It seems that convenience is an important factor; access to retail in the most populous province is low, so alternative means of access to the good are still in favor (i.e. black market). Purport the bubble is bursting after examining the system when it is functioning in a less constrained way that rivals the current system (i.e. black market).
"This is especially true in Ontario, Canada's most populous province. Red tape and a cap on the number of cannabis retail outlets have made rollout slow. Retail licenses were awarded by lottery, and the province held the number of licenses at 24, to serve a population of 14.5m."
"In December, the Ontario government announced that after a slow and fitful start, the province will open itself up to more cannabis retail. It will do away with the lottery system, the cap on the number of private stores and cancel some pre-qualification requirements."
Summarizing the article; The stock bubble burst. The industry will continue to see retail growth as it carves into the black market. It is limited by fundamental demand towards marijuana in the population which is ok but not as pervasive as alcohol and tobacco.
I personally barely experience any impact of legal marijuana in my life besides smelling it on the street as it isn’t illegal any more. As the article states it isn’t like we became a nation of potheads. I only know 2 people amongst my friends who have made more than one purchase at a retailer.
They don’t even use it recreationally when they are out with us because we are all old enough that we have to drive, work, parent, etc.
My anecdote I think fits with the statistics and the economic availability the article lays out.
ps Future US border guards reading this comment may rejoice at how boring Canada remains. :)
Indeed, countries who legalized cannabis rather saw demand stay stable or even fall (hence why the UN has been advocating to end the "war on drugs" for about two decades now). In fact we have data on alcohol as well in the past century, and clearly prohibition was not correlated with less drinking, more like the opposite.
There's a strong body of studies laying out reasons — the most striking to me being, "if someone indeed has a drug problem, who should take care of them: a cop or a doctor?", implying that people don't even talk to their doctors about illegal substances, for fear of legal consequences, which thus compounds the public health problem; not to mention that the black market is likely to encourage addiction, as well as supply "bad" products.
There's really no argument for a legal solution to drugs, the only proven way to get a healthier population in that regard is from the health / medical angle.
> we are all old enough that we have to drive, work, parent, etc.
That's also part of it: legal things otherwise dangerous are introduced with care to the population (warnings, policies regarding the youth, etc).
This is how, despite the incredible risks it poses, we are able to sell alcohol to the general population and yet contain the risks to a large measure, because we are educated about it and responsible, and we can talk, watch out for others, etc. Granted, it's still the first cause of death on Earth (about equal with tobacco), but it's still a victory given the dangerosity of the product (from a toxicological standpoint, it's the most lethal category, on par with cocaine).
That being said, I hate it when people think it's OK to drink and drive or drink and parent if they remain below the legal maximum. Recreation means that, it's the opposite of "duty": one should not drink or smoke at all if they are expected to be responsible for others, especially children. Get that psychoactive substance (beer, wine, cannabis...) when you're really only responsible for yourself. The legal limit, again, in matters of health (here, your ability to be lucid and with good reflexes) is only indicative, a tolerance for those who didn't have enough time before taking the wheel — certainly not an invitation to drink up until that threshold like some badge of honor.
Good point, the irrational exuberance took over but was tamed by the rollout/circumstance? Hard to sell a product and grow when you actually are not allowed/physically able to.
With the way the feds wrote the Cannabis Act, it's actually within a province's power to outright ban the sale of cannabis within their jurisdiction, should they wish.
Basically, the federal law removed the criminal prohibition for trafficking and possession, only if the sale/possession is authorized by a provincial law that conforms with certain requirements laid out in the federal law.
Specifically:
69 (1) A person may possess, sell or distribute cannabis if the person is authorized to sell cannabis under a provincial Act that contains the legislative measures referred to in subsection (3)
[...]
(3) (a) they may sell only cannabis that has been produced by a person that is authorized under this Act to produce cannabis for commercial purposes; (b) they may not sell cannabis to young persons; (c) they are required to keep appropriate records respecting their activities in relation to cannabis that they possess for commercial purposes; and (d) they are required to take adequate measures to reduce the risk of cannabis that they possess for commercial purposes being diverted to an illicit market or activity.
