Hi @mechanicFirstly, I think that was a very good post....

Hi @mechanic

Firstly, I think that was a very good post.

Interestingly, there's not a lot in there that I would disagree with. More importantly, I think you probably know more about hemp and its uses than I do.

My concerns are centered on the decision making and facts that reflect that decision making as they are represented in the published accounts (e.g. the 2019 Annual Report).

I think that there are many things that occur that simply do not make any sense to me. Perhaps, there are valid reasons for all of the points that I (and others over the years) have highlighted. However, specific answers to many questions (not all) seem to be met with silence from the company representative.

It is my observation that, on occasions when specific questions are put to the rep, the responses are vague, imprecise or obfuscatory or, some mixture of all three. That's my view though and others may well disagree.

To date, there have not been any answers (if there have been then I am more than willing to stand corrected) to the following issues;
(a) Why provide a convertible note to a top 20 holder when the company has outstanding loans and debts owing to it?
(b) What was the advantage to shareholders of the convertible note? That should be explained as the holders suffered further dilution as a result of that decision.
(c) Why have they not instituted a comprehensive review of costs. Just yesterday, for heaven's sakes, the rep wrote this sentence, "... and even during this difficult trading environment, with the MC sector at the moment" Ok ... if the trading environment is difficult (this I don't dispute) then why not undertake a thorough review of your expense profile? Why not recall all loans etc.
(d) This paragraph also appeared in the recent foray into the overall efficacy of CGB's communication strategies,

"We respectfully ask shareholders, to consider our policy of responsibility, when it comes to the dissemination of information on public forums, where membership is populated by anonymous posters, versus providing information directly to verified shareholders who, at times, request permission to relay back the contents of an email or a phone call."

Can someone, anyone please interpret the idea that that paragraph is attempting to convey? Frankly, I found it incomprehensible.

To sum up - the move into the "MC sector" might well be a very good move for the company and shareholders. Nonetheless, I fail to see how commercial success can be founded on decisions that approve, as just one example, unsecured and interest free loans to related entities.

I think commercial success will far easier to realise following a thorough review of the company's expenses and capital structure.

The MC sector might well prove very profitable for some startups and industry entrants. However, I suspect that that will be limited to those who are tightly focused on sales and revenue growth, acquisition of market share, strict cost controls, prudent capital management and general business innovation. What's so complicated about that? General principles of business I would argue.

Thank you for your post @mechanic - irrespective of our differing views and perspective - we have been able to discuss some relevant points sans the usual partisan nonsense. Hopefully, that may offer some benefit to the knowledge base of others.

And that, it seems to me, is the purpose of HC.