立即打开
这个版块的股票正处于低点,何时反弹?

这个版块的股票正处于低点,何时反弹?

Anne Sraders 2020-03-13
投资者在去年一度热炒大麻股,但不到半年,泡沫就破了。

直到去年8月,马克·诺贝尔才意识到出了什么事。

作为金融服务公司Horizon ETFs负责ETF策略的执行副总裁,诺贝尔处于观察大麻股的极佳位置。他说:“那曾是个破了的泡沫。”该公司的Marijuana Life Sciences ETF持有Canopy Growth、Tilray和Aurora Cannabis等大麻类股票,其价格已从2018年的20多美元跌至本月的7美元左右。

去年市场热炒之际,投资者纷纷涉足新兴大麻板块。步入成年的千禧一代成为一批新的投资者,将资金投入到这些预示着增长和绿色的闪亮新股中。实际上, 去年6月Aurora Cannabis击败了科技巨头苹果公司,成为Z世代和千禧一代投资App Robinhood上交投最活跃的股票。

但还不到6个月,这些天真的投资者就看到了截然不同的景象。华尔街的担忧开始加重,原因是主要大麻公司公布了令人失望的业绩并且裁员,甚至还有一些出现了合规丑闻。砰的一声,泡沫破了。

从去年6月到年底,Aurora Cannabis和Tilray这两家主要大麻公司的股价分别暴跌70%和60%左右。加拿大大麻指数(它追踪着Tilray、Canopy和Aurora Cannabis等一线大麻上市公司)去年3月以来的跌幅也已超过77%。

这和大麻在美国越发受到欢迎而且愈加合法的局面形成了不可思议的反差。原因有很多。但有一点毋庸置疑,那就是大量财富在非常短的时间里化为乌有。

绿色管理?

最能体现过去一年中这番过山车行情的非MedMen莫属。

正在审理的一宗案件显示,MedMen前首席财务官詹姆斯·帕克指控其他高层通过非法行为迫使他在2018年11月离开了这家公司,被告包括联合创始人亚当·比尔曼和前CEO、首席品牌官安德鲁·莫德林。原告提出的非法行为包括“为[联合创始人的]个人利益挥霍公司资金”,试图炒高MedMen的股价以及“充斥着种族主义、恐同和厌恶女性的表述和诽谤”的工作文化。MedMen则否认了这些指控。

案件显示,尽管MedMen正在快速烧钱,但高层仍将公司资金用于“CEO、总裁及其家人的24小时武装贴身保护(安保)”、私人飞机……以及“多张单价数万美元的豪华定制会议长桌”。

MedMen拒绝向《财富》杂志发表评论。比尔曼在声明中否认了所有指控,称“帕克先生的煽动性指控显然是想为自己毫无价值的官司吸引眼球。”《财富》杂志未能找到比尔曼和莫德林发表进一步评论。该公司董事会也发表声明称上述指控“毫无根据”。

MedMen联合创始人兼CEO亚当·比尔曼(右二)和内华达州民主党参议员提克·塞格布卢姆(左二)。 摄影:BRYAN STEFFY/GETTY IMAGES FOR MEDMEN

无论官司进展如何,现金问题一直层出不穷。股票、金融和商业新闻网站MarketWatch发现(而且已得到该公司确认的)电子邮件显示,MedMen一直想用自家股票跟供应商交换大麻产品,原因是公司公告显示,MedMen极为糟糕的现金状况迫使他们“[修改]付款条款”。去年2月至今MedMen的市值已蒸发约90%。

但让投资者误入歧途的不只MedMen一家公司。

去年夏天,加拿大最大的大麻公司之一CannTrust爆出了监管丑闻。内部通信和电子邮件显示,该公司高层知道有未获许可的场地非法种植大麻,此事让CannTrust成为新闻焦点,其股价也因此暴跌20%以上。

更早一些,加拿大卫生部在2016年曾发现CannTrust数次违规,包括囤积了价值600万美元的产品,是许可库存价值的四倍。该部调查还发现,CannTrust的种植室有发霉问题。

去年2月至今,CannTrust已损失逾九成市值。该公司向《财富》杂志发表声明称,去年夏天以来它“一直聚焦于补救和公司治理”,而且“已经采取重大措施来改善自身的治理文化及监管合规,还对设施进行了修整。”

CannTrust Holdings去年夏天上了新闻,原因是曝光的内部通信和电子邮件显示该公司高层知道有未获许可的场地非法种植大麻,其股价因此暴跌。图片来源:GALIT RODAN—BLOOMBERG/GETTY IMAGES

加拿大会计师事务所MNP全国上市公司实务主管马鲁夫·拉扎2014年首次跟大麻公司打交道,当时他负责处理上市大麻公司的审计和会计事务。后者的管理有什么明显特征呢?具体来说就是,呈现绿色的不光是他们的产品。

拉扎对《财富》杂志回忆道,和这些年轻公司一起做会计和审计工作时,“刚开始需要手把手教的东西要多得多。”他说,整体而言团队较小的较年轻公司起步时需要较多协助并不反常,但私募市场融资问题把这些公司推到公众面前的时间可能比其他行业的公司要早。

拉扎表示:“追根寻源,许多这样的公司在四年前实际上还是初创企业。而现在,其中一些已经从一文不名发展成了市值数十亿美元的跨国集团。”