All the provinces have enacted laws compatible with the requirements there, but each did so slightly differently.
Production remains more closely held by the federal government, and is regulated directly.
Yes. The federal government previously banned cannabis under its criminal law power; it can decriminalize it but it cannot dictate regulations on the sale of goods - something which ordinarily falls under provincial authority. Take a look at section 92 of the Constitution Act. Canadian provinces have expansive powers to regulate commerce within provincial boundaries. This is recognized in the federal legislation on cannabis which left almost every aspect of retail regulation to the provinces.
This is also exactly parallel to how alcohol is regulated in Canada.
Provinces aren’t states. The powers of the Canadian provincial governments are delegated to them from the Canadian federal government, not the other way around. Canada does not have a constitution that constrains federal power, since it was not formed by the uniting of states wary of federal power, but rather the uniting of colonies which all considered themselves to be under the aegis of a single sovereignty (Britain).
Fun fact: rather than each province having a plain-old governor, Canada (as any Commonwealth country) has one Governor General for the whole country; and then each province has a Lieutenant Governor, also appointed by the Queen, to serve under the Governor General.
Provincial powers are not delegated by the federal government. The canadian constitution lists certain powers the provinces have and certain powers the federal gov has, with basically anything unmentioned being federal. The federal government doesnt just decide willy nilly what is being delegated to the provinces.
The lieutenant governor doesnt serve under the governor general-they just have different spheres of influence . In provincial matters the lieutenant-governor represents the queen, not the governor general.
> The canadian constitution lists certain powers the provinces have and certain powers the federal gov has, with basically anything unmentioned being federal.
That's interesting. It's pretty much the opposite according to the US Constitution, which delegates certain specific powers to the feds, anything else is (supposedly) up to the states. In practice, though, that's been ignored quite a bit in the last century.
I think the joke is, that canada wanted strong federal government and weak provinces and ended up with the opposite. USA wanted strong states and weak fed, but ended up with opposite.*
*IANA political scientist, i dont know how true this actually is.
> The powers of the Canadian provincial governments are delegated to them from the Canadian federal government, not the other way around.
The provincial and federal governments are all sovereign, mutually bound under a single constitution. They both derive their powers in parallel from the Constitution Act.
> since it was not formed by the uniting of states wary of federal power, but rather the uniting of colonies which all considered themselves to be under the aegis of a single sovereignty (Britain).
Quebec certainly did not consider themselves under the aegis of British sovereignty. Much of confederation was effectively about assuaging the concerns of Quebeckers losing their religious, linguistic and cultural identity in an increasingly majority-English country.
In some ways, the provinces have more powers than US states. For example, provinces do have a right of secession. If the majority of Quebeckers do vote to leave at some point, the federal government has no legal power to stop them. Though Quebec can't secede unilaterally, either. Both parties would be constitutionally-bound to negotiate a mutually acceptable path to independence.
This is false. Lieutenant Governors are appointed by the Prime Minister of Canada, but are beholden to neither the federal government nor the Governor General. Lt Governors simply perform the same role at the provincial level that the Governor General performs at the federal level: 99% of the time just a ceremonial rubber stamp of signing a bill into law.
Canadian provinces are spelled out specifically in the Canadian constitution; they are not creatures of the federal government (unlike municipalities, which do exist at the whims of provincial governments, which is a big problem IMHO, but I digress.)
The only paternalistic powers that the feds hold over the provinces are Disallowance and Reservation. Neither of those powers have been used in decades. Despite the failure of constitutional amendments that, if passed, would have explicitly removed those powers from the constitution, their disuse has raised questions as to whether they are effectively defunct by convention. I suspect that any attempt by the feds to disallow or reserve a provincial law would make its way to the Supreme Court of Canada to answer that question.
