Cannabis commercialization question

[WildCat]

awaik what makes indoor stronger is the temperature control. something above 25° C i think, natural temperatures slow growth speed and THC production.

No alpine climate here in the US grain belt DC. >25 is pretty much the norm here in summer.

 

[Thomas]

Apparently you have a poor understanding of what it takes to grow a personal use quantity of very good quality marijuana.

Apparently you have a very poor understanding of what we're talking about.. I'm saying that the price of hydroponics will stay fixed by the power bills of the manufactorers, and you go on rambling about private production. That's a strawman.

For the most part smuggled marijuana, quality for quality, can't compete in price with the marijuana I might grow on my sun porch or in my basement. Surely the odd situation would occur where a warehouse shipment gets stolen making the cost to the distributor next to nothing. Also some might buy it in one state and sell it in another where the tax rate is higher, allowing for a small profit margin. But generally speaking, bootleggers couldn't compete with the prices most of my pot smoking acquaintances have been paying for the last 20 or 30 years unless the bootleggers were getting it almost free.

Where I live there isn't a national border for several hundred miles in any direction. It would cost the black marketeers more in gas to haul the stuff here than it would cost me to grow it. Hell, that's pretty much already the case. Probably over half of the marijuana in my area is grown within a hundred miles of here. There are a couple billion acres of land in the United States and a hundred million houses with porches, garages, basements, and fenced in yards. When people aren't risking having their property confiscated by the government for growing a few plants, excellent quality home grown product is likely to become ubiquitous.

So now it's homegrown that will take over the world. Just like with homebrew wine that was supposed to take over 20 years ago.

Tell you what, there are people who have been making marijuana for decades quite professionally, constantly improving the art, and I doubt that your weed can compete with that.. Otherwise I would suggest that you join the annual Cannabis Cup so I can laugh when your homegrown fail with balloons and flags.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Take the same seed stock, grow some outdoors in soil and some indoors hydroponically and and the outdoor marijuana will have a higher yield, just as much if not more potency, and superior taste.

The difference between skunk and your "field weed" is genetic, not where it was grown.

Wrong, utterly wrong, the difference is primarily in constant humidity, constant temperature, monitored watering, stable light cycles and chemicals. Genetics play a part, but that it's the only one is an illusion.

Look, I've had access to hundreds of cannabis variants, every day, for decades.. Outdoors, indoors, haze, skunk, ice, pot, hashish and blah blah blah, because I live right next to a cannabis supermarket that has been open since the 70ies.. Outdoor marijuana is about half the price of indoor, half the strenght and half the smell.. So gimme a break about your tomatoes and what's not, please. Your outdoors crap isn't on par, because you can't insure stable light, stable watering, stable humidity and stable temperature.

Keeping the lights on 24/7 merely allows the plant to grow larger faster, it does nothing for the potency. In fact, marijuana won't flower at all (and it's the flowers you smoke) if the lights are kept on 24/7, to induce them to flower you have to cut back the light to 12 hours a day. And you can use fertilizer outdoors as well.

What you cannot do with lights is match the brightness of the sun, and hydroponics will never contain the same trace minerals as soil does which will affect taste.

The comparison to a hothouse tomato is apt.

I'll also add that lighting is expensive, and I don't see any way such expense could be justified if it was legalized and the price collapses to a tiny fraction of what it is now. And the price would definitely collapse.

Enough of your tomatoes, read the above.

 

[Dr. Keith]

There are probably quite a few police officers and prison employees whose livelihoods depend on prohibition who would disagree about that money being better spent elsewhere.

That may be, but there are also quite a few who don't like to enforce stupid draconian prohibition laws and would rather spend their time on more meaningful crimes.

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php

 

[GeeMack]

Apparently you have a very poor understanding of what we're talking about.. I'm saying that the price of hydroponics will stay fixed by the power bills of the manufactorers, and you go on rambling about private production. That's a strawman.

And I'm saying people will grow their own or buy it from the store. When marijuana is legal, black market marijuana will be about as common as black market beer.