但他指出,目前这些公司的董事会结构已经“截然不同”,甚至是和四年前相比。来自《财富》500强的管理人员一直在慢慢进入部分顶尖大麻公司的董事会并“当上了司机”,Canopy Growth就是一例(饮料巨头Constellation Brands持有前者近40%股份,其多位现任和前任高层已经成为Canopy Growth的董事)。

FlowerHire专为大麻公司提供高管猎头服务,而处于有利观察位置的创始人兼CEO大卫·贝尔斯基认为,大麻公司对具有扭亏经验的高管和中低层管理人员的需求较大。FlowerHire目前正在帮助这些公司寻找投资者关系和公关主管。

拉扎说,尽管也许有些高管在紧张气氛中离了职,但许多创始人和管理团队都开始意识到自己并非带领这些公司进入下一阶段,也就是成为大型上市公司的合适人选。

收入问题

与此同时,供需问题极大的损害了取悦华尔街的法宝,也就是业绩预期。

尽管加拿大正在推动大麻合法化,但由于零售店铺数量不多,许多公司都很难推断需求和产品结构,从而造成某些产品供给过剩。在美国,大麻在联邦层面依然非法,监管气候和去年夏天的电子烟危机更是让上述现金问题雪上加霜。

去年9月,最大上市大麻公司之一Aurora Cannabis披露的业绩未能达到该公司前不久自行发布的预期,即扣除消费税后的净收入为7500-8000万美元。相反,其实际净收入约为7400万美元,比短短五周前的自身预期低了100多万美元。另一主要大麻公司Canopy Growth披露的2020年第二财务季度业绩远低于其预期。当季该公司每股亏损0.72美元左右,而预期为每股收益约0.30美元。

大麻生产商Hexo同样受到重创,原因是该公司警告称第四财季收入约为1090-1240万美元,远低于去年10月份市场预测的1850万美元,从而造成投资者争相抛售其股票。

就像大麻行业咨询机构GreenWave Advisors创始人马修·卡恩斯所说:“曾经出现了大规模炒作以及过度乐观的看法,但到了动真格的时候,这些公司却表示和预期相差很大,”从而造成多家公司的估值直线下跌。他说:“市场预期一直都很难管理,而且我觉得造成这种情况的真正原因一直都是许多公司缺乏经验。”

由于产品基本上处于法律灰色地带,许多大麻公司的另一个难题是应付它难以捉摸的税收和会计负担。

加拿大大麻公司(如Aurora Cannabis和Canopy Growth)的痛点在于他们必须在种植大麻时就估算出这些产品出售时的市场价值,这被称为“公允价值”。或者,就像拉扎总结的那样:“你实际上是要在销售产品前确认收入。”国际财务报告准则(IFRS)将大麻列入国际会计准则第41号——农业(IAS 41)之中,大麻公司必须依此估算种植作物的公允价值。

大麻公司采用这条标准的问题在于,其他生产较传统农产品(如小麦或牲畜)的公司有基于大宗商品的定价,而且可以借助期货来估算产品的公允价值,而和前者不同,拉扎说:“大麻还做不到这些。因此,你的账目中会有大量估算和判断。”虽然某个品种在某个月份或许会有确定的市场价格,但下个月它的价值可能上升或下降。这些估算和判断将各大麻公司置于不公平的环境中,拉扎说,它们并非“一一对应”。

但拉扎仍认为这种不一致并非恶意。他指出:“大多数大麻公司,乃至所有大麻公司最不愿意做的事就是违反这条农产品标准,”反而在出售产品时确认收入。但尽管为估算所种产品的价值耗费了时间和资源,拉扎说:“可惜,他们被这项标准束缚了手脚。”

作为审计人员,拉扎说他看到这些公司试图“找出连接实际数据和预期的正确桥梁”,这给审计机构MNP和管理层带来了有些混乱的情况,“所以相关做法一直受到大量批评”。

Aurora Cannabis管理层提交给美国证券交易委员会的讨论和分析文件恰好体现出了这一点,该公司披露,2016年第一季度净利润(约190万美元)“主要源于生物资产公允价值变动带来的未确认收益”,而在2016年第二和第三季度中,Aurora Cannabis的净亏损(分别为420万美元和560万美元左右)主因是公允价值变动带来的“未确认收益减少”。

这就让投资者感到困惑,原因是它表明由于公允价值难以估算,公司也许不得不披露差异很大的利润或亏损,而这要取决于他们估算的公允价值和源于大麻的收益实际上有多大的差距。对投资者或分析师来说,这会让他们在判断哪些大麻公司的生产效率最高时遇到挑战。

IFRS委员会消息人士告诉《财富》杂志,投资者已经向该机构提出,他们担心按照上述标准提供的信息不充分,因而无助于评估部分大麻公司的利润率。虽然IFRS确实有估算生物资产整体价值的标准,但并无具体条款规定怎样专门评估大麻的公允价值(而且对于大麻公司财报需要就公允价值提供哪些信息,IFRS的要求“并不是非常规范”)。这些消息人士向《财富》杂志透露,目前还没有专门针对大麻重新考量IAS 41的计划,但该委员会正准备要求公司(不只是大麻行业)披露更详细的业绩数据,包括营业利润或亏损以及非美国通用会计准则下的数字。

复杂的税收和会计

GreenWave Advisors创始人马修·卡恩斯以前从事审计工作时对此有所了解。他回忆说,有一次他到大麻公司的某处设施考察并询问一位员工(“可不是低级别员工”)该公司供审计的账目(books)由谁保管。“[那位员工]回答说,‘你指什么,是图书馆里的那种书吗?’”