Furthermore, any attempt to use those powers on a provincial government, especially so in the case of either the governments of Québec or Alberta, would result in a serious crisis of national unity.
Provinces aren't states, but, for example, I live in a distinct nation to you (I assume, if you are under the "aegis of Britain" ;)
There is no written constitution, but there are specific acts, charters and traditions that form constitutional law, and define the clear divisions of responsibility between the provincial and federal government. That includes my government's right to set laws about signage of commercial establishments, specific consumer rights I get, and also the commercial law around the sale of both alcohol and cannabis.
This is canada we are talking about not britian or anywhere else. There is a written constitution (there are also unwritten parts of the constitution but that is beside the point). The written constitution lays out the powers of different levels of government.
>"For example, the federal Trade and Commerce power (s. 91(2)) has been interpreted to mean that Parliament can regulate trade generally in Canada, as well as the flow of trade across provincial or international borders, but cannot regulate the operation of particular industries, businesses or professions within provinces. The provincial power over Property and civil rights (s. 92(13)) gives provinces the authority to regulate trade and commerce within their respective territory."
> I assume, if you are under the "aegis of Britain" ;)
Not me, but certainly the provincial legislative assemblies of 1867 :)
> there are specific acts, charters and traditions that form constitutional law, and define the clear divisions of responsibility between the provincial and federal government
The difference is that these powers are a delegation of federal power to the provinces, rather than reservation of state power away from a federation.
The relationship between the federal and provincial governments in Canada is a lot like the relationship between the Queen and the parliament in Britain: in practice, right now, the Queen is powerless; but technically, the parliament's power derives from the Queen, and there's nothing legally stopping a monarch from revoking that delegation of power. In the current cultural climate, that'd be unthinkable; but all it would take is "mere" sectarian shift to allow for it.
Ontario has always been a bit weird like that (LCBO stores for liqueur, Beer Store for beer).
Out here in Lethbridge, AB (about 100K pop) there's 20 odd stores on Google maps (3-4 within walking distance of me). I've also seen another one or two in the process of being built around town. I made the assumption this story was about too many stores and not enough demand :)
Forgot to mention, in AB all you need (I believe) is a license to sell and you're good to go (like with alcohol).
It doesn't make sense to pay a surcharge for delivery when the product is abundant on the grey market.
As far as the "bubble bursting", well, anyone who thought the Canadian government was going to allow the market to mint Marijuana millionaires and billionaires was simply naive.
Among my age group, cartridges of concentrated cannabis are far more popular than actual plant material. Buying from a legal and regulated business gives peace of mind that the concentrate won't be cut with dangerous materials as they often are in the black market.
I've purchased cartridges in the grey market in California that contained hazardous materials. It can happen anywhere.
You see the same problems in the American market too. Contrast the following experiences. To buy legally, I have to go trek out to my local dispensary, sit outside for 30 min - 1 hour, hope they have what I want when I get inside (no way to check in advance as they have no inventory management), pay 100% more than black market value per quantity, deal with ridiculously arbitrary restrictions on how much and what I am allowed to buy, I have to pay with cash, and I receive product with low potency.
If I want to buy illegally, I can call ping my friend, they tell me the whole inventory in advance, I tell them what I want, they bring it to me for free, I get very high quality product, it's very cheap, and we hang out for a few hours.
Legal. I’m not a heavy user, but legal has been the amazing. I can pick up edibles of known amounts of thc. The sales people are friendly and knowledgeable.
Buying illegally was always sketchy, never knowing if someone would show up, how good the product was, if it actually was indica or sativa or hybrid, it was always just “good shit”, which wasn’t always true.
Prices feel the same and it’s defiantly not lower potency in my experience.
I agree, I am in Australia so no legal weed here but I would happily pay more to be able to buy edibles as well as know exactly what I am buying and what the dosages are.
Not to mention that illegal growers don't care what poisons they douse the plants with as long as the insects die before they can eat them. Then the users smoke this crap. I don't know that we've yet seen the healthcare outcome of this.
