no_thanks Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I think the online education trend will continue to be strong - even replacing college for a lot of people. The freelance economy as well. More and more people will work various freelance jobs, rather than being tied to jobs at specific companies. I spend most of my free time figuring out how to make this happen for myself. Started a blog about it to help myself focus on making it happen yesterday. This ties back into healthcare as health insurance being tied to employment is what is keeping a lot of people in jobs they don't like. Imagine if you couldn't really buy car insurance or home insurance on your own, or from out of state companies, or with the exact level of coverage that you wanted because of stupid government regulations. I was really, really close to saying that health care is the major obstacle in this (in the U.S.). Hopefully it won't be tied to your job within 5 years, but that is a really hard thing to predict. Hope it gets there soon. My first idea I plan on starting to get going tonight is Excel support for small businesses. I just started a new job in Oct. at a fairly large company, and it is wild how little they are productively using the program. I took something my boss was spending 8 hours a month on, and have it down to a 30 min. task. As far as secular trends and this theme go, I see freelancing as a part of the move to two sided markets. https://punchcardblog.wordpress.com/ 's recent post on LYV does a nice job of explaining it. Software is enabling a lot more efficient matching of producers and consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Schwab711 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Increased use of the Northwest Passage for shipping. Not sure how to capitalise on this, though... This is really interesting and I think I recently read about the first freighters making the trip? Might help Canadian oil companies get Brent prices (or close the gap between WTI/Brent beyond quality differences)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Schwab711 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 I agree with thepupil. The standard asset/liability sensitivity analysis doesn't lead to the conclusion that Prime/LIBOR spread, and therefore NIM, currently at historical wides, should be even wider in a rising rate environment. The statement that current LIBOR is negative out to 2 month is also not correct. USD LIBOR is positive across the curve. Otherwise, I happen to like the credit cad business a lot, in all its shapes and forms. According to Paul Volcker, "the single most useful financial innovation". Lots of mistakes! Thanks for pointing this out thepupil and HJ. I even mentioned NIM was at historical highs in the beginning of my post and somehow ignored my own research throughout... USD-LIBOR: http://www.global-rates.com/interest-rates/libor/american-dollar/american-dollar.aspx To correct my mistakes, we should see a ~$100m increase for each rate hike step, initially (trivial relative to NI).However, even though the rates for USD LIBOR are 25 bps higher than [EUR] LIBOR, we are concerned with relative changes from present and USD LIBOR shouldn't be affected by Fed rate hikes (again, only at first). I tried defending my original post for way too long but, [reluctantly] you are both right. Odds are AXP's NIM will have to decrease from 6.6%. Throw on the 10% card-in-effect loss from Costco ($400m in fees and I didn't even try to figure out the discount revenue lost but they mention Costco represents 1% of all billings). That's ~$10B * 1% = $100m for each 1% of discount (merchant fees) or something near ~$700m in revenue from Costco alone?! I don't know how analysts have earnings estimates of $6 in 2016 vs $5.58 for 2015 if this is true... NIM for AXP has been trending up since 2009 and is currently 6.6% (8.3 - 1.7). Eyeballing NIM for 2004-2008 it looks like 2006 was a decent representation of the period: {(9% - 9.5% interest yield) - (~5.0% interest expense [debt of $42B]) - (some % for net write-offs which averaged ~3.3%) = ~3%}. I have definitely not put enough time into AXP but even these numbers feel 'off' since in 2006 interest expense was ~$950m vs $3.5B in interest income. Any input would be great otherwise I'll have to look at this at a later time. A couple things. Excess funds in the banking industry are substantial at the moment which should hold LIBOR artificially low until credit demand picks up. AXP's customers will likely [continue] to experience larger growth the population as a whole so I can see billings/loan balances increasing at higher rates than the economy. As prime rate increases, the spread between AMEX rates and all other types of rates will converge. This will likely lead to high NPL % but also higher credit demand (higher loan balances). They used to be able to pass fee/rate increases but I'm not sure we'll see that moving forward since COF/DFS become noticeably more accepted in the past 10 years creating more price competition in the industry. This will all probably result in a net negative for AXP [for NIM], so they will really need large growth rates for billings/loan balances and up to a small increase in NPL to get NI increases. I hate being wrong. I really do like the industry and company, but after reviewing AXP again today it just seems like a constant uphill battle for NI growth from here. If Costco really does cost $700m/annually then they are looking at a