卡恩斯对《财富》杂志回忆道:“我暗想,‘休斯敦,我们有麻烦了。’”不过,虽然缺乏经验或许一直是某些公司的问题所在,卡恩斯却明确指出,还有一个更大的问题正在削弱大麻公司的利润。

受产品性质,或者说禁令成本影响,部分在美国的大麻公司一直深受沉重税务负担困扰。美国大麻公司的经营遵循美国税法280E条款,而后者一直在抽取许多大麻公司的现金。

按照280E条款,与美国药品管制法规定的一类或二类药品“生意”有关的总收入无法用一般经营费用抵税。或者说,大麻公司的大多数经营费用都不可抵税(尽管某些间接成本可计为销售成本,但卡恩斯说这给部分公司带来了“挑战底线”的机会,从而有可能让它们成为美国国税局严格审查的目标)。

卡恩斯说:“甚至是在亏损状态下,它们仍不得不纳税,而且[数额可能]达到几百万美元。这抽走了本来可以再次投入这些公司的资金。”

GreenWave Advisors对市值超过5亿美元的美国上市大麻公司(不包括MedMen)的分析显示,2018日历年仅有三家公司实现盈利,而它们的实际税率各不相同,介于30%-59%之间。但基于这些公司的结构,总的来说大麻公司一般都不能通过营业亏损结转(将本年度净营业亏损计入今后年份的净利润中,旨在减轻税收负担)来抵补今后利润,从而享受税收优惠。

GreenWave Advisors分析了8家上市的跨州大麻公司,后者从2018年第一季度到2019年第三季度的整体净亏损约为5.42亿美元。在这8家公司中,2019年前三季度未出现净营业亏损的只有1家,GreenWave Advisors估算它们损失的净营业亏损抵税额一共为1.145亿美元左右(简而言之,在最坏情况下,这些大麻公司失去了逾1.14亿美元的抵税机会)。

大麻股前景如何?

由此产生的影响是什么呢?那就是一些较大的大麻公司大量裁员。仅在过去几个月,多家大麻公司一共裁掉了约2000人。

处境艰难的MedMen去年11月裁员190人。今年2月,Tilray表示将裁员10%左右,以便降低成本并进一步向盈利靠拢。当月,Aurora Cannabis也采取了同样的行动,裁员约500人。Canopy、CannTrust、MedMen和Aurora Cannabis都更换了CEO。

拉扎认为这和上市初创公司类似:“实际情况是,股市上发生的许多事情通常都会出现在私募市场中。你可以想想硅谷,它的生态系统为多少科技公司提供资金呢?数以千计。在这些公司中,最终活下来的有多少呢?”

2019年的收入预期过于乐观(而且往往未能实现),这种情况可能不会延续到2020年。FlowerHire首席收入官斯隆·巴伯指出:“[投资者]会回来拍着他们的肩膀说,‘不,骗我一次,丢人的是你。骗我两次,丢人的是我。’”

不过,从经营角度讲,MNP的拉扎认为许多大麻公司或许都刚刚“进入第二局”。晨星分析师克里斯托弗·英顿建议,大麻股投资者需要将自己视为风投人士,他说:“他们不要考虑一年以后的情况,而是要想想市场[潜力]。”

专家们都看到了增长潜力。拉扎相信许多大麻公司最终都会实现自身设定的目标,但他也指出,这“需要时间和耐心,而正如我们所知,股市并不总是有耐心。”新兴行业中数十家有希望的初创公司在高速发展前都曾步履维艰,就像它们一样,并不是所有大麻公司都处在同一起跑线上。

拉扎说:“整体上这些公司都在股市环境下起起落落。并不是所有公司都能生存下来。”

Horizon ETFs的大麻ETF仍未复苏。诺贝尔说,这只ETF目前价格为7美元,比2017年刚上市的价格低3美元。但诺贝尔并未完全放弃希望。他说自己仍将长期投身这一领域,而且“已经得到体现的悲观失望比上升空间大”。

换句话说就是,这个板块目前或许处于低点。但很难说,总有可能很快出现高点。(财富中文网)

译者:Charlie

审校:夏林

直到去年8月,马克·诺贝尔才意识到出了什么事。

作为金融服务公司Horizon ETFs负责ETF策略的执行副总裁,诺贝尔处于观察大麻股的极佳位置。他说:“那曾是个破了的泡沫。”该公司的Marijuana Life Sciences ETF持有Canopy Growth、Tilray和Aurora Cannabis等大麻类股票,其价格已从2018年的20多美元跌至本月的7美元左右。

去年市场热炒之际,投资者纷纷涉足新兴大麻板块。步入成年的千禧一代成为一批新的投资者,将资金投入到这些预示着增长和绿色的闪亮新股中。实际上, 去年6月Aurora Cannabis击败了科技巨头苹果公司,成为Z世代和千禧一代投资App Robinhood上交投最活跃的股票。

但还不到6个月,这些天真的投资者就看到了截然不同的景象。华尔街的担忧开始加重,原因是主要大麻公司公布了令人失望的业绩并且裁员,甚至还有一些出现了合规丑闻。砰的一声,泡沫破了。

从去年6月到年底,Aurora Cannabis和Tilray这两家主要大麻公司的股价分别暴跌70%和60%左右。加拿大大麻指数(它追踪着Tilray、Canopy和Aurora Cannabis等一线大麻上市公司)去年3月以来的跌幅也已超过77%。

这和大麻在美国越发受到欢迎而且愈加合法的局面形成了不可思议的反差。原因有很多。但有一点毋庸置疑,那就是大量财富在非常短的时间里化为乌有。

绿色管理?