So now it's homegrown that will take over the world. Just like with homebrew wine that was supposed to take over 20 years ago.

If home brewing wine, including the time investment, was less expensive than buying it at the store, many more people would likely do a lot more home brewing. Oh, and all that black market beer and wine is where?

Tell you what, there are people who have been making marijuana for decades quite professionally, constantly improving the art, and I doubt that your weed can compete with that.. Otherwise I would suggest that you join the annual Cannabis Cup so I can laugh when your homegrown fail with balloons and flags.

I'm talking about economics, on a large scale, and considering millions of people who smoke it now and who would likely make up the bulk of those smoking it after it's made legal. I'm not talking about several dozen or maybe a few hundred avid dopeheads who pursue it as a hobby.

Wrong, utterly wrong, the difference is primarily in constant humidity, constant temperature, monitored watering, stable light cycles and chemicals. Genetics play a part, but that it's the only one is an illusion.

Look, I've had access to hundreds of cannabis variants, every day, for decades.. Outdoors, indoors, haze, skunk, ice, pot, hashish and blah blah blah, because I live right next to a cannabis supermarket that has been open since the 70ies.. Outdoor marijuana is about half the price of indoor, half the strenght and half the smell.. So gimme a break about your tomatoes and what's not, please. Your outdoors crap isn't on par, because you can't insure stable light, stable watering, stable humidity and stable temperature.

Enough of your tomatoes, read the above.

The issue is the economics of commercial marijuana. Wildcat's comments about prices plummeting post-prohibition are on the mark. Excellent quality marijuana can be grown, processed, and sold as cheaply as tobacco or a moderately priced spice. If commercial producers don't work within a reasonable pricing framework, and if people have the option to grow their own or get it from a pal who does, that's what they'll do.

Maybe you think there's a way for a black market operation to grow, process, ship, and distribute the stuff competitively when it costs only a few dollars an ounce to grow at home or buy at the liquor store. That would mean changing the black market model in some very radical ways. Bootleggers would have to make hundreds of transactions to make the kind of money they make now in one sale. The historical precedent of our alcohol prohibition, as well as the simple fact that the black market is based almost entirely on making the most money possible for the least work, would support the notion that bootleggers won't go that route.

Also, the home grown model is already fairly well established with the primary barrier to entry being the risk of losing one's property. Eliminate that risk and growing some in a planter on the back porch will be a very popular way to obtain marijuana, second only to running to the liquor store or pharmacy.

 

[Thomas]

And I'm saying people will grow their own or buy it from the store. When marijuana is legal, black market marijuana will be about as common as black market beer.

If home brewing wine, including the time investment, was less expensive than buying it at the store, many more people would likely do a lot more home brewing. Oh, and all that black market beer and wine is where?

Taxfree weed will be easy to grow, where as taxfree beers don't grow by the same numbers. It demands distilling, where weed only demands drying.

I'm talking about economics, on a large scale, and considering millions of people who smoke it now and who would likely make up the bulk of those smoking it after it's made legal. I'm not talking about several dozen or maybe a few hundred avid dopeheads who pursue it as a hobby.

All the most popular strains of skunk comes from the Cannabis Cup. You're obviously totally ignorant when it comes to knowledge of cannabis. No news at 11.

The issue is the economics of commercial marijuana. Wildcat's comments about prices plummeting post-prohibition are on the mark. Excellent quality marijuana can be grown, processed, and sold as cheaply as tobacco or a moderately priced spice.

"Excellent quality", only if you don't know what you're talking about yes.

If commercial producers don't work within a reasonable pricing framework, and if people have the option to grow their own or get it from a pal who does, that's what they'll do.

Maybe you think there's a way for a black market operation to grow, process, ship, and distribute the stuff competitively when it costs only a few dollars an ounce to grow at home or buy at the liquor store. That would mean changing the black market model in some very radical ways. Bootleggers would have to make hundreds of transactions to make the kind of money they make now in one sale. The historical precedent of our alcohol prohibition, as well as the simple fact that the black market is based almost entirely on making the most money possible for the least work, would support the notion that bootleggers won't go that route.

