FITX Discussion 08/31/2014 21:23:48 $FITX
The worlds largest grow keeps shrinking.
Because I do not think they can make a 34% profit. Bills initial projections were bs. They will be lucky to make 25%. Which is a solid profit.
FITX Stock Message Board http://investorshangout.com/Creative-Edge-Nut...ITX-63675/
Please provide a verifiable link or post
You did quote it in your post
As I said, please contact Mr. Foran regarding the de facto ban on medical mj growing. It was his statement, not mine.
down down down she goes.
end of the month and no license.
looks like FITX is about to see the end of it's days.
they will never plant the first seed
They will def make money selling weed, I don't know how u can say otherwise
By "Billy standards", I'm in the automotive, real-estate, computer, mobile, personal defense, aeronautics, bio-engineering, space exploration and entertainment sectors.
If that were true it would be great. Hemp technologies revenue was estimated between 100,000 to 500,000. Not much there. I am sure they were and are losing money.
25 million in insurance premium amounts to about 3.75 million in commission. the 25 million premium is a high estimate.
That stem cell thing will never make a dime.
They are not making any money on vitamins.
Giving up 25% of the core business revenues means fitx will have to make 34% profit to break even.
I do not see this company ever making money,
Great stock to flip as any news or hype runs the price up.
One thing is for sure FITX is in several awesome sectors, Medical Marijuana, Hemp for green building products, CBD extraction for medical research and insurance to MJ facilities.
Any one of these sectors could hit a homerun and create 100's of millions in revenue. In total the potential is in the billions. That said this is a speculative play. The float is a negative. The company had/has low revenue and was giving stock away to pay for everything. The stock is worth more now but to increase the float would be suicide. CEN has not tapped all the equity sold for the MJ side of the business so maybe we can recoup some of that. I think Bill is keeping this in his top pocket.
The bottom line is that this company needs to continue to execute. I would say that stock holders have about 6 to 8 months of patience before they start running. This is a speculative play and I think we will do well. Time will tell. I decided not to have a Starbucks and bought a 100 shares. Hope it pays off. The chart also looks promising.
I totally agree with your post. I think the town of Lakeshore will accomodate FITX. Question is when?
More about grandfathering
Sometimes a new city ordinance or building code change will immediately cause hundreds of older buildings to be in violation. Rather than penalize the buildings' owners, the government will insert a grandfather clause into the language of the new regulation. A grandfather clause is an exemption which allows current businesses or property owners to continue operating under the previous laws. A historic restaurant may be exempt from modern sprinkler laws, for example, because the retrofitting would be too expensive or difficult. A new restaurant built next door, however, would be required to meet the current fire safety codes.
A grandfather clause may also extend to private home ownership and zoning. If a new zoning regulation called for 10 feet of clearance on all sides, it would not be practical to physically move all of the current homes built before the zoning change. A grandfather clause would allow exemptions to homes built before the zoning change went into effect. It is important to note, however, that not all contingencies are automatically covered by a grandfather clause. Some changes require everyone affected by the law to take action, regardless of the age or condition of their home.
Anything is possible but we need to look at what is the most likely scenario. Lakeshore has several residents who are in opposition of what FITX want to do for various reasons. Therefore, the council needs to have a deep understanding of the operation that is ensuing to answer resident questions and to help with future laws. They seem reasonable and I haven't heard of anything in any of the meetings that would lead me to believe that they want to stop FITX. I believe the likely scenario is that FITX gets their license and begins growing. If you do a sat view of the area you'll see that there are a few farms around but there is lots of distance between the FITX facilities and their neighbors. Personally I think they should have just leased an abandoned building like TWEED in an industrial area. It would have solved lots of problems and they could have just retrofitted the building. I also believe all the hype about 6k jobs and 1.3 million lbs. of pot being grown was not a good strategy. Low key and humble doesn't scare anyone.
Grandfather Clause
A portion of a statute that provides that the law is not applicable in certain circumstances due to preexisting facts.