Conversely, in Nova Scotia, I can go to my closest dispensary, wait about 5 minutes in line (inside a surprisingly posh store), pay with a simple tap, and I'm on my way. The biggest issue here is the waste from packaging.
Where is this? I can walk into a dispensary.. usually really close to wherever I am and just buy whatever I want. It's like buying bread.
When I lived in California I could have it delivered even.
Here in Colorado the black market continues to thrives because shit heads don't think they should have to pay taxes, but the actual experience of legally buying pot is super easy.
This. The legal cannabis-buying experience in my small BC town is actually quite nice. My only complaint is the required product packaging. The stores are almost as nice as those in Seattle. No problem using a credit card, either.
Daily smoker in NYC, I went to California last winter to visit family. Along the way I stopped in at two dispensaries. Very poor experiences. Police like guards all over, waiting rooms that feel like air locks with doors between the waiting area and the inside. Metal detectors and wands. Cash only with an ATM with yet another line, then a line to the counter.
And like you I call my guy who sends me a list of at least 5-6 different strains, two regular strains he will always have (king and platinum kush), always fresh, with volume pricing up to pounds. Then he shuffles strains and special items like prerolls, edibles, exotics in jars, and oil carts. So there's always a variety. Plus free door to door delivery. So our experiences are similar and the reason why the legal market has yet to catch up with the black market.
> Police like guards all over, waiting rooms that feel like air locks with doors between the waiting area and the inside. Metal detectors and wands. Cash only with an ATM with yet another line, then a line to the counter
Living in Portland, OR that experience is wild to me. All of the shops I’ve been to don’t have any guards, just an employee during the required ID check.
While visiting Oakridge, OR I checked out a dispensary and it had the air-lock waiting area, rude staff ignoring me on the other side after shouting "busy with a customer!", expecting me to wait in a box until the one customer they were already dealing with was finished.
Since I was just curious and don't really consume weed, and wanted to buy something to bring to a friend's place as a gift, I just GTFO. The whole experience was awful and time-wasting, though I guess if you're a pothead wasting time isn't a concern.
My experience in CO was far superior. The place I went to there didn't even have the entrance doors closed, it was like going into a tourist shop selling overpriced t-shirts but instead it was marijuana products. The prices were ridiculous, but at least it didn't feel sleazy or like a huge unnecessary waste of my time where a hold-up may occur at any moment.
Obviously in America it depends on the state. My experience in CO is the opposite, lines are always short or non-existent (except during peak hours). Prices are cheap and concentrates are even cheaper. (It's cheaper than alcohol for sure.) Most stores have sites that show their inventory (TBH it is kind of so-so but honestly almost everything is high THC/low CBD anyway). Purchase limits decent; 28g/1oz flower/8g concentrates is a lot to go through for most people.
Only inconvenience are: Some puritan counties/cities have banned recreational stores. Prices in turist/ski areas can be a bit more expensive depending on supply/demand. And I think higher CBD stuff is getting divereted to the medical & CBD oil market but that's just a theory.
The illegal market obviously varies dealer to dealer... not everyone has that same kind of stay-and-chill relationship with their dealer.
Here in Colorado, I have none of your problems. The wait is usually 0-10 minutes for me. I can check their inventory online for most dispensaries, even pre-order only for some places. I can also call and ask them. The values are cheaper than the black market or about the same. I am starting to be able to pay with my credit card now, but primary it still is cash. The products I buy are amazing in quality. You didn't say which state you are in, so I'm guessing Oregon? I went in to a dispensary when I was there a few years ago and I felt like I was in a drug den. You had to sit around with a bunch of gross people, and had to have a consultation with a doctor... yeah I walked out of there and went to Washington.
I don't know where you live. But here in San Francisco, my neighborhood dispensary ("Apothecarium") is a top-notch experience, sort of like visiting a luxury goods store. They have a great waiting area, and when your name is called (usually within a few minutes), there's a concierge waiting for you who will take you through the entire buying process. It's very civilized.