Also, the home grown model is already fairly well established with the primary barrier to entry being the risk of losing one's property. Eliminate that risk and growing some in a planter on the back porch will be a very popular way to obtain marijuana, second only to running to the liquor store or pharmacy.

You don't understand the difference between hydroponics and au naturel weed. I can only assume that you have limited access to these things, and that it's a waste of time to debate this with one who is totally ignorant of the status quo market.

 

[DreadNiK]

I'm confused - what is the point of disagreement here?

Surely again it will be like alcohol in that the majority will be cheap and mass produced (supermarket lager) and then there will be a steadily increasing price of quality (fine wine and upwards)

Surely it is just a case of setting the tax appropriately?

(btw afaik indoor/controlled intensive growing produces the best stuff, fwiw)

 

[WildCat]

Wrong, utterly wrong, the difference is primarily in constant humidity, constant temperature, monitored watering, stable light cycles and chemicals. Genetics play a part, but that it's the only one is an illusion.

Absolute nonsense. Genetics is 90% of it. Take seeds from "field weed", grow it under any climate conditions you like indoors. You will end up with... crappy "field weed".

Look, I've had access to hundreds of cannabis variants, every day, for decades.. Outdoors, indoors, haze, skunk, ice, pot, hashish and blah blah blah, because I live right next to a cannabis supermarket that has been open since the 70ies.. Outdoor marijuana is about half the price of indoor, half the strenght and half the smell.. So gimme a break about your tomatoes and what's not, please. Your outdoors crap isn't on par, because you can't insure stable light, stable watering, stable humidity and stable temperature.

The only reason inddor marijuana is usually better than outdoor is because of the illegality - you can't tend properly to an outdoor garden without increasing your risk of getting caught. So maybe you don't pull all the males in time, and they pollinate the females. Or you don't catch the insect infestation until it's too late. Nor take measures to keep wildlife away. Etc etc. Not an issue indoors, where the plants can be tended properly without increasing the risk of getting caught.

Enough of your tomatoes, read the above.

Says the guy who didn't know marijuana won't flower* at all if the lights are kept on 24/7?

*some varieties will, but these aren't the ones considered "high quality".

 

[Thomas]

I'm confused - what is the point of disagreement here?

Surely again it will be like alcohol in that the majority will be cheap and mass produced (supermarket lager) and then there will be a steadily increasing price of quality (fine wine and upwards)

Surely it is just a case of setting the tax appropriately?

(btw afaik indoor/controlled intensive growing produces the best stuff, fwiw)

Well, two people here seem to think that homegrown and outdoors weed will be enough to conquer the world at extremely low prices. Ignorant of the fact that people actually smoke hydroponics because it's better and stronger. I'm trying to tell them that their economic paradise won't happen because people are more prone to smoke hydro once they have access. Hope that cleared your confusion.

 

[DreadNiK]

Absolute nonsense. Genetics is 90% of it. Take seeds from "field weed", grow it under any climate conditions you like indoors. You will end up with... crappy "field weed".

My understanding is, you take a high quality strain and it will perform somewhat better in controlled conditions under artificial lighting than otherwise.

The only reason inddor marijuana is usually better than outdoor is because of the illegality - you can't tend properly to an outdoor garden without increasing your risk of getting caught. So maybe you don't pull all the males in time, and they pollinate the females. Or you don't catch the insect infestation until it's too late. Nor take measures to keep wildlife away. Etc etc. Not an issue indoors, where the plants can be tended properly without increasing the risk of getting caught.

Wouldn't pollination mean that rather than 'reducing the quality a bit' you've severely reduced the quality to the point where most (inc myself) would see it as a lower quality 'type'

The other examples you gave would reduce harvest, not quality?

Out of interest have you sampled the differences in quality of cannabis types and strains?

Still not sure what people are disagreeing over though.

