If they'd had any idea of what they were doing or any intent to...

If they'd had any idea of what they were doing or any intent to develop new knowledge they would have been doing weekly testing as a minimum across each of the different strains/paddocks and planting methodologies.

One thing that's also becoming apparent is that they didn't apply any of their 'award winning agronomy technology' to the crop. I don't recall if it was just inferred or if it was stated in the initial hemp pivot announcements that they were seeking to apply their core technology to the growing of hemp. Even if it wasn't specifically stated a reasonable person would have assumed that they would be applying this technology - not stating that they weren't applying their technology is a material failure to disclose IMO. If they were applying their tech then where's all the data?

Either they didn't apply their technology and didn't disclose it or they did and they didn't disclose the data collected.

We could definitely infer a total crop biomass from scaling from an individual image I just think a full count of their crop that we could multiply through by an average plant mass would be very enlightening. If they were applying their drone tech in anything other than a promotional basis they would have known well ahead of time that the biomass would fall well short. If they weren't applying their drone tech then again that's a material failure to disclose IMO.

CLI have three legs to their agronomy offering, agronomists, sensors and drones. It would be strange if they were only applying one of these techniques...