Here in Vancouver it was a fairly lame experience before legalization, but now it's like picking up groceries. $5 - $10 cad for a joint and you're good.
My experience has been vastly different. Pre-legalization I had many local dispensaries I could choose from. Now there is one. The legal weed is overly dry and over packaged.
I buy my weed from a closet in the back of a clothing store. At least I get quality, correct humidity and I can bring my own packaging.
And don't get me started on the egregiously-named "hobo" run by the sexual-predator-defending Donnelly group.
I straight up have no idea what you're talking about lol, but also don't smoke much. I know some people, particularly in the skater community, that love weed and probably care more, but I mostly join in if it's going around and my gf is usually the one getting anything. I can see how our experiences would be different if you were very regularly looking for weed before.
Another reason for users turning to the black market that this article did not mention but that I've heard mentioned elsewhere is that Canada purportedly limits the potency of legal cannabis to relatively low levels, so the black market remains the only source of high potency cannabis.
Maybe, but the real issue is that anyone is allowed to grow the stuff. And it is really easy to grow. So everyone knows somebody who is growing. Why pay commercial prices when your neighbor can provide you the same quality at a fraction the cost? It may be a "black" market in the sense that it isn't the regulated market, but those who smoke the stuff see little difference between buying a neighbor's pot and buying carrots. They both come from the same garden.
Why also explains why rolling back Prohibition in the US was an unmitigated failure, with everybody still drinking their buddies' homebrews and driving all the pro breweries to bankruptcy.
Since that didn't actually happen, and I'm also buying my carrots at the supermarket, we can probably deduce that it's not home-grown supply that's the problem here.
Growing a plant in the backyard is several orders of magnitude easier than buying the equipment and taking the time to brew beer.
... but your underlying point is correct. A better analogy is probably basil, which a large percentage of buyers actually just keep their own plant at home.
Cannabis just requires seeds and some ground outside. Sure it won’t be the best, but it won’t need any equipment or attention this way. Brewing beer requires at least some active effort.
This is correct for the recreational side of the market in Canada, but the experience of the medicinal cannabis market since the most recent legislation is unparalleled. There's some intake forms to fill out with your physician e.g., https://www.auroramj.com/patients/. Once you're in the door though, you have access to D2C e-commerce the likes of which the rec market cannot currently compare to. Cannabinoid profile analysis for each lot is mandated, so you know exactly what you're getting, and many insurance plans will subsidize the cost.
Is the list of ailments that will get you a cannabis medical card in Canada as flimsy as what can be found in California? E.g. a slightly sore back ten years ago?
No list, it's at your doctor's discretion. There are also online/remote doctors that you "visit" via facetime/skype/whatever that will just write you a prescription.
I know you mean hybrid strains bread for high potency. Prohibitting those if otherwise legal would require a legal basis.
I thought one objective of legalization was to avoid laced product. Of course lacing weed to make it appear more potent and to be addictive is still forbidden. I have no source for that. Chalk it up as purported rumor. I've heard police test a crusher (weed grinder, whatchamacallit) positive for co-alkaloids and amphetamin in Germany.
Wine production from hybrid grapevine is also prohibited in the EU due to lesser reasons. The French largely influenced EU wine legislation. Only the rootstock is hybrid because it's disease and fungus resistant.
This is the tragedy of the commons. It's entirely reasonable that Designated Origin rules prescribe the ingredients and naming of products, e.g. for champagne. The problem is that varieties cross polinate through air and thus endanger--oh my gosh--the traditional wine bread. That much I can gather although the article doesn't say so. It's probably a little more complicated, sure.
The article only says that hybrids from the 19th century were inferior; suppose taste wise. Which is a matter of taste, but likely reflected in sales. The upside is resistance to fungi and such.
