5 ms·

Damn Peter Thiel is smart http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/08/cannabis-investor-peter-theil-paypal-founder http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015

Damn Peter Thiel is smart http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/08/cannabis-investor-peter-theil-paypal-founder http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/08/cannabis-inv...

iopq 12y ago
They were talking about it on NPR. Basically, you take a risk on the legality of marijuana to get larger gains in comparison to the investors late to the table. Just because not every investor wants to take that risk your gains are higher because you are getting a larger slice of the pie and funding companies with first mover's advantage.
coralreef 12y ago
Peter Thiel isn't the first big investor to enter marijuana. This has been a heavily watched market ever since marijuana started becoming decriminalized/legal with a doctor's prescription.
tlrobinson 12y ago
Are there decent (non-penny-stock) opportunities to invest in the cannabis industry (for accredited or non-accredited investors)?
- sliverstorm 12y ago
  I suspect you still need to get in "at the ground floor". Unless things have changed, cannabis businesses are still relegated to the "under the mattress" banking method, so I can't imagine there are any cannabis derivatives floating around the open market. Unless you want to invest in related industries- glassware. Frito-Lay. Pizza Hut.
3beard 12y ago
The idea that you can have a nice, clean, legalized marijuana business is just as crazy as the idea that you can have a nice, clean, legalized prostitution business. It will not happen. Some stuff in life is just dark as of itself, and karma is real.
- shillster 12y ago
  The way you conflate these metaphors makes the truth of your statement seem self-evident, but it is not so.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- DanBC 12y ago
  My gut reaction is to tell you that you're wrong and look for evidence of that, and blame the worst problems of cannabis supply on its current illegality. The illegatity pushes the price up; that high price and illegality attracts criminal gangs who use violence and human exploitation to supply the drug. Making it legal would reduce the cost of the drug and allow suppliers to market themselves as ethical ("free range" / "fair trade" / "organic" etc). But looking at cigarretes in the UK we see criminal gangs are still involved in the production of dangerous[1] counterfeits and supply of those counterfeits or of smuggled cigarretes from lower tax areas.
  - 3beard 12y ago
    > The illegality pushes the price up; You make it sound as if this is a bad thing. I'm having a hard time imagining what benefit will result from making a potent and fairly addictive narcotic cheaper and more available.
    - DanBC 12y ago
      It's a bad thing because it leaves space for criminal gangs to make money and does nothing to tackle any harms that result from drug use. Most people who use cannabis will experience no ill-effects. Many of the harms are reducible - use a vaporiser at the correct temperature rather than burning the plant material for example. A few people will experience ill-effects. Providing help to those people through public health measures is more effective and cheaper than targeting them through criminal justice systems. > fairly addictive Citation needed, unless you're misusing "addiction" to mean "habit". Cannabis is not physically addicting and the psychological addiction appears to be weak. There is some element of habit associated with it though.
3beard 12y ago
I'm wondering how many people in favor of legalization would actually like to see a pot shop in their own street. From my own experience in the Netherlands, these kinds of shops attract a sort of crowd that you would much rather avoid.
- sopooneo 12y ago
  I believe you completely, but I bet that if their were more pot shops, that unsavory element would just frequent the shops in their own neighborhoods. The Netherlands in general seem to get all the yahoo's that would just as well stay home and smoke up if they could buy legally in their home nations.
- RogerL 12y ago
  We* have them all over the place. I'm not aware of any problems. * former CO resident, current CA resident.
- soylentcola 12y ago
  I dunno. We have a nice neighborhood pub on our street and it's great. I can stop in for a bite or a few beers and once in a while, yep...I have a few more with my neighbors/friends and we get a bit tipsy and are glad to be able to walk a block to get home instead of taking a cab. There are also some other bars in town that "attract a sort of crowd that (I) would much rather avoid". So that's basically what I do. I don't hang out at bars that attract a bunch of tough guys looking to pick fights or pick up drunk women. That still doesn't mean I think bars should be illegal or that people (even drunks and alcoholics) should be thrown in jail for whatever issues they have with drug (alcohol) abuse. All other arguments about the relative benefits of alcohol or cannabis or anything else aside, that's what it comes down to for me. I just don't think the possession and consumption of anything should be enough to land you in prison. As with alcohol you must be held accountable for your actions whether sober or under the influence. And if you accidentally cause damage to person or property while under the influence, you can be held liable due to your own negligence in not managing your behavior properly. But the idea that your diet can be considered "criminal" is frankly ridiculous to me. Either it's a relatively harmless vice where you occasionally engage in an activity with potential health risks in exchange for altering your mood/perception or you're self-medicating and habituated to something and could use help with withdrawal and with addressing the issues that led you to use intoxication as an escape or a coping mechanism. Neither scenario is something I'd consider worth of criminal punishment. Crimes at their most basic should be situations where one person infringes the rights of another, not situations where one person makes potentially unhealthy decisions.

