 1: monopolies of you know, the Starbucks in the world, and
Speaker 1: I encourage that. I always say to my people at
Speaker 1: Cure Leaf, there's some kids sitting in a garage. Sorry
Speaker 1: for the cliche, but that's you know, in the garage
Speaker 1: thinking of a way to disrupt what we're doing, just
Speaker 1: like we disrupted Cure Leaf. How the industry looked, you know,
Speaker 1: eight years ago, and so there's always somebody else. And
Speaker 1: that's the beauty of the American system. And I believe
Speaker 1: in the American capitalist system. It's not perfect. We have
Speaker 1: a lot of problems, and we have a lot of
Speaker 1: problems to fit. But when I'm not a believer in socialism,
Speaker 1: and I never have been, and someone whose family ran
Speaker 1: from communism, and someone who saw what was going on
Speaker 1: in Russia in the early nineteen nineties when I went
Speaker 1: over there as a young man to you know, put
Speaker 1: off my footprint, my imprint on that economy, I can
Speaker 1: tell you socialism doesn't work anywhere in the world. Of course,
Speaker 1: you put on a table with Boris Jourdan's one fascinating guy.
Speaker 1: He was born, you know, in Long Island. He's in
Speaker 1: his mid fifties now. His parents, grandparents had fled from
Speaker 1: you know, during the Russian Revolution in nineteen around nineteen
Speaker 1: seventeen or so. His grandfather, I think was involved in
Speaker 1: part of you know, at the higher levels in the
Speaker 1: Sarist government. You know, he's what you would call a
Speaker 1: white Russian and he grows up in Long Island, in
Speaker 1: a little white Russian community and Sea Cliff, and he's
Speaker 1: really I think still you're very much woven into that.
Speaker 1: And then in the nineteen nineties when you're going to
Speaker 1: business school, uh, you know, you see all the you know,
Speaker 1: the sons of the elites, you know, going to from
Speaker 1: Latin America going back and setting up American banking and
Speaker 1: you speaking Russian growing up that way, go back to Russia,
Speaker 1: become the boy wonder of Russia markets, you know, with
Speaker 1: with funds that helping get the Russian stock market going,
Speaker 1: you take over a TV station, and TV that goes
Speaker 1: on for a few years. You're reportedly friendly with prudent
Speaker 1: in those days, and then you piss them off at
Speaker 1: old four and life changes. So I want to ask
Speaker 1: you in the first question here. You know, you were
Speaker 1: involved in Russia deeply in the nineties, the born Yelson years,
Speaker 1: the wild West years, and then you come to cannabis.
Speaker 1: But what I want to know is, you know, when
Speaker 1: was it that you first thought about getting into the
Speaker 1: cannabis and just you where were you in your life? Um,
Speaker 1: you know what made you think about this. I'd love
Speaker 1: to be able to say that I was an early advocate,
Speaker 1: as you are, but that would be a lie. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I stumbled into cannabis, so you know, obviously
Speaker 1: as a as a college and and high school student,
Speaker 1: I smoked weed like everybody else and enjoyed it. But
Speaker 1: then I stopped doing it in my mid twenties and
Speaker 1: into my thirties, after having children and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Not because I was against it, but I just stopped.
Speaker 1: I took on other things and then um uh, you know,
Speaker 1: I tend to start businesses in those countries where I live.
Speaker 1: So when I was in Russia, I had a whole
Speaker 1: series of different companies. Then I moved to the UK
Speaker 1: and I started, you know what became the largest data
Speaker 1: center operation in Europe, a company called tell A City.
Speaker 1: We lived there for eleven years and then I moved
Speaker 1: back to United States and I had a friend of
Speaker 1: mine come over, a very interesting person. He came to
Speaker 1: me and he said, Hey, I'm starting a cannabis UH
Speaker 1: medical device business. He came up with a patent for
Speaker 1: a machine that was going to deliver dose specific dosage
Speaker 1: of cannabis to late stage cancer patients in hospitals, and
Speaker 1: he wanted to get that approved by the FDA. Well,
Speaker 1: I invested in his business UM, and obviously the FDA
Speaker 1: wasn't gonna look at this. And then I kept telling
Speaker 1: him and his colleagues that they have to pivot UH
Speaker 1: to this vertical business because I started looking into cannabis.
Speaker 1: And then I reoriented the company from the medical device
Speaker 1: business to this vertical cannabis UH cultivation, manufacturing, and distribution.