Grandfather clauses, which were originally intended to prevent black people from voting, were named for provisions adopted by the constitutions of some states. Such amendments sought to interfere with an individual's right to vote by setting forth difficult requirements. For example, common requirements were ownership of a large amount of land or the ability to read and write portions of the state and federal constitutions. The name grandfather clause arose from the exceptions that were made for veterans of the Civil War. If the veterans were qualified to vote prior to 1866, their descendants were also qualified. Thus, in effect, if a person's grandfather could vote, he could vote without further restrictions.
These statutes accomplished precisely what was intended, since nearly all slaves and their descendants were disqualified from voting because they could not satisfy the statutory requirements.
In the 1915 case of Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347, 35 S. Ct. 926, 59 L. Ed. 1340, the Supreme Court of the United States examined a Grandfather Clause that was added to the Oklahoma constitution shortly following its admission to the Union. The 1910 constitutional amendment required that prospective voters pass a literacy test in order to qualify to vote. However, anyone who was entitled to vote on January 1, 1866, or any time earlier under any form of government, or who at that time lived in a foreign country, was exempt from satisfying the literacy test requirement. The lineal descendants of such exempted persons also were exempt from such a requirement. In reality, the amendment recreated and perpetuated the very conditions that the Fifteenth Amendment was intended to destroy, even though race was never mentioned as a voter qualification.
The Court held that the clause was in violation of the Fifteenth Amendment, which states that "the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Oklahoma argued that states had the power to set forth voter qualifications. Therefore, the statute in controversy did not violate the Fifteenth Amendment since race was not mentioned as a voter qualification. The Supreme Court was in agreement that states have the right to determine who is qualified to vote; however, they are permitted to do so only within constitutional limits. The limit that proscribes consideration of the race of voters extends to sophisticated as well as simpleminded discrimination, and equality under the law cannot be based upon whether a person's grandfather was a free man.
Oklahoma undertook to change its law following this decision. The revised statute said that everyone who was able to vote as a result of the grandfather clause automatically continued to be eligible and those who had been denied voting rights were given twelve days in 1916 to register to vote. If they were out of the county where they resided or if they were prevented from registering by sickness or unavoidable circumstances, they were given an additional fifty days in 1916 to register. After that time black persons who tried to register to vote were turned away, since the time to register outside the grandfather clause had ended in 1916.
In the 1939 case of Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268, 59 S. Ct. 872, 83 L. Ed. 1281, the Supreme Court rejected Oklahoma's new scheme, calling it another example of an attempt by a state to thwart equality in the right to vote regardless of race or color. The Court ruled that the proposed remedy, in the form of such a limited registration period, was inadequate. A group of citizens who lacked the habits and traditions of political independence deserved a greater opportunity to register to vote.
The term grandfather clause in its current application refers to a legislative provision that permits an exemption based upon a preexisting condition. For example, through the application of grandfather clauses, certain prerogatives are extended to those regularly engaged in a particular profession, occupation, or business that is regulated by statute or ordinance. Such a clause might allow an individual, who has been in continuous practice in a particular profession for a specific period, to circumvent certain licensing requirements.
I am sure courts are different in Canada. I am also sure I could find cases in Canada where there was no grandfathering. This may happen in March.
Read it again. When Fitx gets a license I will show you an example of a company with a license to grow 1.3 million lbs of pot that is not profitable. That being FITX.
I'm not spinning. You keep citing examples from Colorado re: the municipality and the courts. The legislation that applies to municipalities and the court's jurisdiction in Colorado are entirely different than in Ontario. I'm merely suggesting to stop using those as examples/precedents because they simply don't apply here.
Where did I compare colorado to Ontario? This poster is bent on FITX being grandfathered and they are not. I used it as an example of how grandfathering does not always apply. But keep spinning.
You need to stop comparing Colorado to Ontario. Two entirely different sets of legislation. Municipalities in Ontario are creatures of statute governed by statute.