最能体现过去一年中这番过山车行情的非MedMen莫属。

正在审理的一宗案件显示,MedMen前首席财务官詹姆斯·帕克指控其他高层通过非法行为迫使他在2018年11月离开了这家公司,被告包括联合创始人亚当·比尔曼和前CEO、首席品牌官安德鲁·莫德林。原告提出的非法行为包括“为[联合创始人的]个人利益挥霍公司资金”,试图炒高MedMen的股价以及“充斥着种族主义、恐同和厌恶女性的表述和诽谤”的工作文化。MedMen则否认了这些指控。

案件显示,尽管MedMen正在快速烧钱,但高层仍将公司资金用于“CEO、总裁及其家人的24小时武装贴身保护(安保)”、私人飞机……以及“多张单价数万美元的豪华定制会议长桌”。

MedMen拒绝向《财富》杂志发表评论。比尔曼在声明中否认了所有指控,称“帕克先生的煽动性指控显然是想为自己毫无价值的官司吸引眼球。”《财富》杂志未能找到比尔曼和莫德林发表进一步评论。该公司董事会也发表声明称上述指控“毫无根据”。

无论官司进展如何,现金问题一直层出不穷。股票、金融和商业新闻网站MarketWatch发现(而且已得到该公司确认的)电子邮件显示,MedMen一直想用自家股票跟供应商交换大麻产品,原因是公司公告显示,MedMen极为糟糕的现金状况迫使他们“[修改]付款条款”。去年2月至今MedMen的市值已蒸发约90%。

但让投资者误入歧途的不只MedMen一家公司。

去年夏天,加拿大最大的大麻公司之一CannTrust爆出了监管丑闻。内部通信和电子邮件显示,该公司高层知道有未获许可的场地非法种植大麻,此事让CannTrust成为新闻焦点,其股价也因此暴跌20%以上。

更早一些,加拿大卫生部在2016年曾发现CannTrust数次违规,包括囤积了价值600万美元的产品,是许可库存价值的四倍。该部调查还发现,CannTrust的种植室有发霉问题。

去年2月至今,CannTrust已损失逾九成市值。该公司向《财富》杂志发表声明称,去年夏天以来它“一直聚焦于补救和公司治理”,而且“已经采取重大措施来改善自身的治理文化及监管合规,还对设施进行了修整。”

CannTrust Holdings去年夏天上了新闻,原因是曝光的内部通信和电子邮件显示该公司高层知道有未获许可的场地非法种植大麻,其股价因此暴跌。

加拿大会计师事务所MNP全国上市公司实务主管马鲁夫·拉扎2014年首次跟大麻公司打交道,当时他负责处理上市大麻公司的审计和会计事务。后者的管理有什么明显特征呢?具体来说就是,呈现绿色的不光是他们的产品。

拉扎对《财富》杂志回忆道,和这些年轻公司一起做会计和审计工作时,“刚开始需要手把手教的东西要多得多。”他说,整体而言团队较小的较年轻公司起步时需要较多协助并不反常,但私募市场融资问题把这些公司推到公众面前的时间可能比其他行业的公司要早。

拉扎表示:“追根寻源,许多这样的公司在四年前实际上还是初创企业。而现在,其中一些已经从一文不名发展成了市值数十亿美元的跨国集团。”

但他指出,目前这些公司的董事会结构已经“截然不同”,甚至是和四年前相比。来自《财富》500强的管理人员一直在慢慢进入部分顶尖大麻公司的董事会并“当上了司机”,Canopy Growth就是一例(饮料巨头Constellation Brands持有前者近40%股份,其多位现任和前任高层已经成为Canopy Growth的董事)。

FlowerHire专为大麻公司提供高管猎头服务,而处于有利观察位置的创始人兼CEO大卫·贝尔斯基认为,大麻公司对具有扭亏经验的高管和中低层管理人员的需求较大。FlowerHire目前正在帮助这些公司寻找投资者关系和公关主管。

拉扎说,尽管也许有些高管在紧张气氛中离了职,但许多创始人和管理团队都开始意识到自己并非带领这些公司进入下一阶段,也就是成为大型上市公司的合适人选。

收入问题

与此同时,供需问题极大的损害了取悦华尔街的法宝,也就是业绩预期。

尽管加拿大正在推动大麻合法化,但由于零售店铺数量不多,许多公司都很难推断需求和产品结构,从而造成某些产品供给过剩。在美国,大麻在联邦层面依然非法,监管气候和去年夏天的电子烟危机更是让上述现金问题雪上加霜。

去年9月,最大上市大麻公司之一Aurora Cannabis披露的业绩未能达到该公司前不久自行发布的预期,即扣除消费税后的净收入为7500-8000万美元。相反,其实际净收入约为7400万美元,比短短五周前的自身预期低了100多万美元。另一主要大麻公司Canopy Growth披露的2020年第二财务季度业绩远低于其预期。当季该公司每股亏损0.72美元左右,而预期为每股收益约0.30美元。

大麻生产商Hexo同样受到重创,原因是该公司警告称第四财季收入约为1090-1240万美元,远低于去年10月份市场预测的1850万美元,从而造成投资者争相抛售其股票。