Speaker 1: So it goes from being a kind of little sideline
Speaker 1: interest in fourteen where it absorbs more and more and
Speaker 1: more of your time, to the point of today where
Speaker 1: it's how you spend your time in business. It's I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm a a full time to be honest, I'm spending
Speaker 1: most of my time on US. Now, you're right, and okay,
Speaker 1: I'm super fascinated with it. So boris I gotta bring
Speaker 1: up when Putin invaded Ukraine some months ago. You know,
Speaker 1: you took a lot of flak because you put out
Speaker 1: this kind of lukewarm thing, a kind of both sides
Speaker 1: hope there can be peace resolution. Clearly you were not
Speaker 1: you in no public place condemning you know, this brutal
Speaker 1: assault on Ukraine by Putin, and you knew the guy
Speaker 1: twenty years ago, And I'm just assuming the reason you
Speaker 1: haven't said anything more boldly is that you know Pudin
Speaker 1: kills people, and he's vicious, and you still have friends
Speaker 1: and business interests in Russia, and so your view was,
Speaker 1: you know what the cost of my saying something criticizing
Speaker 1: Pudin on this invasion is gonna be risky in various ways.
Speaker 1: It's just I'd rather take the ship from the community
Speaker 1: for not being bolder. Is that basically what happened. No,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you. I'm a I'm an old line
Speaker 1: student of business, and I know things have changed Ethan,
Speaker 1: and maybe I need to change. But everything I learned
Speaker 1: about business, not only from my father but also in
Speaker 1: school and then my first jobs, is that businesses and
Speaker 1: politics are separate. And I have made it a thirty
Speaker 1: year issue that I do not get involved in politics
Speaker 1: while I'm running businesses. And I'll tell you one of
Speaker 1: my mentors, George Sorols, pushed that with me until, of course,
Speaker 1: he switched his fund to philanthropy and to a charity,
Speaker 1: and then he got involved heavily into politics. But you know,
Speaker 1: if you know the old George, which I do, and
Speaker 1: if you read his book Source on Soils, he's got
Speaker 1: three pages about our relationship in there, you'll know that
Speaker 1: he was one of the people that said Boris focus
Speaker 1: on the business and stay out of politics. And so
Speaker 1: I try to stay out of the politics because I
Speaker 1: don't believe there's any upside to business in getting involved
Speaker 1: in politics. Well, listen, let's turn to a few other
Speaker 1: things here. On the future of the industry, I mean,
Speaker 1: if heard you say, look, so many people focus on
Speaker 1: how what happened last quarter, and I you focus on
Speaker 1: the fundamentals. You think, like Warren Buffett, you think, like
Speaker 1: black Rock, this is long term. You're in it for
Speaker 1: a long term. One of the things you've been saying
Speaker 1: about the nature of this industry, apart from the stuff
Speaker 1: we've been talking about, is you think fifty of the
Speaker 1: industry will be people drinking their cannabis um within a
Speaker 1: few years. And so tell me what you see on
Speaker 1: the evolution of this thing in terms of the drinkables,
Speaker 1: the edibles, other forms of consuming. How do you see
Speaker 1: this thing evolving in lie So it's and I think
Speaker 1: the industry is going to break up into three categories.
Speaker 1: There's gonna be the pharmaceutical part of the industry, and
Speaker 1: that's when synthetic cannabinoids come about. I believe this pharmaceutical
Speaker 1: companies will switch from being the biggest opponents of legalization
Speaker 1: to the biggest proponents of legalization. And obviously that's not
Speaker 1: an area where we intend to play. That's gonna be
Speaker 1: really a pharma category. And by the way, I think
Speaker 1: the cannabis plant is such such a great medical plant
Speaker 1: that I think they're gonna do very well in that area.
Speaker 1: The second part of the industry is going to be
Speaker 1: what I call the neutraceutical part or the wellness part,
Speaker 1: and that is somewhere where we do want to play.
Speaker 1: We just launched a rub which is really revolutionary. I'm
Speaker 1: recommending it to everybody. It's a rub for arthritis and
Speaker 1: muscle and joint pain. It has no psychoactive effect on
Speaker 1: the person, but it has high levels of th hc,
Speaker 1: c B, D c BG, it's some other uh components
Speaker 1: that really really helps with pain and and so I
Speaker 1: think that the whole sleep and pain category, it's going
Speaker 1: to be a big one. And I think cannabis is
Speaker 1: gonna play a role in that. And I think that's
Speaker 1: gonna be biologicals rather than synthetics, because people really prefer
Speaker 1: Today the world is really moving towards much more homeopathic
Speaker 1: medicines than these awful drugs that people have hooked us on.
Speaker 1: And so I think that will be a big category,
Speaker 1: and purely wants to be a player there. And we
Speaker 1: have a i think the largest R and D facility
Speaker 1: in the country working on products in that area. And
Speaker 1: the third is going to be your recreational market, which
Speaker 1: is very similar to you know, alcohol and and and
Speaker 1: and other things. So the reason I made that statement
Speaker 1: was because I've been watching consumer behavior not only United
Speaker 1: States but in the world, and and people are really
Speaker 1: trying to move away from smoking. And it's not only
Speaker 1: because smoking, in the case of cigarettes, caused cancer, but
Speaker 1: it's because anything you put into your lungs that's not
Speaker 1: fresh air is not natural, and I think that the
Speaker 1: world is heading in a direction where we don't want
Speaker 1: to put anything into our lungs except oxygen. And I
Speaker 1: don't think this is gonna happen soon ethan, because there's
Speaker 1: a huge cannabi's culture of smoking. But I think that
Speaker 1: culture is older, and I think the younger generation is
Speaker 1: going to move on to other products. Plus, as this
Speaker 1: industry and the products spread to new people, new customers,
Speaker 1: those people that never used cannabis, a lot of those
Speaker 1: are not smokers. It's women replacing a glass of chardonnay,
Speaker 1: or men for that matter, with you know, a drink.