best-case scenario of zero-growth for NI until 2017! At what level are you interested in buying? Either way, I don't think this side-tracked the conversation as I definitely believe CC spending (billings and loan balances) counts as a long term positive trend since CC spending should increase at rates greater than nominal GDP as electronic spending gains more market share, more consumers become eligible for credit (credit demand at historical low), and inflation might someday resurface. Moody's Ratings Guide: (Baa is IG cutoff) http://www.tdsecurities.com/tds/image/Ratings.gif?language=en_CA AXP Raings: http://ir.americanexpress.com/GenPage.aspx?IID=102700&GKP=208712 Old AXP ARs: https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000004962&type=10-K&dateb=&owner=exclude&count=40 OIS-LIBOR Spread Discussion: http://soberlook.com/2011/11/ois-spread-compare-contrast.html (I like this website a lot!) http://soberlook.com/2013/12/5-facts-about-interbank-lending-in-us.html Munger doesn't like AXP as much anymore?: http://seekingalpha.com/news/2391626-amex-seeks-to-reassure-at-investor-day-munger-questions-competitive-edge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orthopa Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 I know it was touched on before but the legalization of Marijuana I think will be a boon to big tobacco, mostly because of in place advertising ability, convenience for consumers, and in place distribution channels. Here is a copy/paste of one of my comments on another forum. "Interesting discussion regarding the MJ. I have no absolute knowledge but believe all of the branding, advertising (if allowed), distribution is in place for big tobacco to start selling MJ. I would expect a similar roll out to MarkTen. I also don't believe full legalization is that far way (less then 10 years) as 25 states already have some form of relaxed marijuana legislation. In regards to usage I have a couple thoughts. 1. If the "market" price is set by a combination of taxes, profit etc, say the price of regular cigs. Why would the home/private marijuana seller price their product much below market? ie if a pack of marijuana cigs costs $10, why would the private guy sell his product for much below? One would think he would raise his prices and get an instant increase on his margins. Hell may even charge more for a better type of bud, etc. 2. If number 1 becomes true and prices and quality similar my next thought would be convenience. Whats easier, growing your own including WAITING for it to grow initially, buying the equipment to grow it indoors in a cooler climate, drying it, rolling 20 MJ blunts/cigs...or just going to the convenience store and buying a pack and paying a little more? If you just want to party for a weekend or every once in a while are you going to grow your own? Prob not, so whats easier, finding a dealer, rolling your own, etc or just going to the gas station and buying it. My guess is the latter. A corollary would be with packs of cigs at $10.00 a pack why aren't people just rolling their own tobacco cigs? My guess is BC its inconvenient and the handful of dollars saved isnt "worth" it. 3. One would also then think a marijuana e cig would be available with a THC hit whenever one wanted. 4. My guess is once legalized more then anything it will finally open up convenience, (read no more sneaking around) and people will take advantage of it. " Internationally the marijuana legalization wave will take longer BC of all of the different countries involved. International operators such as PM, Japan tobacco, BTI, could benefit eventually. Marijuana is much more tolerated worldwide then I thought before I googled this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_country#/media/File:World-cannabis-laws.png Take a look at this and tell me Altria does not have this ready to go. ;D http://static.businessinsider.com/image/545f98d9ecad040b2463393c/image.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CONeal Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 It's pretty much a lose thought that really hasn't been developed. I see data security being an even bigger focus on people as we constantly become a data driven world. With your entire life stored and accessed through the Internet a hacker can really wreck havoc. I'm not sure why more effort hasn't been focused in the area but your health records and bank records can be accessed by anyone with an Internet connection and programming skills. More along data security from both the individual side and also the corporate side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Schwab711 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It's pretty much a lose thought that really hasn't been developed. I see data security being an even bigger focus on people as we constantly become a data driven world. With your entire life stored and accessed through the Internet a hacker can really wreck havoc. I'm not sure why more effort hasn't been focused in the area but your health records and bank records can be accessed by anyone with an Internet connection and programming skills. More along data security from both the individual side and also the corporate side. Not necessarily your point but I have to stick up for Epic Systems (http://www.epic.com/ OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Systems). They are by far the largest EHR (Electronic Health Record; everyone should use MyChart if you don't already!) company and have nearly 