Or just a step in a required process.
I think Waste is something that they have to worry about from the standpoint of running
the business or staying compliant. But they seemed more interested in other portions of
the data. I think they'd be really interested in it at the business level for sure. Being
able to say like, you know, where, what processes might be resulting in higher cases of mold
or stuff like that.
Exactly. So I guess my experience, you know, the cultivators are pretty focused on growing
and selling the cannabis and they don't want a bunch of distractions. And so that actually
kind of opens the door for companies to come in and solve some of these problems they don't
want to deal with. So I noticed there was, you know, it seems there was a successful
waste management company in Southern California, maybe San Diego, and another one in Colorado.
So it seems, I don't know if they're dealing too much with data. They're just more just
going and picking it up.
I'm curious. What are some of the differences in dealing with metric from state to state?
I mean, you're essentially the expert here. So I'm curious. I've heard California's maybe
the more stringent state, but that's about the extent of my knowledge.
Yeah, I mean, so one of the just a really simple example is between, so I'm in Washington.
Washington's not a metric state, but we did work with customers that were in California
and Oregon. We had customers all across the states, but those were the two places that
we were looking at primarily. And one big difference was when you have, when you're
expected to tag your plants and how those are treated. And so there's between California
and Oregon, there's actually different, different growth phase definitions and different requirements
as to when you promote them through those phases and when you are required to tag a
plant. And there's also differences in whether or not it's indoor or outdoor between those
two states as well. So if you are trying to be a third party integrator that is providing
a service that is a one stop shop where you're providing extra value, in addition to trying
to say, you can just come to our stuff and we'll keep you compliant with metric. One
of the challenges that all these companies have to solve is how do they, how do they
build their software in a way that can be flexible with different workflows per state?
Because each state, given that it's still federally illegal and that each state is really
defining what legality means and what the requirements are, while they are using templates
of other states that have already created markets and managed compliance and stuff like
that, they're still unique and still unique enough that third parties really need to be
cognizant of that going into designing and building their software.
That's quite interesting, especially the different growth stages and tagging points. That would
throw a monkey wrench into things. I'm curious, do the software companies, do they essentially
approach compliance as like a second thought?
No, compliance is probably, compliance is a really big part of this for sure. There are
a lot of ramifications to not staying compliant, whether you're a cultivator or a processor
or retailer. In a lot of cases, the way that you have to integrate with state compliance
is not necessarily easy, intuitive or cost effective. Any promise that you can make as
a third party to provide making that easy, automating it, providing workflows or the
ability to have just a single place where you can do all of your work and you're not
swapping between five different pieces of software.
That's where these various cannabis SaaS companies are really competing is, can we integrate
with metric? Can we integrate with, I say we, I'm not currently there anymore, but QuickBooks,
all these different things that a business has to do to be successful, is there one place
that they can go and get all of that? You'll see some of these companies are specializing
maybe in a particular level and really focus on cultivators or really focus on manufacturing
or really focus on processing.
Or you'll see a lot of seed to sale products where you can manage your whole workflow.
It's in the name from seed to sale. And sometimes that can extend to the retail side if they're
able to be vertically integrated. And that's another thing of differing state by state.
In Washington state, you cannot have both a cultivation license and a retail license,
but in other states you can be vertically integrated from growth to sales. So again,
Washington isn't metric, so it didn't manifest itself in that way necessarily, but I could
definitely see where that would be an issue in a state that wanted to use metric for tracking,
but had set limitations on how you can vertically integrate, if you can vertically integrate
number of licenses, all that fun stuff.
It seems that because it does look at metric provides a simple user interface. I'm just
curious if people heavily use that or not because doesn't, I'm just confused because
it seems like they may just be making a cleaner wheel that people can use to enter data, but
it seems that maybe the selling factor is the ancillary thing. So what are some of
the things you see, like I guess there's billing and maybe...
Well, even just the data entry for compliance can be onerous, especially on a small farm.