Speaker 1: And the drinks category in terms of products, consumer based
Speaker 1: products is the biggest in the world. And edibles and
Speaker 1: drinking that's the biggest. It's much bigger than anything to
Speaker 1: do with smoking. As a matter of fact, smoking is
Speaker 1: on the decline in the world and and drinks and
Speaker 1: edibles are on the increase. And so when I made
Speaker 1: the statement at the Benzinga conference in Chicago last week,
Speaker 1: so I first of all, I said it's five to
Speaker 1: ten years from now. I didn't say it's tomorrow the
Speaker 1: next year. I said five to ten years from now.
Speaker 1: I expect that the industry will be between drinks eventually
Speaker 1: going to and that's because it's a form of consumption
Speaker 1: that is really growing within the population, not only United
Speaker 1: States but in the world, and smoking is falling off.
Speaker 1: Does that mean that the importance of growing is very
Speaker 1: high in marijuana in greenhouses? The specific strains in all
Speaker 1: this is going to be less important that when you're
Speaker 1: doing edibles and drinkables, he can really be outdoor grow.
Speaker 1: You don't need to be quite as particular in the
Speaker 1: content of these things. So you know, there is a
Speaker 1: story and around that. I disagree with it because I
Speaker 1: think that the edibles and the drinks are much better
Speaker 1: with high grade product and you can taste the difference
Speaker 1: and feel the difference in the entourage effect by planting
Speaker 1: very good plants. Now you know my view generally, and
Speaker 1: I don't know how well the the audience knows this.
Speaker 1: You know, I think this whole higher th HC is
Speaker 1: better is garbage. I believe it's all in the trpenes.
Speaker 1: It's not in the THHC. So you know, I think
Speaker 1: at eight U th HC plant UH and AC plant
Speaker 1: is going to give you the same effect depending on
Speaker 1: the profile of the turpenes. So I do think trpines
Speaker 1: are absolutely critical, and for trpenes you need very well grown,
Speaker 1: high end cannabis. So I actually think you're gonna still
Speaker 1: require really high end and different strains to get different
Speaker 1: types of entourage effects from these places. So now in
Speaker 1: terms of the broader future of the industry, I mean
Speaker 1: you mentioned they are about big big pharma and how
Speaker 1: they're gonna want synthetic cannabis. I guess because you control
Speaker 1: dosing and purity and your consistency more in that way.
Speaker 1: What about you know, big tobacco. You know, I interviewed
Speaker 1: uh the chairman and former CEO of Philip Moore's International,
Speaker 1: Andro Colenzopolis, a few months ago on Psychoactive, and he said, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, it has been a couple of little investments.
Speaker 1: He kind of hedged on where they might go, but
Speaker 1: there's clearly evidence of them moving in. Do you see
Speaker 1: them ultimately dominating this or given what you're saying about
Speaker 1: um people switching to edibles and to uh drinkables, do
Speaker 1: you see big alcohol or the big consumer good companies
Speaker 1: ultimately dominating this or well, or were pure marijuana companies
Speaker 1: actually play there? Continuing major role. I mean, looking out
Speaker 1: ten fifteen years from now, what do you think? So
Speaker 1: I think they're all gonna be players in the sector.