 

[DreadNiK]

Well, two people here seem to think that homegrown and outdoors weed will be enough to conquer the world at extremely low prices. Ignorant of the fact that people actually smoke hydroponics because it's better and stronger. I'm trying to tell them that their economic paradise won't happen because people are more prone to smoke hydro once they have access. Hope that cleared your confusion.

Ah.

So can you explain to me why most people buy cheap lager from supermarkets instead of champagne? Or cheap cigarettes as opposed to fine cigars (or ok, nicer cigarettes, there are differences!).

Actually rather than explaining the obvious could you explain why you don't think the two above examples don't apply equally to cannabis if legalised?

(might sound a little condescending there but I'm very much open to having not thought of something, thanks to the topic at hand)

 

[WildCat]

Well, two people here seem to think that homegrown and outdoors weed will be enough to conquer the world at extremely low prices. Ignorant of the fact that people actually smoke hydroponics because it's better and stronger. I'm trying to tell them that their economic paradise won't happen because people are more prone to smoke hydro once they have access. Hope that cleared your confusion.

The only advantage of hydroponic indoor growing is you can do it hidden from view.

Note there is no legal large-scale hydroponic anything grown commercially today. That's because all it does is add expense (and a lot of it) for little to no added benefit. Marijuana will not be an exception.

 

[Thomas]

Ah.

So can you explain to me why most people buy cheap lager from supermarkets instead of champagne? Or cheap cigarettes as opposed to fine cigars (or ok, nicer cigarettes, there are differences!).

Actually rather than explaining the obvious could you explain why you don't think the two above examples don't apply equally to cannabis if legalised?

(might sound a little condescending there but I'm very much open to having not thought of something, thanks to the topic at hand)

Well, your two examples doesn't compute, because cigarettes will remain at the same nicotine level, and wine at the same alcohol level, whereas hydro and outdoors marijuana differes in THC levels, the active ingredient that would estimate to nicotine and alcohol in your above examples.

 

[DreadNiK]

Well, your two examples doesn't compute, because cigarettes will remain at the same nicotine level, and wine at the same alcohol level, whereas hydro and outdoors marijuana differes in THC levels, the active ingredient that would estimate to nicotine and alcohol in your above examples.

That doesn't answer my question.

Regardless of what makes them 'better', are you saying that because you can get 'better' marijuana at a higher cost (i.e. from indoor growing, and I don't dispute this is the case) that there will somehow be a black market generated, when exactly the same applies to cigarettes and alcohol in that you can get 'better' quality cigarettes and alcohol at a higher cost?

I'm still a bit confused...

 

[WildCat]

My understanding is, you take a high quality strain and it will perform somewhat better in controlled conditions under artificial lighting than otherwise.

All other things being equal, the sun beats artificial lighting every time. Flowers will be larger and heavier, as will the plants. And it's far less expensive.

Wouldn't pollination mean that rather than 'reducing the quality a bit' you've severely reduced the quality to the point where most (inc myself) would see it as a lower quality 'type'

Pollination means seeds and smaller, less potent flowers.

The other examples you gave would reduce harvest, not quality?

Anything that stresses the plant reduces quantity and quality.

Out of interest have you sampled the differences in quality of cannabis types and strains?

Yes, I'm well aware.

Still not sure what people are disagreeing over though.

Mostly I take issue with claims that there's hundreds of billions of dollars to be made if only marijuana were legalized. In fact it might have exactly the opposite effect, as a black market that is worth hundreds of billions gives way to a legal market worth a tiny fraction of that.

I'm for legalization btw, but I certainly don't see it as a panacea for budget deficits, school funding, etc etc.

 

[Thomas]

Absolute nonsense. Genetics is 90% of it. Take seeds from "field weed", grow it under any climate conditions you like indoors. You will end up with... crappy "field weed".

Yes, absolute nonsense. Because the strains are designed for various properties. Properties that you seem to be ignorant of. Some are bred for outdoors cultivation and some for indoor. It's not algebra for university students.