50% of the country on their servers (they focus on enterprise solutions for the largest hospital systems - software is too in-depth/complicated for the little guys). Yet they have never lost non-trivial info (nothing more than SS#) for more than 150 patient records at one time since inception (tipping point for felony; as of 3 years ago when I last worked there). Their culture is unfathomable and if you are ever in or near Madison, WI it is worth a visit! I learned more about business from Judy then any single professor or non-family member (who was very available for a billionaire; I once bumped into her and glared at her until she apologized lol!). This stock would have multiples that would make AMZN blush if they were public. I honestly don't know how CERN (Cerner) gets 75x PMs with Epic stealing all of their major customers and only signing up Epic rejects. My [rambling] point is that the laws for health records (Anthem intrusion isn't really similar) make the security around patient accounts quite impressive. The difficulty is no one company will ever gain a strong foothold in the industry as it would just make it easier for potential wrong-doers. I definitely see this as a likely long-term trend with regards to money spent but the winners will likely be IBM more than data/network security [corporate] specialists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 It's pretty much a lose thought that really hasn't been developed. I see data security being an even bigger focus on people as we constantly become a data driven world. With your entire life stored and accessed through the Internet a hacker can really wreck havoc. I'm not sure why more effort hasn't been focused in the area but your health records and bank records can be accessed by anyone with an Internet connection and programming skills. More along data security from both the individual side and also the corporate side. Data security is important, but it seems that both companies and individuals are not willing to pay for it a lot. Of course, part of the issue is that paying a lot does not guarantee impregnability. Part of the issue is that security is really really hard. You can be super smart and think about everything and still if there's a hole in one of 10M software routines, bad guys can get in. Sure, I might be exaggerating a bit, but it's true. Or you have everything nice tight and secure, but then another part of the company sets a server that is naked on the internetz, it gets hosed in a minute and they get to your secure stuff from the inside. Yeah, sure, partition, don't reuse credentials, etc., but... I've tried to play this theme time and again with Symantec, Checkpoint, but without much success. IBM is trying to be security company for enterprises - this might be OK business for them if companies pay top bucks for their security consulting and IT buildout. It's not a pure play though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubsfan Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I think that is such a good point - security is just really, really hard - because the bad guys continually change tactics. And also users don't want their lives to be made more difficult by internal security processes. (You want me to remember how many passwords and processes??) Companies will continue to spend fortunes on it, as they have since the inception of the mainstream internet. It started with antivirus and firewalls - but continues to morph into a large variety of products/services as security threats evolve and the endpoint devices keep changing. It's a nightmare for IT departments. So the only area I would disagree. Companies are willing to pay plenty for top notch security. It's just that it takes many products to solve the problem - and also a large amount of spending, (not to mention increased hassle for their user) on their own internal processes, etc. - No one vendor or product solves the problem, although many of them (Symantec, RSA, etc) say they can. Most of the technology to secure data/endpoints/devices exists - for a price. But the one problem that is very difficult to solve - is how you don't overburden and piss off the people you are trying to protect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I don't think we disagree much. :) I might be more skeptical about security for even a high price - I think even for high price it's very tough to avoid holes - but overall I think we are on similar page. Edit/add: I think that a lot of high price security is through obscurity. There are very few bad guys who know z/OS, DB2, etc. to punch holes in them compared to LAMP or haha Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLValue Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I think there will be a secular trend away from established advertising forms. Duh More importantly and somewhat related I think there will be a secular trend away from established Brands in developed markets (it is actually happening already in the US). I'm not talking about luxury brands or aspirational brands like BMW, Hermes or Dior but rather consumer branded products from Kraft, Kellogg and P&G. The internet and social media have made brands less relevant as large companies are slow to follow trends and traditional advertising becomes less effective. http://www.forbes.com/sites/marketshare/2012/03/26/only-one-quarter-of-american-consumers-are-brand-loyal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I think there will be a secular