Speaker 1: So I think the tobacco companies, in my opinion, will
Speaker 1: no longer be known as tobacco companies. They will be
Speaker 1: known as cannabis companies. So I think they'll be prolific
Speaker 1: investors in the sector. As you know, the biggest investments
Speaker 1: made so far come from drinks tobacco companies. And I
Speaker 1: think that, you know, Philip Morris, no matter what he
Speaker 1: told you, I can tell you they are spending money
Speaker 1: and a lot of time. They are doing enormous amounts
Speaker 1: of R and D on the plant, on the cannabinoids,
Speaker 1: on the different entourage effects. They're going to be in
Speaker 1: the sector, no question. And I personally think they're gonna
Speaker 1: get out of tobacco eventually and focus on cannabis and
Speaker 1: cannabis related products. It does seem like p M I is,
Speaker 1: you know, leading the way. I just heard a presentation
Speaker 1: by Vivian Aser, the analystic Cowen who follows the alcohol,
Speaker 1: tobacco and cannabis industries, and p M I seems leagues
Speaker 1: aheads of all the other big ones in terms of
Speaker 1: making that transition. But one thing I do worry about,
Speaker 1: and this comes from the kind of public health part
Speaker 1: of my advocacy brain, is whether or not we're gonna
Speaker 1: see on the legal industry trying to fuse nicotine product
Speaker 1: with Canadas. And obviously already people you know, both in
Speaker 1: Europe and even the US, whether you know splits, blunts,
Speaker 1: whenever they're they're already merging these two products. I remember
Speaker 1: when I lived in London for a year. I didn't
Speaker 1: like it because all my friends would smoke him in combo,
Speaker 1: and I didn't like the tobacco thing. But do you
Speaker 1: think that's gonna happen and you think governments are basically
Speaker 1: gonna put prohibitions on selling those products in combination? You
Speaker 1: probably remember this right, Schumer said that he doesn't want
Speaker 1: the tobacco industry involved in the cannabis at all. And
Speaker 1: so I do think that there's going to be significant
Speaker 1: early pressure to keep the tobacco companies out. But I
Speaker 1: can tell you right now, British, American Tobacco, Altria, Philip Morris,
Speaker 1: they're all writing big checks, particularly in Europe, not the
Speaker 1: United States because of our federal prohibition, but in Europe
Speaker 1: and investing in startup companies across the board. But apart
Speaker 1: from the company's what about the product itself? And there
Speaker 1: was the notion of selling cannabis that also has nicotine
Speaker 1: in it. You know, I've never smoked a cigarette. I
Speaker 1: think maybe one as a young kid, but I never
Speaker 1: liked cigarettes and I didn't like to taste that like,
Speaker 1: so I'm the wrong person to talk about cigarettes except
Speaker 1: to tell you that I think there's gonna be too
Speaker 1: much pressure on them to keep tobacco and particularly nicotine
Speaker 1: out of this space. Let's take a break here and
Speaker 1: go to an ad so both you among I think
Speaker 1: all the major figures in the cannabis world in the
Speaker 1: US at least, maybe not Canada, but the US have
Speaker 1: been the most excited about the international markets in especially
Speaker 1: Europe and everywhere I look. You're talking about Germany, Germany, Germany,
Speaker 1: you know, other major multi state operators are not going
Speaker 1: to Europe in the same way. But you're big in Germany,
Speaker 1: and you pointed out that medical marijuana. You know, they
Speaker 1: didn't do that so well. But if they go for
Speaker 1: full legalization, um, it will be big. And the new
Speaker 1: government says they're gonna do it. So give us your
Speaker 1: perspective on Germany before I ask you about the rest
Speaker 1: of Europe. First of all, Germany, you know the way
Speaker 1: Germany goes, Europe tends to go there the leader obviously,
Speaker 1: at least at the moment, especially now with the UK
Speaker 1: out of the European Union. I think the Germans are
Speaker 1: very very focused. I mean cannabis use and by the way,
Speaker 1: psychedelic use is very prolific in Germany. You know, if
Speaker 1: you go to Berlin, you can't walk down the street
Speaker 1: without smelling cannabis everywhere. Um same thing in Spain. But
Speaker 1: the German government is a rational government, right they they
Speaker 1: understand the taxation benefits and so they are legalizing cannabis.
Speaker 1: It's our view that barring some treaty hiccups that they have,
Speaker 1: particularly on the EU side, I think the U N
Speaker 1: Treaty is resolvable because Canada did it and there's a
Speaker 1: precedent now for it. I think that the EU treaty
Speaker 1: nobody has addressed that issue. What Canada did and with
Speaker 1: Germany might do is basically to do with Avo Morales,
Speaker 1: the former Bolivian president d with Coca, which is to
Speaker 1: withdraw from the treaty and then rejoin the treaty saying
Speaker 1: we don't agree to the coca provision or in this case,
Speaker 1: the cannabis provision, that's what you're talking about, correct, And
Speaker 1: they get a they get an exemption on that. Yet
Speaker 1: what's interesting is that no one's ever done that near
Speaker 1: you yet, at least we don't have a precedent. So
Speaker 1: this is groundbreaking now. Obviously, see if there's any country
Speaker 1: in the world they could do it, and you it's
Speaker 1: it's Germany because the EU basically is Germany from an
Speaker 1: economic perspective, So so I think they could lead the way,
Speaker 1: but they have to get people on their side. But
Speaker 1: luxembourger is trying to get this, Switzerland is trying to
Speaker 1: get so they have people, they have other countries that
Speaker 1: are on their side. I think there's five countries at
Speaker 1: all right now that are trying to get this through
Speaker 1: the EU. I mean, it's weird how the Dutch, you
Speaker 1: know who almost fifty years ago did the you know,
Speaker 1: the coffee shop model with decriminalization, Shane, How they've just
Speaker 1: never kind of crossed over to making a fully legal
Speaker 1: back door, you know, the legal wholesale production of this stuff.
Speaker 1: It's very much the way that medical marijuana dispensaries were
Speaker 1: in the US. You know, between the time we first
Speaker 1: legalized medical marijuana and California nineties six until we got
Speaker 1: the first dispensary law in New Mexico and oh seven.
Speaker 1: I mean, basically it was the thing where activists would
Speaker 1: start setting it up, first the cops to shut them down.