If you have to have someone that's dedicated to making sure that you're staying in compliance,
that can be really expensive and can take a lot of time, both from the people that are
actually doing the cultivation, that's what I'm most familiar with, as well as the people
running the company and making sure that the data that is ending up being sent to the state
is accurate. So any way that you can automate that and provide a way that they mostly don't
have to think about it except to review and say, like, yep, that looks like what happened
on the farm today, great, go ahead and we can stay compliant, adds a tremendous amount
of value. Because now a farm manager is maybe only spending a few minutes at the end of
the day rather than their entire day. And there are pretty big consequences if you're
getting it wrong. If you're managing stuff on a whiteboard or in a notebook and you miss
something, there are consequences to falling out of compliance. And so anything that can
automate that just like anything else and provide a higher level of accuracy is definitely
of value to these cannabis farms in particular, but also processors. But you're absolutely
right. If then above and beyond that, I'm able to see what's going on in my facility
or my retail space or my farm, and above and beyond that, I'm able to integrate with QuickBooks
and manage my costs and see where do I have waste not just in my plants but in what I'm
spending money on, where can I be more efficient. All of those are additional values to the
cannabis companies, which is why I think there's such a big market and so many people entering
the cannabis SaaS space. Do you think there's a shortage or oversupply
of SaaS, the software services? There are a lot. So you can go and see what
integrators with Metric in particular, you can go and see who has been an approved integrator
for Metric in each of the states. And there are a lot of people, there are a lot of people
still trying to figure out what the right solution is. And some of them are really tailored
to specific portions of the process. Some are trying to be end to end, some are trying
to be an ERP, some of them are trying to manage customer and brand loyalty. I think because
it's still federally illegal and there are restrictions on interstate trade and stuff
like that, people can still find a market and find a niche and make some money there.
It will be interesting to see how things kind of come together and combine at the point
that it becomes federally legal and they can start operating not just as farms or as retailers
across state lines, but also as service providers. Because there are companies that operate in
multiple states, but there are restrictions on where it can be grown and where it can
be sold and all that jazz, but that will go away.
And so if now they can operate across multiple states and they've already picked a piece
of software that's valuable to them, they'll probably stick with that piece of software.
And so I think everybody's trying to find their way to be that piece of software or
one of the top five available at the point that that happens.
That's an interesting insight because like you said, you just see this mirth of businesses
just all filling these different niches and there may be a demand for that because there
are thousands of cannabis businesses.
And there's different sizes too, right? Like the needs of a mom and pop are very different
than the needs of a large MSO. So people can target that specifically just like any other
company, right? There's the difference between me trying to sell stuff on Etsy versus Amazon
trying to sell stuff on their website. And so there are opportunities there for sure
for people to meet the needs of the scale with who they're working with.
Well, I guess that brings me to the next logical question. So what are some of the major pain
points you've seen people run into with some of these software solutions?
Yeah. I mean, metric compliance is really a big one. Compliance is really, really important
for the success of the business. And everybody seems to struggle with it. It's not like literally
everybody seems to struggle with it. And so as a third party provider or as a farm, that
can be really frustrating and really painful, but is still a legal requirement.
Man, that's probably the biggest one. There's a lot of small things. Everybody has their
trade-offs and the things that they focus on and the way that they're trying to carve
out their own space. And everybody has their own approaches to how they go about doing
that from the features that they provide and the way that they do or do not simplify systems
or the way that they market themselves. And I'm not as familiar about non-metric states
like what that looks like. I'm familiar with green bits, but only kind of tangentially.
And I heard someone complain about one. So maybe it's just compliance in general and
it's not metric. It's just that metric is used in so many states. And so it's people
targeting the biggest one. But it has been very difficult to interact with them in a
consistent way for a number of reasons.
Well, I can share my insights on working with leaked data systems. So that was my primary
point of interaction with the traceability system. So in Washington, I worked with leaked
data systems. There's of course always people complaining about it. I think that may just
stem from, I'm not certain. I think maybe just being forced to use a compliance tool,
maybe you just don't want to read up about it. And it's just sort of this mysterious
force. But it's not like glamorous, but I found the API acceptable. And then the main
pain point I found was essentially transferring inventory. So from, there would always, there
was maybe be some discrepancies or miscommunication between the shipping and the receiving party.
So I'm curious in metric, are there any sort of breakdowns in when transfers happen?
So yeah, so metric, I think, so I'm not familiar. Like I said, I haven't worked directly with
the system up here in Washington, even though I'm up here. Metric has been the primary integration.