You could also blame the government inefficiency in QC. The stores are government ran. The one in Montreal on St Catherine has permanent bread lines at any time of the day. Some of the product is sold out first thing in the morning and you need to arrive an hour before opening. It’s like Soviet Union of weed.
Quebec is always a special case of bureaucracy and government mismanagement.
Remember that all liquor stores in Quebec are government stores too. I suspect they'll start distributing them there - possibly dependent upon neighborhood approval.
I'll note that the neighborhood I'm in - the older folks are not happy about the new constant pot smell around.
The lack of edibles for the initial launch is a big blocker for casual adoption IMO.
As per the visuals, cannabis use has not grown dramatically since legalization. Oils and raw bud are simply not as accessible as a bar of chocolate.
I imagine that won't cause a significant bump either, but at the least, it opens up the market to the casual user -- which simply has not happened yet in Canada.
Way too much illegal vs legal supply for legal demand to keep up. Same glut we're having in California, excepting half of that is caused directly by zoning laws and such making it almost impossible to open a legal dispensary despite it being legalized in the state.
Speaking as a Canadian (and utterly uninterested in cannabis) - this is closest to accurate.
Many jurisdictions are openly hostile
Most parts of the country limited access, supply and transportation.
It's hard to make a legal business work when most are still against it functioning.
This zoning issue has affected every state that moved to legal over the last five years and will, for sure, play the same in the states launching in 2020. Many millions have been spent on just legal wrangling to start a business
Since 90s or so I’ve viewed Canada as quasi legal. Very low enforcement compared to my US experience. It seemed like a larger amount of homegrown and related technologies came out of Canada. Maybe I’m wrong. But if that is true, for consumer there’s really no advantage to going retail and lots of disadvantages as mentioned. So the “black market” sounds bad it’s really like a local artisan. Not some terrorist funding cartel run thing. Just your friend from down the road that shares his bounty.
Very true, the RCMP in my hometown were rarely doing raids/busts or anything of the sort. Unless you we're trying to muck around with hard drugs or driving around in a hotboxed car.
There were multiple parents/working class people with tables/setups in their garage. Come over for a cup of coffee, catch up about the kids, grab a few grams until next week! Nothing nefarious.
On the consumer end the logistics is really the benefit of legal weed. You don't have to know a guy, play a game of telephone, wait around. Instead you can visit a professionally run store filled with people that know about the products and gear that is stocked. Makes it much easier to add into the routine right beside picking up groceries. That being said you pay a premium for that, and there's still black-market services doing Amazon style home delivery.
Also, drug crimes in Canada are prosecuted by the feds, not your local prosecutor. And I don't think there's been much federal prosecutorial interest in those cases, even if your local RCMP thinks its a problem.
It likely explains why Toronto had to go the bylaw infraction route to close down shops. Which was still a waste of money...
To flip the question around, what's the benefit of regulation? If none, then yeah, it's less weight to just not do it. But without regulation, presumably you get shady growers/dealers with products of dubious constitution.
It looks like the price of legalization (in this case) is taxation and regulation. It should have been possible to legalize without either of these things, but that didn't happen. Gotta wonder why.
Sure if you have such a friend they would be a great alternative to legal retail. But many people don't have such a connection so the retail option is just a hell of a lot easier than what they were used to.
I wouldn’t disagree. My point is more that a grey market going legal isn’t the same as a black market going legal like is happening in the States. Also doesn’t sound like the retail convenience is materializing for most.
I would suspect that many people purchasing on the black market are in fact purchasing from stores (not just “their weed guy”) but don’t realize the store is not properly licensed.
Don't trust that; unlicensed shops have been closing down much faster than google's been keeping up. Source: I'm a customer that preferred the unlicensed shops because the product and pricing was better. I was never ignorant about their legal status.
In licensed shops you get a very limited selection and typically, a low inventory. They've got little sniffer pods where you're supposed to be able to smell the product but it's nothing like the old shops where they'd have a canister where you could really get a good whiff. Packaging requirements mean that there's a limited selection of quantities; and typically, the packaging is at least 3x bigger (and significantly more expensive) than previously.