Speaker 1: Then eventually they say, well, maybe this works better this way.
Speaker 1: But it's weird how they never gone all the way now.
Speaker 1: I also are a lot of people talking about Portugal,
Speaker 1: but is that basically because of the cultivation side and
Speaker 1: their low cost production. Portugal right now has a medical
Speaker 1: program almost impossible. We've We've been an applicant for our
Speaker 1: products there for three years and where one of the
Speaker 1: biggest cultivators in the country, and we still haven't gotten
Speaker 1: our medical license. It takes forever. It's a very bureaucratic
Speaker 1: oh siety. I think only one company, I think til Ray,
Speaker 1: has a license to sell it's it's not a very
Speaker 1: big market because of the way they regulate it, but
Speaker 1: they are the center of cultu ovation because the climate.
Speaker 1: The climate is very similar to California, and so you
Speaker 1: have the ability to grow basically three quarters of the
Speaker 1: year outdoors, sun grown or hoop houses or greenhouses. You
Speaker 1: can grow very very nice product. And so that's why
Speaker 1: Portugal is so popular because it has an absolutely perfect
Speaker 1: climate for growing cannabis, and most of the cannabis in
Speaker 1: Europe comes from Portugal today rather than from any other country.
Speaker 1: Given the factor of class of production, why would a
Speaker 1: place like Columbia or Morocco or some other African country
Speaker 1: UM emerges a major suppliers in the way they have
Speaker 1: with coffee or tea or a whole range of other
Speaker 1: UM commodities, including psychoactive commodities. So I think they will.
Speaker 1: I think Colombia is you hit it on the nail
Speaker 1: on the head. Uganda is already supplying. There's Ugandan product
Speaker 1: coming into Germany right now, so right, I mean, I
Speaker 1: do think they're going to be. But but I think
Speaker 1: that you know, some of these countries, these some of
Speaker 1: these regions may put on limits. For instance, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: up until last week, it was anticipated that all the
Speaker 1: Canada's coming into Germany would be EU g MP. Didn't
Speaker 1: matter where it comes from, as long as it's U
Speaker 1: g m P, you can import it into Germany for
Speaker 1: the wreck program that's starting in twenty four. You know,
Speaker 1: there's rumors today that there's certain elements that have lobbied
Speaker 1: to say we want to have domestic growing only now.
Speaker 1: Obviously that's nuts because Germany is probably the most expensive
Speaker 1: place in Europe to do business, and currently with the
Speaker 1: energy crisis, you couldn't grow a cannada's plant there, either
Speaker 1: in a greenhouse or indoors that would be remotely uh
Speaker 1: profitable to sell, or if you were selling, it's all
Speaker 1: at such a price that it would be prohibitive for
Speaker 1: people to buy in the black market would continue to proliferate.
Speaker 1: So I'm hoping that Germans walk away from that. And
Speaker 1: this is not Catherine Stone, this is just conversation, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna hear this kind of conversation for the next
Speaker 1: six months as they go through rulemaking for the recreational program. Obviously,
Speaker 1: different interest groups in the country are going to be
Speaker 1: lobbying for different things. I personally think it's uneconomic to
Speaker 1: grow in Germany and so I hope they walk away
Speaker 1: from that. But there is a rumor that they're going
Speaker 1: to try and do that. And where do you see
Speaker 1: the greatest likelihood is of you know, countries in Central
Speaker 1: East jor moving forward leading aside the Czech Republic, which
Speaker 1: has generally been more ahead of everybody. In any case,
Speaker 1: I think actually interesting enough fin notes. But Ukraine, so
Speaker 1: I actually have on my desk right now some due
Speaker 1: diligence on Ukrainian UH greenhouses. Uh Zelenski has said that
Speaker 1: he wants to legalize cannabis in Ukraine, and so I
Speaker 1: think Ukraine could be come out, assuming we can get
Speaker 1: some resolution to this conflict. You know, twenty years ago,
Speaker 1: the president of Kazakhstein UH now they're by it, basically
Speaker 1: proposed that they look at the possibility of legalizing cannabis,
Speaker 1: not just him plant but cannabis. And it didn't really
Speaker 1: go anywhere here. But I mean, kan has been the
Speaker 1: kinic hemp, but you know, bread basket, I guess for
Speaker 1: that part of the world for a long time. Do
Speaker 1: you see any possibility that among the various stands UH
Speaker 1: in the former Soviet republics that UM apart from Ukraine,
Speaker 1: that Kazakhstan might begin to play role. So no, I
Speaker 1: don't think they're gonna play a role, but I will
Speaker 1: tell you there are two major UH middle Eastern countries,
Speaker 1: major countries that are very high density populated countries that
Speaker 1: are considering medical first and then eventually adults. Which can
Speaker 1: you say which ones? Ah? I think I don't want
Speaker 1: to jinx it because you know that these are most
Speaker 1: these are difficult issues for them, and I don't want
Speaker 1: to mess it up. But I've been advising them and
Speaker 1: I can tell you that I think that very shortly
Speaker 1: you're gonna hear about eighty million plus population country which
Speaker 1: nobody would ever think would legalize I think is going
Speaker 1: to legalize cannabis and smaller secondary but also very interesting
Speaker 1: country that is looking at adult use as a way
Speaker 1: to stimulate tourism in that country as well. So it's
Speaker 1: very interesting. You know. I I probably spend less time
Speaker 1: now ethan on purely specific I'm I'm becoming a bit
Speaker 1: more of an ambassador and I'm running around the world
Speaker 1: really trying to talk to these governments about opening up
Speaker 1: their countries to cannabis. And Thailand, what a bizarre story there,
Speaker 1: this sudden legalization, these bizarre politics. Um, you know, how's
Speaker 1: that all going to shake out? And are you looking there? Yeah,
Speaker 1: we We've had a team in Thailand probably for a
Speaker 1: month and a half. We're trying to be the first
Speaker 1: company to export from Europe into Thailand. So the transaction
Speaker 1: hasn't gone through yet. But you know, these first transactions
Speaker 1: are always the most difficult, and after that, you know,
Speaker 1: the supply chain starts to work. But we are in
Speaker 1: the process of trying to get a fairly substantial first
Speaker 1: shipment into Thailand as a test case on supplying that
Speaker 1: country with European cannabis. Okay, So to come full circle
Speaker 1: back to Russia here, I remember the early two thousand.
