I’m doing research today, and up to my neck in information. During it, I’ve been listening to the latest sell-side tropes on a couple of widely syndicated advertisements podcasts. There’s many out there. I usually don’t listen or read anything other than source documents. Philosophically, I prefer to keep the field clean……as it were.

I’ve seen (and heard) some pivots on sell-side lately which pushes the boundaries of logic and reason – and have to admit – I enjoy some mild voyeurism into sell-side re-triangulation.

A sound-byte worth mention:

This states flatly that recent softness in MSO’s and underlying asset valuation is stock manipulation by more than one actor.

Otherwise known as racketeering.

The second part of the argument put forward (in the podcast) is that if SAFE isn’t passed – the entirety of Social Justice will have been denied. People of colour and the historically disadvantaged will have been abandoned if it isn’t enacted before the end of the year (yeah, that was said too). How dare political leaders abandon ‘BLM’ and ostensibly, all the things that MLK fought for. That there’s nothing more to it than that.

It’s ballsy enough that an example of non-controlling interests in California is presented as proof. There’s no mention of WA or ORE or CO, I’m supposing they don’t serve the purpose well enough, and lobbyists/salespeople rarely desire an informed buyer of their wares.

At any rate, this is the pitch that lobbyists for MSOs are currently presenting to politicians inside the Beltway. Those lobbyists are really good at what they do as well. My suggestion to the investor is to avoid conflating MSO wish-lists (and hopes) with one’s investing strategy.

Until some regulatory certainty comes around, we’ll be listening to advertisements like this for awhile.

EDIT provided by GoBlue:  I have +30 years in commercial lending experience in Canada, USA and internationally, from small business to multinationals, from straightforward operating loans to highly structured loans.  I have designed credit structures for the market and government assisted loan programs.  I can tell you no start up will secure bank lending without providing collateral to the bank outside the business.  Banks lend on ability to repay.  Security is a “second out”.  To tout that “SAFE is required for social equity to assist SE applicants in getting loans” is hilariously off base and not in any real banking world I have seen.  Expect Social Equity Loan programs to be government funded or government supported, and even they will have to get past a credit room approval process.    Illinois launched a Social Equity Loan program via two credit unions with a goal to disburse USD 34 million in year 1. 

The preceding is the opinion of the author, and is in no way intended to be a recommendation to buy or sell any security or derivative.