And while there's certainly some amount of resistance just to having to do a compliance
operation of any sort, there are issues with metrics specifically and their ability to
scale their ability to have version software, their ability to have consistent data. And
to your point, that becomes problematic with transfers. So if I'm a cultivator and I want
to provide my product to a processor and metric is down, or I'm not able to complete a certain
set of steps, I can't actually transfer my product to them. They might be sitting in
my lobby waiting to pick it up. And if I can't do the things that I need to do to stay compliant
for whatever reason, whether it's because of metrics specifically, or because I'm using
a third party that's struggling to integrate with them for whatever set of reasons, that
can actually be a physical obstacle to me running my business. So I think it, while
there is some resistance that is founded in just not wanting to do the process, I think
there are a lot of things that with the process are lacking that prevent people from doing
what is legally required of them and thus negatively impacting their business. There's
a lot of other critical, all of this actually you can go in and hear people give their feedback
to the state of California. So there's no secrets here. But having to tag every single
plant has an ecological impact. You don't have to do that with any other agricultural
product to my knowledge. And it's a lot of plastic. And so is that the right way to manage
it? Well, that's how metric manages it. So I think there are other things that come into
play with metrics specifically that have been making it challenging. They obviously say
that they are going to continue to work with the states to make it better. Some of those
things have absolutely improved. Some of them have not. And I think that that's been the
challenge for cannabis companies and their third party SaaS providers as well.
That's quite interesting. So when you say they've worked to make things better, does
that mean actual changes to the code or is that just more communication, training?
The claim is both.
So there are not to rag on them, but are there actual outages?
There was one in March where there was an outage for something like 17 days. You can
actually go read about it. Distru is a metric integrator and they wrote a blog about it
and gave details about how they worked around it. That's a really long time. It's a really
long time in software. It's a really long time in cannabis. It's a really long time
in cannabis software. And that would just be unacceptable just about anywhere else.
Or that there was outages here and there, or at least in my experience, reduction in
functionality significant enough that it could keep people from doing business for the day
or a couple of days at a time. But 17 days is a, I think it was something like that.
I think it was over two weeks. It's just such a long time to impact business. And then I
don't know the details of what the expectation was of the farm, but in a lot of these cases,
the expectation is that the farm is being compliant, even if they're not able to complete
what they need to do. So hopefully they made some exceptions for the outage. I know that
they made exceptions when they were having the really bad wildfires last year. They said,
we understood, do the best. We understand that you had to abandon your farm, do the
best that you can. So they have absolutely made efforts in a lot of these cases. It's
debatable as to who you talk to and what side they're on and what they've experienced specifically
as to whether or not it's been enough.
That sounds like an epic story because the cannabis industry, and you're right, 17 days,
that would be known as the great metric outage of 2020.
And it might've been specific to a couple of APIs, so it might've only been affecting
vertical integrators or people in a particular segment of that. Again, Distro wrote up a
really good article on it, and I'm forgetting a lot of the details. It was just more of
a shock at the amount of time.
I'll dig that article up because a similar thing happened, I think, back in 2019 with
the data system. So essentially they were rolling out their, I think their first, I
think they're like their one big update to the code. And it was a minor update, but I
think they maybe changed a few fields from optional to required. So that would, you know,
that there was a monkey wrench into people's third party software systems. And so while
the actual change to the API wasn't that drastic, I mean, when you really take a step back,
it caused about the similar like two week rough period. And that had really lasting
consequences. It goes back to the point we were making earlier where the cultivators,
they don't want any distractions. They just want to focus on growing and selling and anything
else is a nuisance. And so if traceability goes down, that's a nuisance. And there's
definitely going to be some parties that make some noise about that.
And like I said, there's consequences. So then, you know, now I think Washington State
sort of started to get like wet, I mean, cold feet about their traceability system. So,
you know, it's kind of hard to walk anything back, you know, once you've committed to a
statewide system. I guess I'm curious, like, what do you see as like sort of the future
traceability? Like, so say there was like, you know, federal legalization or something
like that, do you see traceability sticking around or getting upended?
Your guess is as good as mine on that one. I have no idea what to expect. There's a lot
of double speak from this administration. You know, you've seen them talk about supporting
legalization, at least in some ways, while firing interns that have ever used before.
And so who knows whether or not they'll support it? Who knows what will come out of it? I
think there are a lot of unknowns when it comes to what the, or at least people with
a lot more experience than I have, at least that can probably answer that question better
as to what to expect at the point that it becomes federally legal or when it if when
all that all that jazz.
On my end, like I work for a manufacturing company. And so we're currently in like five
different states and expanding to maybe four this year. So I think we're projecting 2024
as like a federal legal, like it's not going to be tomorrow. But that's when we're expecting
hopefully that some changes will be made. So wouldn't be this. So it's gonna be a few
years before for I think we think that often.
That's well, your boots on the ground. That's quite interesting. I'm curious, Nick, do you
interface with metric in the different states you're in? I guess you're in Oregon. So
Yeah, we use metric in Oregon, California, and we Colorado, Nevada, both use metric.