Speaker 1: You know, Putting comes to power with January one, two thousand.
Speaker 1: In those early years, there was some kind of progressive stuff.
Speaker 1: There was a decriminalization, people being led out of prison,
Speaker 1: there was some support the kind of you know, crazy narcology.
Speaker 1: Establishment was kind of a little pushed back a bit.
Speaker 1: And I'm wondering in Russia in terms of cannabis, can
Speaker 1: you imagine cannabis liberalization or maybe liberalization is their own word,
Speaker 1: but medical cannabis and then maybe a broadening out happening
Speaker 1: in Russia in the next five to ten years. Listen,
Speaker 1: it's gonna be difficult, um for two reasons. Well, Underpoots,
Speaker 1: I don't see it happening because, um, he is anti
Speaker 1: alcohol and anti any drugs. Right. The man is a
Speaker 1: health freak. He is never going to allow it. Although
Speaker 1: I don't know where the study is now. He did
Speaker 1: allow one Russian government owned organization to build a green
Speaker 1: house and to plant cannabis as well as the opium
Speaker 1: plant and to do medical research as to whether or
Speaker 1: not it actually works, because he had enough pressure on
Speaker 1: him with everything going on the United States and Europe
Speaker 1: that he allowed for that to happen. And he said,
Speaker 1: if you guys can bring me medical evidence that these
Speaker 1: things actually cure or at least assist in medical conditions,
Speaker 1: and that this would be a cheaper variant two synthetic drugs,
Speaker 1: he said, I will seriously give it consideration. I think
Speaker 1: that was three years ago. A lot recreational never underputs
Speaker 1: his watch. He's adamantly against it. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: he apparently cracked a joke to someone once, uh saying,
Speaker 1: asked some Russian that knew me, is Jordan's still selling
Speaker 1: weed to the Americans? And that person said yes, he goes,
Speaker 1: oh thank god. So you know his view of cannabis
Speaker 1: is is very negative, right, Um, at least for his
Speaker 1: own population. However, you know, the population underneath Putin, and
Speaker 1: when that old guard steps away from power is very different,
Speaker 1: very different. I can tell you that the younger generation
Speaker 1: right underneath him is much more open minded to these things.
Speaker 1: And so I would if I was a betting man
Speaker 1: and I'm in cannabis, so I guess I am, I
Speaker 1: would argue that Russia could move very quickly under a
Speaker 1: new regime. However, there are massive stigmas in Russia, very
Speaker 1: similar to the ones in the United States. A matter
Speaker 1: of fact, many people don't realize this, but if if
Speaker 1: you take the political establishment class out, I see a
Speaker 1: tremendous amount of similarities between Russians and Americans, tremendous amount
Speaker 1: The way they think, the way they behave a lot
Speaker 1: of things are very very similar. And so the young
Speaker 1: generation Russia is very progressive, very progressive. And I think
Speaker 1: that that generation, assuming it does run off because of
Speaker 1: this war, um, I'm assuming that they would move on
Speaker 1: cannabis very quickly. And finally, the last two megamarkets out
Speaker 1: there China is their role basically going to be on
Speaker 1: the hemp side and maybe the scientific side of a
Speaker 1: synthetic cannabis and that's it. Yeah, they're not going to
Speaker 1: go recreational, I don't think, or even medical in any
Speaker 1: substantial way. I think I think they're very, very conservative.