就像大麻行业咨询机构GreenWave Advisors创始人马修·卡恩斯所说:“曾经出现了大规模炒作以及过度乐观的看法,但到了动真格的时候,这些公司却表示和预期相差很大,”从而造成多家公司的估值直线下跌。他说:“市场预期一直都很难管理,而且我觉得造成这种情况的真正原因一直都是许多公司缺乏经验。”

由于产品基本上处于法律灰色地带,许多大麻公司的另一个难题是应付它难以捉摸的税收和会计负担。

加拿大大麻公司(如Aurora Cannabis和Canopy Growth)的痛点在于他们必须在种植大麻时就估算出这些产品出售时的市场价值,这被称为“公允价值”。或者,就像拉扎总结的那样:“你实际上是要在销售产品前确认收入。”国际财务报告准则(IFRS)将大麻列入国际会计准则第41号——农业(IAS 41)之中,大麻公司必须依此估算种植作物的公允价值。

大麻公司采用这条标准的问题在于,其他生产较传统农产品(如小麦或牲畜)的公司有基于大宗商品的定价,而且可以借助期货来估算产品的公允价值,而和前者不同,拉扎说:“大麻还做不到这些。因此,你的账目中会有大量估算和判断。”虽然某个品种在某个月份或许会有确定的市场价格,但下个月它的价值可能上升或下降。这些估算和判断将各大麻公司置于不公平的环境中,拉扎说,它们并非“一一对应”。

但拉扎仍认为这种不一致并非恶意。他指出:“大多数大麻公司,乃至所有大麻公司最不愿意做的事就是违反这条农产品标准,”反而在出售产品时确认收入。但尽管为估算所种产品的价值耗费了时间和资源,拉扎说:“可惜,他们被这项标准束缚了手脚。”

作为审计人员,拉扎说他看到这些公司试图“找出连接实际数据和预期的正确桥梁”,这给审计机构MNP和管理层带来了有些混乱的情况,“所以相关做法一直受到大量批评”。

Aurora Cannabis管理层提交给美国证券交易委员会的讨论和分析文件恰好体现出了这一点,该公司披露,2016年第一季度净利润(约190万美元)“主要源于生物资产公允价值变动带来的未确认收益”,而在2016年第二和第三季度中,Aurora Cannabis的净亏损(分别为420万美元和560万美元左右)主因是公允价值变动带来的“未确认收益减少”。

这就让投资者感到困惑,原因是它表明由于公允价值难以估算,公司也许不得不披露差异很大的利润或亏损,而这要取决于他们估算的公允价值和源于大麻的收益实际上有多大的差距。对投资者或分析师来说,这会让他们在判断哪些大麻公司的生产效率最高时遇到挑战。

IFRS委员会消息人士告诉《财富》杂志,投资者已经向该机构提出,他们担心按照上述标准提供的信息不充分,因而无助于评估部分大麻公司的利润率。虽然IFRS确实有估算生物资产整体价值的标准,但并无具体条款规定怎样专门评估大麻的公允价值(而且对于大麻公司财报需要就公允价值提供哪些信息,IFRS的要求“并不是非常规范”)。这些消息人士向《财富》杂志透露,目前还没有专门针对大麻重新考量IAS 41的计划,但该委员会正准备要求公司(不只是大麻行业)披露更详细的业绩数据,包括营业利润或亏损以及非美国通用会计准则下的数字。

复杂的税收和会计

GreenWave Advisors创始人马修·卡恩斯以前从事审计工作时对此有所了解。他回忆说,有一次他到大麻公司的某处设施考察并询问一位员工(“可不是低级别员工”)该公司供审计的账目(books)由谁保管。“[那位员工]回答说,‘你指什么,是图书馆里的那种书吗?’”

卡恩斯对《财富》杂志回忆道:“我暗想,‘休斯敦,我们有麻烦了。’”不过,虽然缺乏经验或许一直是某些公司的问题所在,卡恩斯却明确指出,还有一个更大的问题正在削弱大麻公司的利润。

受产品性质,或者说禁令成本影响,部分在美国的大麻公司一直深受沉重税务负担困扰。美国大麻公司的经营遵循美国税法280E条款,而后者一直在抽取许多大麻公司的现金。

按照280E条款,与美国药品管制法规定的一类或二类药品“生意”有关的总收入无法用一般经营费用抵税。或者说,大麻公司的大多数经营费用都不可抵税(尽管某些间接成本可计为销售成本,但卡恩斯说这给部分公司带来了“挑战底线”的机会,从而有可能让它们成为美国国税局严格审查的目标)。

卡恩斯说:“甚至是在亏损状态下,它们仍不得不纳税,而且[数额可能]达到几百万美元。这抽走了本来可以再次投入这些公司的资金。”

GreenWave Advisors对市值超过5亿美元的美国上市大麻公司(不包括MedMen)的分析显示,2018日历年仅有三家公司实现盈利,而它们的实际税率各不相同,介于30%-59%之间。但基于这些公司的结构,总的来说大麻公司一般都不能通过营业亏损结转(将本年度净营业亏损计入今后年份的净利润中,旨在减轻税收负担)来抵补今后利润,从而享受税收优惠。

GreenWave Advisors分析了8家上市的跨州大麻公司,后者从2018年第一季度到2019年第三季度的整体净亏损约为5.42亿美元。在这8家公司中,2019年前三季度未出现净营业亏损的只有1家,GreenWave Advisors估算它们损失的净营业亏损抵税额一共为1.145亿美元左右(简而言之,在最坏情况下,这些大麻公司失去了逾1.14亿美元的抵税机会)。

大麻股前景如何?