The worlds largest grow keeps shrinking.
Because I do not think they can make a 34% profit. Bills initial projections were bs. They will be lucky to make 25%. Which is a solid profit.
FITX Stock Message Board http://investorshangout.com/Creative-Edge-Nut...ITX-63675/
Please provide a verifiable link or post
You did quote it in your post
As I said, please contact Mr. Foran regarding the de facto ban on medical mj growing. It was his statement, not mine.
down down down she goes.
end of the month and no license.
looks like FITX is about to see the end of it's days.
they will never plant the first seed
They will def make money selling weed, I don't know how u can say otherwise
By "Billy standards", I'm in the automotive, real-estate, computer, mobile, personal defense, aeronautics, bio-engineering, space exploration and entertainment sectors.
If that were true it would be great. Hemp technologies revenue was estimated between 100,000 to 500,000. Not much there. I am sure they were and are losing money.
25 million in insurance premium amounts to about 3.75 million in commission. the 25 million premium is a high estimate.
That stem cell thing will never make a dime.
They are not making any money on vitamins.
Giving up 25% of the core business revenues means fitx will have to make 34% profit to break even.
I do not see this company ever making money,
Great stock to flip as any news or hype runs the price up.
One thing is for sure FITX is in several awesome sectors, Medical Marijuana, Hemp for green building products, CBD extraction for medical research and insurance to MJ facilities.
Any one of these sectors could hit a homerun and create 100's of millions in revenue. In total the potential is in the billions. That said this is a speculative play. The float is a negative. The company had/has low revenue and was giving stock away to pay for everything. The stock is worth more now but to increase the float would be suicide. CEN has not tapped all the equity sold for the MJ side of the business so maybe we can recoup some of that. I think Bill is keeping this in his top pocket.
The bottom line is that this company needs to continue to execute. I would say that stock holders have about 6 to 8 months of patience before they start running. This is a speculative play and I think we will do well. Time will tell. I decided not to have a Starbucks and bought a 100 shares. Hope it pays off. The chart also looks promising.
I totally agree with your post. I think the town of Lakeshore will accomodate FITX. Question is when?
More about grandfathering
Sometimes a new city ordinance or building code change will immediately cause hundreds of older buildings to be in violation. Rather than penalize the buildings' owners, the government will insert a grandfather clause into the language of the new regulation. A grandfather clause is an exemption which allows current businesses or property owners to continue operating under the previous laws. A historic restaurant may be exempt from modern sprinkler laws, for example, because the retrofitting would be too expensive or difficult. A new restaurant built next door, however, would be required to meet the current fire safety codes.
A grandfather clause may also extend to private home ownership and zoning. If a new zoning regulation called for 10 feet of clearance on all sides, it would not be practical to physically move all of the current homes built before the zoning change. A grandfather clause would allow exemptions to homes built before the zoning change went into effect. It is important to note, however, that not all contingencies are automatically covered by a grandfather clause. Some changes require everyone affected by the law to take action, regardless of the age or condition of their home.
Anything is possible but we need to look at what is the most likely scenario. Lakeshore has several residents who are in opposition of what FITX want to do for various reasons. Therefore, the council needs to have a deep understanding of the operation that is ensuing to answer resident questions and to help with future laws. They seem reasonable and I haven't heard of anything in any of the meetings that would lead me to believe that they want to stop FITX. I believe the likely scenario is that FITX gets their license and begins growing. If you do a sat view of the area you'll see that there are a few farms around but there is lots of distance between the FITX facilities and their neighbors. Personally I think they should have just leased an abandoned building like TWEED in an industrial area. It would have solved lots of problems and they could have just retrofitted the building. I also believe all the hype about 6k jobs and 1.3 million lbs. of pot being grown was not a good strategy. Low key and humble doesn't scare anyone.
Grandfather Clause
A portion of a statute that provides that the law is not applicable in certain circumstances due to preexisting facts.