Speaker 1: Although you know what's interesting about China's China is probably
Speaker 1: the center of holistic medicine, so so it's kind of
Speaker 1: strange that they don't allow it. And you would think
Speaker 1: given that their population uses roots and all sorts of
Speaker 1: things for medicine, and some of the greatest you know,
Speaker 1: acupuncturists and stuff like that come out of China. I'm
Speaker 1: surprised frankly that they haven't adopted it. But the language
Speaker 1: out of China at the moment is negative. And the
Speaker 1: country that may soon as their past China, with the
Speaker 1: biggest population in the world, India, where many states have
Speaker 1: a long tradition of cannabis use and of drinking bong,
Speaker 1: the cannabis infused beverage. You see India making any steps
Speaker 1: forward on this. So if this country I'm talking about
Speaker 1: in the Middle East moves on cannabis over the next
Speaker 1: three months, which I expect that it will, um, I
Speaker 1: think that India could be next. Very interesting. Well, Boris
Speaker 1: I've been a fascinating conversation. UM, so listen, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for taking the time to talk with me
Speaker 1: and my listeners on Psychoactive. I think it's remarkable what
Speaker 1: you've done in building this mega company. It sounds like
Speaker 1: you're gonna be in it for quite a while to come.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm curious. I mean, do you see this
Speaker 1: as for the next four or five years of your life?
Speaker 1: Do you see ultimately selling Pure Leaf to a bigger alcohol, tobacco, pharma,
Speaker 1: some other type of company, consumer goods company. I mean,
Speaker 1: what is the future not just for cure Leef. I'm
Speaker 1: also asking you to speculate a bit about some of
Speaker 1: the other multi state operators and major companies. Is that
Speaker 1: one thing I've always this is my fifth company I've built,
Speaker 1: and my formula has always never build a company to
Speaker 1: sell it. Build a company to compete and be best
Speaker 1: in class. And that's what I'm doing. In some cases
Speaker 1: those companies got bought. In some cases those companies state
Speaker 1: as independent operators. You know, I would love it if
Speaker 1: if the landscape in the world was you know, there's
Speaker 1: gonna be obviously tobacco companies and alcohol companies and and
Speaker 1: you know, food companies that everybody gonna use cannabis. I
Speaker 1: would like to think that they'll be one or two,
Speaker 1: you know, pure play cannabis consumer goods operators in the world.
Speaker 1: And that's what I'm trying to build. And I hope
Speaker 1: I'm successful. But you know, I can't predict today what's
Speaker 1: gonna happen. But I can tell you one thing. I'm
Speaker 1: not building cure leaf to sell it to a tobacco company.
Speaker 1: I'm building cure leaves to being competitive in this world.
Speaker 1: Is one of the thing I forgot to ask you about,
Speaker 1: which is one issue I've become passionate about since I
Speaker 1: stepped down from Drug Policy Alliance, is the whole fight
Speaker 1: over e cigarettes and tobacco harm reduction. And the scientific
Speaker 1: evidence is pretty clear here that if you could snap
Speaker 1: your fingers and all the smokers worldwide would suddenly stop
Speaker 1: and all take up vaping. And even if the number
Speaker 1: of vapors was greater than the number of smokers, and
Speaker 1: not just vaping, but the you know, the lozenges, the
Speaker 1: things you put in your mouth and oral versions, it
Speaker 1: would be one of the greatest advances in public health
Speaker 1: in human history. And you made the point before about
Speaker 1: you seeing a shift in cannabis consumption from the smoking
Speaker 1: and maybe even the vaping too. Things we're not putting
Speaker 1: things in your lungs. And here we have a case
Speaker 1: where you know, you see the shift from smoking the vape.
Speaker 1: You see, it's made a big difference, not just in
Speaker 1: places like Japan and Korea, but even in Russian Ukraine,
Speaker 1: people stopping smoking, taking up these heat not burn uh
Speaker 1: nicotine tobacco stuff. The emergence of e cigarettes in some places, um,
Speaker 1: you know, major advantage from a public health perspective in
Speaker 1: some respects in many parts of the world, even more
Speaker 1: controversial than cannabis is. But I'm curious have you been
Speaker 1: keeping your eye on that area. Have you been following
Speaker 1: it thinking about investing or the connections to cannabis. I've
Speaker 1: been following it very close, is my fact. I've had
Speaker 1: numerous calls this week on the Jewel situation that took place,
Speaker 1: you know, the settlement that the fine and everything. So
Speaker 1: I'm I'm I'm very much on top of the issue
Speaker 1: because I think it's very relevant. Listen, I think there's
Speaker 1: two things. The first thing is, you know, there's no
Speaker 1: question Jewel targeted teenagers, and so in marketing and social
Speaker 1: media and everything they were doing, and so in that regard,
Speaker 1: and I saw the effects on children firsthand. I five
Speaker 1: of them of what vaping can do when you're trying
Speaker 1: to get your kid off of it, and I can
Speaker 1: tell you it's a nasty look. I mean, hand shaking,
Speaker 1: they can't sleep, mood changes really really so, so I
Speaker 1: do think that that it's all about what you put
Speaker 1: in them. And my biggest question to vaping as a
Speaker 1: whole is there hasn't been enough work done on either
Speaker 1: the devices or on the effects of the vaping on
Speaker 1: the longs of of the individuals. And I know, in
Speaker 1: some ways I'm talking against my own book because we
Speaker 1: sell a tremendous amount of apens, but there's heavy metals
Speaker 1: issues right. A lot of people are putting all sorts
Speaker 1: of substances into these vapes. I mean, even edible biologicals
Speaker 1: have a different impact in your stomach versus your loans.