Damn Peter Thiel is smart http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/08/cannabis-investor-peter-theil-paypal-founder http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/08/cannabis-inv...

iopq 12y ago

They were talking about it on NPR. Basically, you take a risk on the legality of marijuana to get larger gains in comparison to the investors late to the table. Just because not every investor wants to take that risk your gains are higher because you are getting a larger slice of the pie and funding companies with first mover's advantage.

coralreef 12y ago

Peter Thiel isn't the first big investor to enter marijuana. This has been a heavily watched market ever since marijuana started becoming decriminalized/legal with a doctor's prescription.

tlrobinson 12y ago

Are there decent (non-penny-stock) opportunities to invest in the cannabis industry (for accredited or non-accredited investors)?

sliverstorm 12y ago
I suspect you still need to get in "at the ground floor". Unless things have changed, cannabis businesses are still relegated to the "under the mattress" banking method, so I can't imagine there are any cannabis derivatives floating around the open market. Unless you want to invest in related industries- glassware. Frito-Lay. Pizza Hut.

3beard 12y ago

The idea that you can have a nice, clean, legalized marijuana business is just as crazy as the idea that you can have a nice, clean, legalized prostitution business. It will not happen. Some stuff in life is just dark as of itself, and karma is real.

shillster 12y ago
The way you conflate these metaphors makes the truth of your statement seem self-evident, but it is not so.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
DanBC 12y ago
My gut reaction is to tell you that you're wrong and look for evidence of that, and blame the worst problems of cannabis supply on its current illegality. The illegatity pushes the price up; that high price and illegality attracts criminal gangs who use violence and human exploitation to supply the drug. Making it legal would reduce the cost of the drug and allow suppliers to market themselves as ethical ("free range" / "fair trade" / "organic" etc). But looking at cigarretes in the UK we see criminal gangs are still involved in the production of dangerous[1] counterfeits and supply of those counterfeits or of smuggled cigarretes from lower tax areas.
- 3beard 12y ago
  > The illegality pushes the price up; You make it sound as if this is a bad thing. I'm having a hard time imagining what benefit will result from making a potent and fairly addictive narcotic cheaper and more available.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    It's a bad thing because it leaves space for criminal gangs to make money and does nothing to tackle any harms that result from drug use. Most people who use cannabis will experience no ill-effects. Many of the harms are reducible - use a vaporiser at the correct temperature rather than burning the plant material for example. A few people will experience ill-effects. Providing help to those people through public health measures is more effective and cheaper than targeting them through criminal justice systems. > fairly addictive Citation needed, unless you're misusing "addiction" to mean "habit". Cannabis is not physically addicting and the psychological addiction appears to be weak. There is some element of habit associated with it though.

3beard 12y ago

I'm wondering how many people in favor of legalization would actually like to see a pot shop in their own street. From my own experience in the Netherlands, these kinds of shops attract a sort of crowd that you would much rather avoid.

sopooneo 12y ago
I believe you completely, but I bet that if their were more pot shops, that unsavory element would just frequent the shops in their own neighborhoods. The Netherlands in general seem to get all the yahoo's that would just as well stay home and smoke up if they could buy legally in their home nations.
RogerL 12y ago
We* have them all over the place. I'm not aware of any problems. * former CO resident, current CA resident.
soylentcola 12y ago
I dunno. We have a nice neighborhood pub on our street and it's great. I can stop in for a bite or a few beers and once in a while, yep...I have a few more with my neighbors/friends and we get a bit tipsy and are glad to be able to walk a block to get home instead of taking a cab. There are also some other bars in town that "attract a sort of crowd that (I) would much rather avoid". So that's basically what I do. I don't hang out at bars that attract a bunch of tough guys looking to pick fights or pick up drunk women. That still doesn't mean I think bars should be illegal or that people (even drunks and alcoholics) should be thrown in jail for whatever issues they have with drug (alcohol) abuse. All other arguments about the relative benefits of alcohol or cannabis or anything else aside, that's what it comes down to for me. I just don't think the possession and consumption of anything should be enough to land you in prison. As with alcohol you must be held accountable for your actions whether sober or under the influence. And if you accidentally cause damage to person or property while under the influence, you can be held liable due to your own negligence in not managing your behavior properly. But the idea that your diet can be considered "criminal" is frankly ridiculous to me. Either it's a relatively harmless vice where you occasionally engage in an activity with potential health risks in exchange for altering your mood/perception or you're self-medicating and habituated to something and could use help with withdrawal and with addressing the issues that led you to use intoxication as an escape or a coping mechanism. Neither scenario is something I'd consider worth of criminal punishment. Crimes at their most basic should be situations where one person infringes the rights of another, not situations where one person makes potentially unhealthy decisions.