由此产生的影响是什么呢?那就是一些较大的大麻公司大量裁员。仅在过去几个月,多家大麻公司一共裁掉了约2000人。

处境艰难的MedMen去年11月裁员190人。今年2月,Tilray表示将裁员10%左右,以便降低成本并进一步向盈利靠拢。当月,Aurora Cannabis也采取了同样的行动,裁员约500人。Canopy、CannTrust、MedMen和Aurora Cannabis都更换了CEO。

拉扎认为这和上市初创公司类似:“实际情况是,股市上发生的许多事情通常都会出现在私募市场中。你可以想想硅谷,它的生态系统为多少科技公司提供资金呢?数以千计。在这些公司中,最终活下来的有多少呢?”

2019年的收入预期过于乐观(而且往往未能实现),这种情况可能不会延续到2020年。FlowerHire首席收入官斯隆·巴伯指出:“[投资者]会回来拍着他们的肩膀说,‘不,骗我一次,丢人的是你。骗我两次,丢人的是我。’”

不过,从经营角度讲,MNP的拉扎认为许多大麻公司或许都刚刚“进入第二局”。晨星分析师克里斯托弗·英顿建议,大麻股投资者需要将自己视为风投人士,他说:“他们不要考虑一年以后的情况,而是要想想市场[潜力]。”

专家们都看到了增长潜力。拉扎相信许多大麻公司最终都会实现自身设定的目标,但他也指出,这“需要时间和耐心,而正如我们所知,股市并不总是有耐心。”新兴行业中数十家有希望的初创公司在高速发展前都曾步履维艰,就像它们一样,并不是所有大麻公司都处在同一起跑线上。

拉扎说:“整体上这些公司都在股市环境下起起落落。并不是所有公司都能生存下来。”

Horizon ETFs的大麻ETF仍未复苏。诺贝尔说,这只ETF目前价格为7美元,比2017年刚上市的价格低3美元。但诺贝尔并未完全放弃希望。他说自己仍将长期投身这一领域,而且“已经得到体现的悲观失望比上升空间大”。

换句话说就是,这个板块目前或许处于低点。但很难说,总有可能很快出现高点。(财富中文网)

译者:Charlie

审校:夏林

It wasn’t until August that Mark Noble realized what was happening.

As the executive vice president of ETF strategy at Horizon ETFs, Noble had a perfect perch from which to watch cannabis stocks. "This was a bubble that burst," he says. Horizon's Marijuana Life Sciences ETF, which holds names like Canopy Growth, Tilray, and Aurora Cannabis, plunged from over $20 in 2018 to around $7 this month.

Last year, investors clamored to buy into the burgeoning cannabis industry in a moment of market zeitgeist. A new kind of investor was coming of age—millennials poured money into the flashy new stocks that promised growth and green. In fact, back in June, the most popular trade on Gen Z and millennial investment app Robinhood was Aurora Cannabis—beating out tech giant Apple.

But within six months those wide-eyed investors were looking at an entirely different picture. Wall Street grew weary as major cannabis companies reported disappointing earnings, laid off employees, and even in some cases, faced compliance scandals. Pop! The bubble had burst.

Big names like Aurora and Tilray plunged around 70% and 60% respectively from June to the end the year. The Canadian Marijuana Index (which tracks some of the biggest public pot companies like Tilray, Canopy, and Aurora) is down over 77% from March of last year.

It's an incredible disconnect with the widening popularity and spreading legalization of pot in the U.S. And the catalysts are many. But one thing is for sure: in a very short time, a lot of money went up in smoke.

Green management?

Perhaps no company better illustrates the wild ride of the past year better than MedMen.

According to an ongoing lawsuit, James Parker, the former CFO at MedMen, alleged that executive management including co-founders Adam Bierman and Andrew Modlin, the firm’s ex-CEO and chief brand officer, respectively, were engaged in unlawful behaviors that forced Parker's ousting in November of 2018. The suit alleges that the unlawful behavior included "profligate spending of company funds for [the co-founders’] own personal benefit," attempts to buoy MedMen’s stock, and a work culture "replete with racial, homophobic and misogynistic epithets and slurs," Parker's suit claims. The allegations have been denied by MedMen.

According to the suit, executives at MedMen spent company money on "24-hour armed Executive Protection (security) for the CEO, President, and their families," private jets, ... and "tens of thousands of dollars apiece on multiple extravagant custom conference room tables," despite burning cash at a rapid rate, according to the lawsuit.

MedMen declined to comment to Fortune. In a statement, Bierman denied the allegations, stating that "Mr. Parker’s inflammatory allegations are a transparent attempt to gain attention for his meritless lawsuit." Fortune was not able to reach Bierman or Modlin for further comment. MedMen's board also issued a statement calling the allegations "baseless."

Regardless of the legal situation, cash problems abound. An email viewed by MarketWatch shows (and the company confirmed) MedMen has been trying to offer stock as payment to vendors for cannabis products, as the company's dire cash situation has prompted them to "[modify] payment terms," per a statement from MedMen. Since February of last year, the stock has shed about 90% of its market cap.

But MedMen wasn't alone in giving investors a bad trip.

