### Comment:
Interesting perspective. My logic wasn't particularly deep. It was essentially, they are valued at x in a not so friendly marijuana environment (much friendlier than before but still) so they will probably be valued significantly more in the future. I thought that was a pretty uncontroversial stance and the controversial stance would be me limiting the value of their stock in the future based on it being diluted.

### REPLY:
I don’t think you’d be controversial in saying the dilution limits their share price potential. They diluted a lot to make acquisitions which I think will make them a top player in this sector long-term, but for now the share price has suffered because of it. Lots of shareholders don’t understand that to move the stock a few bucks they gain a few billion in market cap, which isn’t giving large returns compared to other weed stocks, partially because of their outstanding shares.

### END.