My preferred purchasing pattern is to buy a single gram of a few unfamiliar strains, test them out, and then come back in a few days to get an ounce of the best one. With this pattern, I only need to go to the store a few times a year. With the new shops, they don't carry single grams, and you can't save on packaging by buying in bulk -- if you want an ounce, you'd have to buy 10 of the 3.5g canisters.
I was pro-legalization for obvious reasons but now I wish I had a good black-market hookup.
The only reason cannabis cost $6-8 per gram was the illegality of it all. There were paid shocktroops(The Police) helping the criminals keep the price high. Grown on it's own it waould be a little more expensive than hay, something that is grown from seed in fields acres in size can be waay under $1. Some states have huge gluts. EVen the hybrid seeds where 10,000 seeds come from one large plant, each one female, each one prefertilized (feminized) https://shop.ilovegrowingmarijuana.com/collections/feminized
So the growers can always beat the legal price because the goverment has encumbered the legal growers with red tape and other restrictions to help the illegal market continue to prosper. Remove the limits = $1 a gram or even less
I think you’re right about the market constraints, but in terms of a crop it’s more labor intensive — more like strawberries or tomatoes than hay. It’d be great to see a shift towards low input natural farming for cannabis, but at present it’s very input and labor intensive.
I’m under the impression that the market will grow with time. The product happens to be great enough for my standards. The obvious downside is the requirement from a person needing to explore the dosage intake themselves and contrary to how everyone can dive into coffee for a different type of high. I’m skeptical of the price being where it should be because I think it’s too high resulting in the profits being worse then what could be achieved. Interestingly all the high THC strains are usually all sold out online in my province’s store but I think most people that would enjoy the benefits from the high would prefer a low to medium THC or even CBD strain. Edibles are in my opinion dangerous and I’m curious to see how that will likely make no difference in sales. I think what needs to happen is the ability to micro dose safely without any unpleasantness and be affordable. Vaping can make it affordable but dosing isn’t as accurate as I believe it should be.
I don't think it burst because of the Canadian market. It burst due to the Canadian LPs building out infrastructure like there was going to be this giant international market in Europe and the US. The Canadians haven't been able to penetrate either market. The US seems to be handling itself and the tiny legal international cannabis export/import market is being targeted by Colombia aggressively. The Canadians only ever had the advantage of first mover and now that legal barrier is collapsing.
What I've noticed here in Ontario is that everyone is growing their own instead of buying it. Even my mother's book club is basically 15 minutes of book talk followed by 2 hours of people trading grower's tips.
My dealer pulls up within half an hour of texting them, with a full ounce they grew themselves. They know everything about the plant, and breed it for high THC. No delivery fee. Friendly. Great weed. No packaging. No bullshit. And great deals. Most dealer you buy from you won't be paying $280 ($10/h per O). Why would I ever go the "legal" route?
Sure. I've had some excellent homegrown weed. Most parts of the US don't have access to this though. Even in the Bay Area there are places where the homegrown stuff is pretty low quality. If I go to a dispensary I can get a much greater selection, is consistent quality, and isn't grown in some destructive "farm" in a state park. The dispensary I go to takes online orders and has them ready in 10 minutes.
I'm mostly into edibles these days. It was a bit disappointing when California capped the max THC per package (100 mg) -- but upside is pretty awesome. I can get a consistent product that's been tested to be a certain potency and free of pesticides and whatnot.
"This is especially true in Ontario, Canada's most populous province. Red tape and a cap on the number of cannabis retail outlets have made rollout slow. Retail licenses were awarded by lottery, and the province held the number of licenses at 24, to serve a population of 14.5m."
"In December, the Ontario government announced that after a slow and fitful start, the province will open itself up to more cannabis retail. It will do away with the lottery system, the cap on the number of private stores and cancel some pre-qualification requirements."
List of Canadian Provinces by Population: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_and...