The only reason inddor marijuana is usually better than outdoor is because of the illegality - you can't tend properly to an outdoor garden without increasing your risk of getting caught. So maybe you don't pull all the males in time, and they pollinate the females. Or you don't catch the insect infestation until it's too late. Nor take measures to keep wildlife away. Etc etc. Not an issue indoors, where the plants can be tended properly without increasing the risk of getting caught.

Good, then take your outdoors weed to the next Cannabis Cup and watch yourself getting laughed to the door.

Says the guy who didn't know marijuana won't flower* at all if the lights are kept on 24/7?

*some varieties will, but these aren't the ones considered "high quality".

They are due to run 27/4 for certain periods, which is what is implied from whatever post you're quoting from.

Pull the other one.

 

[BNRT]

Well, two people here seem to think that homegrown and outdoors weed will be enough to conquer the world at extremely low prices. Ignorant of the fact that people actually smoke hydroponics because it's better and stronger. I'm trying to tell them that their economic paradise won't happen because people are more prone to smoke hydro once they have access. Hope that cleared your confusion.

I don't think it will be much of an issue. I suspect that when weed will become legalised, They^TM will require all growers of more than n plants to have some kind of permit.

Over here you are allowed to grow three to five plants at home. This can yield reasonable crops, but I don't see much people doing it. Just like I don't see that many people growing their own tomatoes.

 

[Thomas]

That doesn't answer my question.

Regardless of what makes them 'better', are you saying that because you can get 'better' marijuana at a higher cost (i.e. from indoor growing, and I don't dispute this is the case) that there will somehow be a black market generated, when exactly the same applies to cigarettes and alcohol in that you can get 'better' quality cigarettes and alcohol at a higher cost?

I'm still a bit confused...

Forget the black market, all I'm saying is that we shan't expect to rely solely on hemp quality weed in a legalized society. Hydroponics will be just as popular in the future as they are now, WildCat has this wild notion that hydroponics will cease to be once it's legalized. Ignorant of what is considered quality.

 

[DreadNiK]

All other things being equal, the sun beats artificial lighting every time. Flowers will be larger and heavier, as will the plants. And it's far less expensive.

I've no position on this

Pollination means seeds and smaller, less potent flowers.

Do you accept that some users will view it as an inferior 'type'?

Anything that stresses the plant reduces quantity and quality.

Again, I'm no horticulturalist so I take no position.

Yes, I'm well aware.

You seem somewhat unaware of the distinction between sinsemilla skunk and non-sinsemilla.

Mostly I take issue with claims that there's hundreds of billions of dollars to be made if only marijuana were legalized. In fact it might have exactly the oppoosite effect, as a black market that is worth hundreds of billions gives way to a legal market worth a tiny fraction of that.

I can agree with that. I never actually thought about how it would have an opposite effect because I assumed some legal money was better than a much larger amount of legal money. But then I actually thought it through and was ashamed as I have a degree in economics.

I'm for legalization btw, but I certainly don't see it as a panacea for budget deficits, school funding, etc etc.

Agreed.

I was thinking they might be able to tax it by weight or more sensibly 'thc amount'. But even then is the amount of thc the only factor in the perceived 'quality'?

 

[Thomas]

I don't think it will be much of an issue. I suspect that when weed will become legalised, They^TM will require all growers of more than n plants to have some kind of permit.

Over here you are allowed to grow three to five plants at home. This can yield reasonable crops, but I don't see much people doing it. Just like I don't see that many people growing their own tomatoes.

Ding-ding-ding.. Johnny, we have a winner!

 

[DreadNiK]

Forget the black market, all I'm saying is that we shan't expect to rely solely on hemp quality weed in a legalized society. Hydroponics will be just as popular in the future as they are now, WildCat has this wild notion that hydroponics will cease to be once it's legalized. Ignorant of what is considered quality.

Ok.

So you are just arguing over indoor vs outdoor growing? Shouldn't you take it to a dedicated cannabis cultivation forum?