trend away from established advertising forms. Duh More importantly and somewhat related I think there will be a secular trend away from established Brands in developed markets (it is actually happening already in the US). I'm not talking about luxury brands or aspirational brands like BMW, Hermes or Dior but rather consumer branded products from Kraft, Kellogg and P&G. The internet and social media have made brands less relevant as large companies are slow to follow trends and traditional advertising becomes less effective. http://www.forbes.com/sites/marketshare/2012/03/26/only-one-quarter-of-american-consumers-are-brand-loyal/ Thanks. That is an excellent observation. I think some of the things that come into play here are 1) most big brands have about the same quality so if you are going to buy it comes down to price. But many people don't want the big brands at all any more, because you can get exactly what you are looking for from smaller operations who's product quality is equal, or in many cases, greater than the big brands. The internet makes it difficult to stay in business for long with a shady sub-standard quality product. A quick search by any potential customer will quickly find your dissatisfied former customers. This works in favor of the small businesses who do produce a quality product as a quick search will also find rave reviews from many of your satisfied customers. There is no longer a need to stick with a big brand that you know well to protect yourself from shoddy products. In the past people stuck to the big brands that they were comfortable with even though they might have been over priced, bland, or not 100% what they would want, just because it was safer and easier than taking a chance with an unknown brand. This whole de-branding of the economy is going to accelerate as we become more and more networked and 3D Printing/small scale/additive manufacturing takes off. The easier it is to manufacture a quality custom product and the easier information flows, the less we need the things that we formally used to protect us such as brand loyalty or most consumer regulations. Look at the taxi regulations versus Uber and the other ride sharing companies. People want to do their own research and make their own decisions now, because it is no longer that hard to do. We are on the cusp of some major changes in just about every area of life. Big brands are just one of the many things that will go by the wayside. These manufacturing trends should also effect the shipping industry in a big way. It will become easier at some point to setup local manufacturing facilities than to ship products half way around the Earth. Shipping will be more about moving raw materials than finished products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Debranding. I am not sure. Personally, I am probably very "non-brand" person: trying to buy stuff cheap, don't watch ads, don't use social media, ad blocking, etc. But... I'll go through concrete examples: - Cars. Bought Toyota Camry used last year. No, I did not do any research to see if Hyundai or whatever would be better/cheaper. I doubt I would have been able to make informed choice even if I did the research. So pretty much a brand buy. - Cat food - we buy some mainstream brands, some small "quality" brands. Both pretty much because the cats eat them. Can't choose something else and risk they don't like it... OK, so half brand. - TVs, Blu-ray players, appliances. Just buy cheapest with OK rating and looking good... But there is not much competition... You go to Lowes or Amazon or whatever and there's only Samsung/LG/Sony (TVs), Samsung/Bosch/GE appliances. It's brand - there are no "no brand" products. - Computers - just bought a gaming PC. Went to small custom company that assembles PCs. IMHO they did a crappy job. So... a great area for debranding, but small companies do crappy job... Big companies also do crappy job (see Dell, HP reviews)... So a wash between brands and no brands - Toothpaste. I buy generic mostly, wife can only use Colgate, don't even try anything else - Shampoo. I don't care. Wife can only use very select brands, otherwise her hair and scalp all get unhappy. So... I am not sure the debranding is accelerating. IMO there's still a lot of power in brands. Yes, I think some areas will see debranding, but some are getting more branded. E.g. Apple products in almost all areas are a brand incursion into no-brand or weak-brand areas. And BTW, I think I disagree with People want to do their own research and make their own decisions now, because it is no longer that hard to do. Yeah, people do it, I do it, but it's not easy. Reviews are all spread out, they are stacked by fakes, people complain more than post positive reviews (I've bought hard drives from Seagate and WD and they all get horrible reviews, since majority of reviews are from unhappy people). It's a mess. And it possibly takes more time (and time cost in money) to do research than to grab the brand and be done... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Schwab711 Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Debranding. I am not sure. Personally, I am probably very "non-brand" person: trying to buy stuff cheap, don't watch ads, don't use social media, ad blocking, etc. But... I'll go through concrete examples: - Cars. Bought Toyota Camry used last year. No, I did not do any research to see if Hyundai or whatever would be better/cheaper. I doubt I would have been able to make informed choice even if I did the research. So pretty much a brand buy. - Cat food - we buy some mainstream brands, some small "quality" brands. Both pretty much because the cats eat them. Can't choose something else and risk they don't like it... OK, so half brand. - TVs, Blu-ray players, appliances. Just buy cheapest with OK rating and looking good... But there is not much competition... You go to Lowes or Amazon or whatever and there's only Samsung/LG/Sony (TVs), Samsung/Bosch/GE appliances. It's brand - there are no "no brand" products. - Computers - just bought a gaming PC. Went to small custom company that assembles PCs. IMHO they did a crappy job. So... a great area for debranding, but small companies do crappy job... Big companies also do crappy job (see Dell, HP reviews)... So a wash between brands and no brands - Toothpaste. I buy generic mostly, wife can only use Colgate, don't even try anything else - Shampoo. I don't care. Wife can only use very select brands, otherwise her hair and scalp all get unhappy. So... I am not sure the debranding is accelerating. IMO there's still a lot of power in brands. Yes, I think some areas will see debranding, but some are getting more branded. E.g. Apple products in almost all areas are a brand incursion into no-brand or weak-brand areas. And BTW, I think I disagree with People want to do their own research and make their own decisions now, because it is no longer that hard to do. Yeah, people do it, I do it, but it's not easy. Reviews are all spread out, they are stacked by fakes, people complain more than post positive reviews (I've bought hard drives from Seagate and WD and they all get horrible reviews, since majority of reviews are from unhappy people). It's a mess. And it possibly takes more time (and time cost in money) to do research than to grab the brand and be done... I do think money will continue to be spent on pets at rates exceeding nom GDP (anyone see USA Today facts corner mentioning that 50%+ Americans would be more likely to own a cat if the stigma wasn't there?). Also, I'm definitely a big fan of L'Oreal. It seems like some things for woman aren't worth saving $ for lesser quality. I actually think brands are becoming more valuable now than ever. Internationally they may end up being worth just as much as the US because they invoke a perception of quality or a "fair deal". It's really interesting talking to immigrants or foreign travelers/LT visitors about this. They almost feel more strongly about the quality than Americans (n = maybe 100; take with grain of salt). For me I think American brands being introduced internationally will be the secular trend to profit from. P&G/JNJ have already expanded but I like the WDFC or FICO's of the world that can become part of their culture like ours. I am often amazed at the generally world-wide fascination with American culture. You read about America not being well-liked but I feel this is sensationalized or looked at from the POV that assumes everyone loves America or that America is the best at everything. Expectations are too high in those cases. All things equal I would prefer an American company. If the FX rates ever revert to recent levels then we might see some impressive growth spurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomep Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I do think money will continue to be spent on pets at rates exceeding nom GDP (anyone see USA Today facts corner mentioning that 50%+ Americans would be more likely to own a cat if the stigma wasn't there?). Also, I'm definitely a big fan of L'Oreal. It seems like some things for woman aren't worth saving $ for lesser quality. I actually think brands are becoming more valuable now than ever. Internationally they may end up being worth just as much as the US because they invoke a perception of quality or a "fair deal". It's really interesting talking to immigrants or foreign travelers/LT visitors about this. They almost feel more strongly about the quality than Americans (n = maybe 100; take with grain of salt). For me I think American brands being introduced internationally will be the secular trend to profit from. P&G/JNJ have already expanded but I like the WDFC or FICO's of the world that can become part of their culture like ours. I am often amazed at the generally world-wide fascination with American culture. You read about America not being well-liked but I feel this is sensationalized or looked at from the POV that assumes everyone loves America or that America is the best at everything. Expectations are too high in those cases. All things equal I would prefer an American company. If the FX rates ever revert to recent levels then we might see some impressive growth spurts. ] I would think that statement is so obvious it needs no defending. Looking at the experience of people on this forum is not a good proxy for the world. We are afterall value investors so we look for value in everything. Not so for the world. With gobalization the world is coming down to less and less brands. For example, there are only two makers of large airliners, Boeing and Airbus. I think most people in the world would think twice about boarding a new airliner made by say China..... even chinese people would be nervous. There so so many examples, think of generic drugs. They are so much cheaper than brand name, yet when patents expire, brand name drugs do not go to zero! You know mainland chinese would ask doctors to mail give them