Over the summer, a regulatory scandal unraveled at one of Canada's biggest cannabis companies, CannTrust. The company made headlines last summer when internal communications and emails came to light showing members of the company's C-suite were aware that cannabis was being illegally grown in unlicensed rooms—sending the stock plummeting over 20% when news broke.

That was preceded in 2016 by several compliance violations with Health Canada—including having $6 million worth of seized product in its vault at the time, four times more than it was licensed to have, and having mold in the grow rooms—according to inspection findings by Health Canada.

Since February of last year, CannTrust has lost over 90% of its market cap. CannTrust told Fortune in a statement that since the summer, the company is "focused on remediation and governance activities," and that "significant steps have been taken to improve the company’s corporate culture and regulatory compliance and remediate its facilities."

When he first started working with cannabis companies in 2014, Maruf Raza, the national director of the public companies practice at Canadian accounting firm MNP, was tasked with handling audits and accounting for public cannabis companies. What stood out about the management? Namely, their products weren't the only thing that was green.

"Initially, there was a lot more hand holding," working through accounting and audits with young companies, Raza recounts to Fortune. He says it's not unusual for younger companies in general with smaller teams to need more assistance at the beginning, but that challenges in raising capital in the private markets had pushed these companies into the public eye perhaps sooner than others in different industries would be pressured to.

"The genesis of these companies is that a lot of [them] were effectively startups four years ago," says Raza. "They’ve gone from zero to now, in some cases, multi-national companies with multi-billion dollar market caps."

But now, Raza says that the board composition at these companies is "night and day" from even four years ago. Professionals from Fortune 500 companies have been slowly filling seats at some of the top cannabis companies and "driving the bus," like at Canopy Growth (where many of the seats are filled by current or former executives at beverage giant Constellation Brands, which owns a nearly 40% stake in the company).

From the vantage point of David Belsky, the founder and CEO of FlowerHire, a cannabis-specific executive search and staffing company, there's more demand from cannabis companies for C-suites and lower management with turnaround experience. FlowerHire is now helping companies fill roles in investor relations and communications.

Although there may have been some tense C-suite departures, Raza says, many founders and management teams are realizing on their own that they are not the right teams to lead companies into their next phase as large public companies.

The revenue problem

Meanwhile, supply and demand issues have wreaked havoc on that Holy Grail of pleasing Wall Street—earnings estimates.

Despite the roll-out of legal marijuana in Canada, many companies struggled to gauge demand and product mix amid a lackluster number of retail stores in Canada, resulting in an oversupply of product for some. And in the U.S., where cannabis is still federally illegal, the regulatory climate and a vaping crisis last summer only exacerbated cash problems.

Back in September, one of the biggest names in the public markets, Aurora Cannabis, missed its own recently issued guidance for its 4th quarter and full year earnings, estimating roughly $75 million to $80 million USD in net revenue after accounting for net excise taxes paid. Instead, the company posted roughly $74 million in net revenue—an over $1 million miss from guidance it provided merely five weeks before reporting. Canopy Growth, another heavy hitter in the space, wildly missed earnings estimates in its 2nd fiscal quarter for 2020—reporting a loss of about $0.72 in USD per share versus roughly $0.30 estimates.

Cannabis producer Hexo was also hit hard after warning of a fiscal 4th quarter revenue miss of $10.9 million in USD to roughly $12.4 million, well below Street estimates of $18.5 million in October—sending investors into a frenzied sell-off.

As GreenWave Advisors founder Matthew Karnes (who describes himself as someone who isn't "ra, ra, ra, pot, pot, pot") tells it, "There was a big hype and sense of over-exuberance, but when push came to shove, and these companies reported, they didn’t come near it," sending valuations into a nosedive for many. "Managing Street expectations has been challenging, and I think that’s really been driven by lack of experience throughout many of these organizations," he says.

Another challenge for many cannabis companies has been navigating the arcane tax and accounting burdens for a product that largely falls into a legal grey area.

A sore spot for Canada-based cannabis companies (like Aurora Cannabis and Canopy Growth) is that they are required to estimate the market value of their products when they're sold while they are still growing them—called "fair value." Or, as Raza surmises, "you’re effectively recognizing income before you’re selling the product." Cannabis companies are required to fair value their growing plants as biological assets under the International Accounting Standard 41 Agriculture (IAS 41), by the International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS).

The problem when this standard is applied to cannabis companies is that, unlike other companies producing more traditional agricultural goods (like wheat or cattle) that have commodity-based pricing and futures to help them fair value their product, "cannabis is not there yet," Raza says. "As a result, you have a lot of estimates and judgement that’s gone into some of the accounting." While one strain may go to market for a certain price one month, it might be worth more or less the next. These estimates and judgement have created a somewhat uneven playing field across different pot companies—it's not "apples to apples," says Raza.

But Raza maintains these inconsistencies aren't nefarious: "Most of these cannabis companies, if not all, would like nothing more than to not apply this agricultural standard," he argues, and instead recognize the income when they sell it. But despite the drain on time and resources estimating the value of companies' growing products, "Unfortunately they're handcuffed by the standard," Raza says.

As an auditor, MNP's Raza says he sees these companies trying to "figure out what the right bridge for the actual versus the projected [is]," which has made things a bit messy for MNP as auditors and for management, "so there’s been a lot of criticism about the math involved."