Speaker 1: And I think that the issue is we need more
Speaker 1: work done on that. I am sure. I'm absolutely sure
Speaker 1: that there is a way to make vaping safe. I'm
Speaker 1: absolutely sure of it. But I think that there needs
Speaker 1: to be more work and more transparency on the work
Speaker 1: that's already been done for the consumer to understand. So,
Speaker 1: for instance, the company Select that I bought years ago,
Speaker 1: it was built on a very simple premise. It was
Speaker 1: a bunch of young guys out of Oregon that realized
Speaker 1: that the vappens that people were using in California, we're
Speaker 1: making people cough hard and they were getting really bad coughs.
Speaker 1: And what happened was they were using silicon wicks in
Speaker 1: their vapens and they were getting sil a coosis and
Speaker 1: that was affecting their lungs and making them cough. And
Speaker 1: so these young guys did a simple thing. They went
Speaker 1: out and they replaced the silicon wick with a Japanese
Speaker 1: cotton wick, and all of a sudden, the coughing stopped.
Speaker 1: But that's just one element, right, What about the you know,
Speaker 1: the metals that are used. I agree with you, but
Speaker 1: you know, one sees now the FDA is basically green
Speaker 1: lighting a whole bunch of these things, you know, whether
Speaker 1: it's Enjoy or the you know blue I think it is.
Speaker 1: So they're definitely looking at stuff and even you know,
Speaker 1: they blocked jewel and then got mud on their face
Speaker 1: because it seemed like they were doing it for political reasons,
Speaker 1: not for scientific reasons. So I'm glad you're keeping your
Speaker 1: eye on this area because I do think it's a
Speaker 1: fascinating one and there's probably nothing that could more advance
Speaker 1: public health around the world than seeing a rapid transition
Speaker 1: from combustible cigarettes onto the noncombustible forms of nicotine. I
Speaker 1: completely agree with you in this product that Philip Marris
Speaker 1: has in Europe. It's prolific and it's illegal in the
Speaker 1: United States. It's amazing. Yeah, well, just's caught up in
Speaker 1: litigation with another I think British Americans bacco or something.
Speaker 1: But I think eventually it's just going to get out there,
Speaker 1: and it's true. It's and I think especially Russian Ukraine
Speaker 1: are two of the biggest places where it can you
Speaker 1: know be it's it's proliferic. I can tell you even
Speaker 1: I was, you know, I was in greased this uh
Speaker 1: the summer for a vacation. I mean, all the Europeans
Speaker 1: are using icons. It's amazing. Yeah, well boris On that note,
Speaker 1: thank you ever so much for joining me and my
Speaker 1: listeners on Psychoactives. If you're enjoying psychoactive, please tell your
Speaker 1: friends about it. Or you can write us a review
Speaker 1: at Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. We
Speaker 1: love to hear from our listeners. If you'd like to
Speaker 1: share your own stories, comes and ideas, then leave us
Speaker 1: a message at one eight three three seven seven nine
Speaker 1: sixty that's eight three three psycho zero, or you can
Speaker 1: email us at Psychoactive at protozoa dot com, or find
Speaker 1: me on Twitter at Ethan Nadelman. You can also find
Speaker 1: contact information in our show notes. Psychoactive is a production
Speaker 1: of I Heart Radio and Protozoa Pictures. It's hosted by
Speaker 1: me Ethan Nadelman. It's produced by Noam Osband and Josh Stain.
Speaker 1: The executive producers are Dylan Golden, Ari Handel, Elizabeth Geesus
Speaker 1: and Darren Aronofsky from Protozoa Pictures, Alex Williams and Matt
Speaker 1: Frederick from my Heart Radio and me Ethan Nadelman. Our
Speaker 1: music is by Ari Blucien and a special thanks to
Speaker 1: a Brios f, Bianca Grimshaw and Robert Deep. Next week,
Speaker 1: I'll talk with Kirch Smoke, a true profile encouraged the
Speaker 1: former Baltimore mayor who called for ending the war on drugs.
Speaker 1: And putting all alternatives on the table. The country and
Speaker 1: the national political scene was moved towards a crime bill
Speaker 1: that was going to be very, very harsh, So there
Speaker 1: was still basically a feeling that we can prosecute our
Speaker 1: way out of this problem, and it just needed, you know,
Speaker 1: more police resources, more incarceration, more for the d e A.
Speaker 1: Subscribe to Cycleactive now see you don't miss it.