perscriptions to take back home, even though the same thing is available at home. I see there main factors, one is advertising, you just are used to thinking of a certain brand when it comes to a certain product. The second is status, people in poorer countries especially want to show they are higher class by following western ways. And the third is trust, local products may be unsafe, for example think of something as simple as baby formula in china. I am a long term investor in PM, and I cannot understand really the appeal of Marlboro, I mean it is supposed to be crappy tobacco, but when I ask people why they smoke it, they just say it is the most common, the default choice. Think of processors, I've always used AMD because it is cheaper, and my personal view is that based on quality and price it should get a larger market share. But everyone knows intel. Must of the S&P 500 is exporting names, even though their products may not be superior. Is gillette really worth the price, and Coke? The only product line that is not brand dominated that I can think of right now is wines, that's a strange one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLValue Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Another megatrend is hispanic population growth in the US. This could be a very profitable trend to exploit, hispanic supermarkets, hispanic products, growth in the south, southwest - lots of opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomep Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I think the biggest trend of all for investors, and that nobody has mentioned, is that the rich are getting richer. I mean by the ratio of wealth of richer classes to poorer classes. And I presume all of us are on this forum to keep ourselves in the richer classes :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Schwab711 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Another megatrend is hispanic population growth in the US. This could be a very profitable trend to exploit, hispanic supermarkets, hispanic products, growth in the south, southwest - lots of opportunity. In general, they seem to assimilate pretty quickly and the growth is decelerating. Makes me hesitant but I've thought this as well. Univision would be the way to go if it will ever IPO. http://corporate.univision.com/2013/05/the-wall-street-journal-reports-that-with-audiences-growing-univision-seeks-bigger-share-of-marketing-dollars/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/10/media/univision-ipo/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ourkid8 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Great article, http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2015/04/11/cigarettes-and-marijuana/70746772/ Tks, S I know it was touched on before but the legalization of Marijuana I think will be a boon to big tobacco, mostly because of in place advertising ability, convenience for consumers, and in place distribution channels. Here is a copy/paste of one of my comments on another forum. "Interesting discussion regarding the MJ. I have no absolute knowledge but believe all of the branding, advertising (if allowed), distribution is in place for big tobacco to start selling MJ. I would expect a similar roll out to MarkTen. I also don't believe full legalization is that far way (less then 10 years) as 25 states already have some form of relaxed marijuana legislation. In regards to usage I have a couple thoughts. 1. If the "market" price is set by a combination of taxes, profit etc, say the price of regular cigs. Why would the home/private marijuana seller price their product much below market? ie if a pack of marijuana cigs costs $10, why would the private guy sell his product for much below? One would think he would raise his prices and get an instant increase on his margins. Hell may even charge more for a better type of bud, etc. 2. If number 1 becomes true and prices and quality similar my next thought would be convenience. Whats easier, growing your own including WAITING for it to grow initially, buying the equipment to grow it indoors in a cooler climate, drying it, rolling 20 MJ blunts/cigs...or just going to the convenience store and buying a pack and paying a little more? If you just want to party for a weekend or every once in a while are you going to grow your own? Prob not, so whats easier, finding a dealer, rolling your own, etc or just going to the gas station and buying it. My guess is the latter. A corollary would be with packs of cigs at $10.00 a pack why aren't people just rolling their own tobacco cigs? My guess is BC its inconvenient and the handful of dollars saved isnt "worth" it. 3. One would also then think a marijuana e cig would be available with a THC hit whenever one wanted. 4. My guess is once legalized more then anything it will finally open up convenience, (read no more sneaking around) and people will take advantage of it. " Internationally the marijuana legalization wave will take longer BC of all of the different countries involved. International operators such as PM, Japan tobacco, BTI, could benefit eventually. Marijuana is much more tolerated worldwide then I thought before I googled this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_country#/media/File:World-cannabis-laws.png Take a look at this and tell me Altria does not have this ready to go. ;D http://static.businessinsider.com/image/545f98d9ecad040b2463393c/image.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now