Grandfather clauses, which were originally intended to prevent black people from voting, were named for provisions adopted by the constitutions of some states. Such amendments sought to interfere with an individual's right to vote by setting forth difficult requirements. For example, common requirements were ownership of a large amount of land or the ability to read and write portions of the state and federal constitutions. The name grandfather clause arose from the exceptions that were made for veterans of the Civil War. If the veterans were qualified to vote prior to 1866, their descendants were also qualified. Thus, in effect, if a person's grandfather could vote, he could vote without further restrictions.
These statutes accomplished precisely what was intended, since nearly all slaves and their descendants were disqualified from voting because they could not satisfy the statutory requirements.
In the 1915 case of Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347, 35 S. Ct. 926, 59 L. Ed. 1340, the Supreme Court of the United States examined a Grandfather Clause that was added to the Oklahoma constitution shortly following its admission to the Union. The 1910 constitutional amendment required that prospective voters pass a literacy test in order to qualify to vote. However, anyone who was entitled to vote on January 1, 1866, or any time earlier under any form of government, or who at that time lived in a foreign country, was exempt from satisfying the literacy test requirement. The lineal descendants of such exempted persons also were exempt from such a requirement. In reality, the amendment recreated and perpetuated the very conditions that the Fifteenth Amendment was intended to destroy, even though race was never mentioned as a voter qualification.
The Court held that the clause was in violation of the Fifteenth Amendment, which states that "the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Oklahoma argued that states had the power to set forth voter qualifications. Therefore, the statute in controversy did not violate the Fifteenth Amendment since race was not mentioned as a voter qualification. The Supreme Court was in agreement that states have the right to determine who is qualified to vote; however, they are permitted to do so only within constitutional limits. The limit that proscribes consideration of the race of voters extends to sophisticated as well as simpleminded discrimination, and equality under the law cannot be based upon whether a person's grandfather was a free man.
Oklahoma undertook to change its law following this decision. The revised statute said that everyone who was able to vote as a result of the grandfather clause automatically continued to be eligible and those who had been denied voting rights were given twelve days in 1916 to register to vote. If they were out of the county where they resided or if they were prevented from registering by sickness or unavoidable circumstances, they were given an additional fifty days in 1916 to register. After that time black persons who tried to register to vote were turned away, since the time to register outside the grandfather clause had ended in 1916.
In the 1939 case of Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268, 59 S. Ct. 872, 83 L. Ed. 1281, the Supreme Court rejected Oklahoma's new scheme, calling it another example of an attempt by a state to thwart equality in the right to vote regardless of race or color. The Court ruled that the proposed remedy, in the form of such a limited registration period, was inadequate. A group of citizens who lacked the habits and traditions of political independence deserved a greater opportunity to register to vote.
The term grandfather clause in its current application refers to a legislative provision that permits an exemption based upon a preexisting condition. For example, through the application of grandfather clauses, certain prerogatives are extended to those regularly engaged in a particular profession, occupation, or business that is regulated by statute or ordinance. Such a clause might allow an individual, who has been in continuous practice in a particular profession for a specific period, to circumvent certain licensing requirements.
I am sure courts are different in Canada. I am also sure I could find cases in Canada where there was no grandfathering. This may happen in March.
Read it again. When Fitx gets a license I will show you an example of a company with a license to grow 1.3 million lbs of pot that is not profitable. That being FITX.
I'm not spinning. You keep citing examples from Colorado re: the municipality and the courts. The legislation that applies to municipalities and the court's jurisdiction in Colorado are entirely different than in Ontario. I'm merely suggesting to stop using those as examples/precedents because they simply don't apply here.
Where did I compare colorado to Ontario? This poster is bent on FITX being grandfathered and they are not. I used it as an example of how grandfathering does not always apply. But keep spinning.
You need to stop comparing Colorado to Ontario. Two entirely different sets of legislation. Municipalities in Ontario are creatures of statute governed by statute.