Those are the states that were were currently, currently and so they all use metric, but
we're working to start operating in Washington. So it's gonna be very, it's gonna, it's gonna
be unique to see how our company reacts to a new system. Because everybody that I know
of is only familiar with metrics. So we may, but we are the way we do things is we kind
of operate under other people's license. And so there's people that have a license that
are familiar with it that we can kind of like learn from. But yeah, it'll be interesting
to see when it comes federally legal, what happens when each state has their own like
traceability system like, like, who's gonna win out? Because like, I was gonna want to
know, like, can, I don't know, especially companies that are in multiple states are
going to get frustrated if they have to use multiple different like systems that to keep
track of things. Oh, I may have to send you the link. So there's a really interesting
podcast. I'm with RJ, and he has the CEO of metric on and it's sort of a topic they talk
about. And you can kind of tell that essentially metric would love, you know, to be adopted
at like essentially a national scale. But I just, I think even they may think that may
not really be realistic. But you can kind of tell from the conversation that, you know,
that that would be their their dream. But yeah, but I don't know. I give you your props
to you know, trying to tackle metric and leaf data systems.
Yeah, and like, so I'm not in like data. I'm currently like just an accountant. So for
a manufacturing company, but I'm switching to I'm taking learning data analytics. So
I'm looking to switch into like, I'm slowly learning that side of things. So yeah, it'll
be like currently, we use QuickBooks as accounting software. And so that doesn't integrate with
anything. And so a lot of the information that we need are just reports pull from metric.
And since we don't specifically use metric, just like to look at inventory wise, the balance
out our inventory, I think the one issue we always had is that in QuickBooks, we invoice
to the retailer name. So it may be like, you know, it's the retailer, but their license
in metric is under a different name. And so trying to like, sometimes it can be difficult
figuring out like, which license this is from if we're not specifically like using metric
on a daily basis, like an outside source is it's hard to tell like, who are they actually
selling this product to?
That kind of brings me to an interesting question. So it's a minor problem in Washington State.
Well, it's not really a problem. But from a software point of view, it's a problem. So
there'll be companies with multiple licenses. But there's maybe a minority of companies,
but some do. I'm wondering, in metric, do you have companies working with multiple licenses?
And is that like a how do you approach that? Is there confusion? Well, Nick, you may even
have multiple licenses. So just curious about how you approach that from a business slash
software point of view.
Like I think our inventory team just, they have a list of who what licenses for what
company in our in QuickBooks or like, so like we use since we don't have like an ERP system,
we actually use Google Sheets. And so we have our processes, we have all we have an order
form, which our sales reps then put in their orders on this form. And then our inventory
team has access to see that. So when someone puts up a new order, they know, like the data
is supposed to be pulled from like when it's supposed to be ready and all that. And so
what our inventory team just has a list of like names and licenses, so they can like,
if they're ever confused, they know which one to put it into metric. Because yeah, like,
if you put it in the wrong in the metric, then the company that you have to deliver
to has to reject that order because it's under the wrong name. So in in since we do deal
with the retailers, like we want to keep them happy. And the last thing we want to do is
is not make a delivery because we put it under the wrong the wrong name.
And that's essentially what I've noticed in in Washington state is everybody's trying
to keep their clients happy. And that's kind of expected of businesses. But and then the
transfers it's just like you said, you don't want to transfer to the wrong person. Then
the whole mess of having to reject incorrect transfers. So I don't know, just from my experience,
I say it just a pain point that can be helped by you know, just better. You know, more organized
more organized software, I suppose. Well, actually, I don't know, I don't really know
what the solution may be. That is a pain point.
A radical view, which, you know, obviously would maybe put me out of business is to not
have such strict regulation. You know, again, I don't know of any other agricultural product
that has to behave this way or any other you know, like tobacco, you're not tagging every
plant alcohol, you're not following it all the way in, you have to keep track of what
goes into your batch and what alcohol comes out and you have to keep track of bottles
and that sort of stuff. But it's not at the level that's required for cannabis. And I
think that's been unique to cannabis because of its legality at the moment. So it'll be
interesting to see if some of that lightens up a little bit going forward, trusting farms
a little bit more, or maybe checking in at very specific times rather than having to
track every single plant at every single stage. Maybe that's pie in the sky hopes, but I think
there will be a lot of benefits to relaxing that a little bit.
And that's what I was kind of curious about as to, you know, the future landscape because
so essentially I'm working on CanLytics, which is laboratory software. And the whole idea
was to be sort of laboratory software first and then compliance second. Because, you know,
the laboratories aren't going anywhere and you know, even if you didn't have traceability,
they would still be there. And so the software is just more laboratory focused and then meeting
the compliance. And so I'm just curious about the future because I'm almost a little worried
that, you know, maybe some companies may have built their software and business model too
much around compliance and metric because then if metric changes or would say goes away
in five years for whatever reason, then there goes your business model. There goes your
business. You know, like in Washington state, like, you know, it's real uncertain what traceability
is going to look like in five years from now. But at the same time, the companies that have
made integrating with metric easy have done quite good for themselves.