Case in point: in Aurora Cannabis' Management's Discussion & Analysis filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company disclosed that, in the quarter ending in March 2016, Aurora's net income (of roughly $1.9 million in USD) was "primarily attributable to the unrealized gain on the changes in fair value of biological assets," whereas in the quarters ended September 30, 2016 and June 30, 2016, the net losses (of roughly $4.2 million in USD and $5.6 million respectively) were primary due to a "decrease in unrealized gain" on changes in fair value.

This is a frustration point for investors because it shows that, due to the challenges of estimating fair value, companies might have to substantially report different income or losses depending on how their fair value estimates actually match up with what they make off the plant—making it a challenge for investors or analysts to determine which cannabis companies have the most efficient production (and which are performing the best).

Sources at the IFRS Board tell Fortune that investors have raised concerns with the Board regarding insufficient information provided through the standard to help assess profit margins of some of these companies. While the IFRS does have standards for fair valuing biological assets en masse, there is no specific literature addressing how to fair value cannabis in particular (and their requirements of what information cannabis companies need to provide in their income statements regarding fair value are "not very prescriptive"). Sources at the IFRS Board tell Fortune there are currently no plans to reexamine IAS 41 in regard to cannabis specifically, but the Board is in the process of proposing to require companies (not limited to the cannabis industry) to report more detailed financial performance, including operating profit or loss and non-GAAP transparency.

Tax and accounting complexity

GreenWave Advisors' Matthew Karnes has seen a thing or two in his day as a former auditor.

He recalls touring a pot facility once and asking an employee ("not just a low-level employee") who kept the company's books for auditing. "[The employee] is like, 'what do you mean, like the library books?'"

"So I’m thinking to myself, 'Houston, we have a problem,'" Karnes recounts to Fortune. But while inexperience may have been the thorn in the side for certain companies, he asserts there's a bigger issue—altogether above-board—that's hurting cannabis companies' bottom lines.

Some pot companies in the U.S. have been hit hard with massive tax burdens due to the nature of their product—in other words, the cost of prohibition. U.S. pot companies operate under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Service tax code—which has been draining many pot companies of cash.

Under Section 280E, businesses aren't able to deduct ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the "trafficking" of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. In other words: most of the operating expenses for pot companies are nondeductible (although certain overhead costs can be allocated to cost of sales, but Karnes says this provides an opportunity for some companies to "push the envelope," which could make them targets for IRS scrutiny).

"Even if they’re suffering losses, they still have to pay taxes—[which could be] millions of dollars. That’s a drain on cash that would otherwise be [deployed] as reinvestment into these companies," says Karnes.

According to an analysis by GreenWave Advisors of public U.S. cannabis companies with a market cap of over $500 million (with the exception of MedMen), tax rates among the only three companies that were profitable in calendar year 2018 had varying effective tax rates, from 30% to 59%—but generally, depending on how the companies are structured, the tax benefit of operating loss carryforwards (which are intended to reduce tax liability by applying the current year's net operating loss to future years' net income) for cannabis companies are generally not permitted to offset future income.

The eight publicly-held multi-state operators (MSOs) GreenWave examined from the 1st quarter of 2018 through the 3rd quarter of 2019 collectively incurred net losses of roughly $542 million. And of those eight companies, all but one of which was operating at a net loss for the first nine months of 2019, GreenWave Advisors' analysis estimates a total loss of around $114.5 million of lost net operation loss tax credits. (In short: in the worst case scenario, these cannabis companies are missing out on over $114 million in tax credits).

What's next for cannabis stocks?

The fallout? Significant job cuts at some of the bigger cannabis companies. In the past several months alone, the sector has seen around 2,000 jobs cut across various companies.

Embattled MedMen cut 190 jobs in November. In February, Tilray announced it would cut about 10% of its staff in a ploy to reduce costs and inch closer to profitability. That same month, Aurora Cannabis followed suit, cutting about 500 jobs. Canopy, CannTrust, MedMen and Aurora have all replaced their CEOs.

Raza likens it to public startups: "The reality is, a lot of the stuff that’s happening in the public markets normally plays itself out in the private market. When you think of Silicon Valley, how many tech companies does the Silicon Valley ecosystem fund? Thousands. Of those companies, how many ultimately survive?”

The overenthusiastic (and often missed) revenue estimates of 2019 will likely no longer fly in 2020 —"[Investors] are going to come back in with a chip on their shoulder, saying, ‘no, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,'" FlowerHire's chief revenue officer Sloane Barbour notes.

Still, from an operational standpoint, MNP's Raza thinks many of these companies may be only in "the second inning." And Morningstar's Kristoffer Inton suggests cannabis investors need to think of themselves as venture capitalists—"They don’t think about one year’s time—they think about the market [potential]," he says.

That growth potential is there, experts say. MNP's Raza believes many will end up getting to where they said they would, but it's a "function of time and patience, and as we know, public markets are not always going to be patient," he contends. But just as dozens of hopeful startups in nascent industries have choked out before hitting their stride, not all cannabis companies are created equal.

"The entire rise and fall of these companies is being played out in a public setting," Raza says. "And not all of them are going to survive."

Horizon's marijuana ETF still hasn't recovered. Noble says that at $7, the ETF is trading at $3 less than the price it began trading in 2017. But Noble hasn't entirely lost faith. He says he remains committed long term to the potential of the space, and that "there’s more doom and gloom than upside priced in."

In other words, the sector may currently be at a low. But you never know, there could always be another high around the corner.

热读文章
热门视频
扫描二维码下载财富APP