My experience has been, and maybe Nick can speak to it as well, but my experience has
been that that's usually part of their offering, but not their exclusive offering. That, you
know, if you're focusing on cultivation metric or compliance as part of your cultivation
process, but it's not the only thing, right? The rest is, you know, how do you get the
best yield or how do you get a particular profile, whether do how can you use crop steering
to get a particular outcome? Integration with QuickBooks because at the end of the day,
there still is, you know, money involved as much as we enjoy watching plants grow. How
do you develop new cultivars or, you know, does cultivar even have a meaning? There's,
you know, a lot of discussion there. So I think there's a lot more that, you know, or
if you're an ERP or if you're a seat to sale product, you're obviously providing that value
through the whole process and adding additional things onto it. I think compliance is a really
big portion of it at the moment, as you point out. I don't know of anybody that is only
doing compliance as a third party piece of software. I don't know of anybody that is
only just a wrapper around same metric. There's usually, it's usually part of an offering
that they make beyond that with, you know, whatever stage or stages they're interacting
with. It could be a very substantial portion of their business model for sure and everything
you bring up would still be a risk for them. Absolutely.
Yeah, I mean, I think that's sort of, you know, where the software space is, is, you
know, if you can make all these integrations, you can add a lot of value. And like you said,
you know, metric itself is, you know, it's essentially just a, you know, it's even, you
know, it's got its nuances, but at the end of the day, it's just the, it's not even that
large, it's just sort of a small API. So, you know, write a wrap around that and then
you set, and then that's when the other magic happens is when you start to integrate QuickBooks
and this is...
Yeah, I think I might be particularly jaded with metric. Having built services in the
past, there's some really just basic stuff that I don't see them doing that makes having
to integrate with them a lot more difficult. So, for example, and you gave a really great
example as well, which is if you do backward incompatible changes, like maybe you bump
the version of your software or the version of your service. And if you don't have version
services in the first place, that's really hard to do. And so getting all of your customers
to adopt a backward incompatible change or breaking change all at once is never successful.
Like, so version software, you know, it's a solved problem. It's been solved for 20
years or longer. But if that's something that to your point, an API with relatively few
calls should be very easy to use. But if it's changing out from underneath you in a way
that you don't get notified about, where it's not versioned, where you can't stay on an
old version long enough to migrate, that there's a deprecation or end of life plan that extends
long enough for these businesses to not only meet the needs of their current customers,
but then update to your backwards incompatible changes. Like, I think that's where both the
cannabis companies that are either integrating with it directly, and they have to update
their processes in some cases, or they might have themselves built software integrations
with metric to make their life easier. Or these third party, you know, SaaS companies
trying to provide that to their customers really find a lot of pain with it in particular.
So I know I've ragged on them a lot. I know they're trying. I know they're, you know,
talking about things that they're going to be doing to make things better. But some of
these things that are pretty standard practice in a lot of building, you know, web services,
I think would would make their life a lot easier.
And so I guess it's part of this just because I think metric maybe rolled out in, you know,
in like 20, really, the early 2010s in Colorado, is that correct?
I'm really new to the industry. I don't I don't know their history.
So I think that just from you know, what I heard the CEO talking about, it sounded like
they're open to making improvements. And so, so you hit on the backwards incompatibility.
And then I've just been, you know, working on it with integration. And it would be nice
to get some things returned from from like post requests and things like that. But like,
are there any other like concrete things that you like really see that need to be improved
like standardization or?
I mean, data consistency is a big one. If we would create objects, they may not be available
in an amount of time. And but or we might have been told that they were created. But
when we go to use them, they're not available. There are also things around the creation
itself. So we would be told to just submit the create again, which would then fail because
now then, you know, now it would have caught up and it would be consistent. So you know,
one thing that solves that is using item potent keys, like that's a pretty standard practice.
Have I already seen this request to create it? Great. I've already done it. Here's a
success response, even if I told you that it failed the last time. Shoot, there was
another one that we ran into a lot. So like, backward compatibility was one data consistency
was one item potency was very closely related to that, particularly around creation of objects.
Compatibility was one uptime. We've already talked about that. Knowing when changes were
coming and this is where I will give them a lot of credit. They have been very proactive
within the last year or so in reaching out to companies and letting them know. Or at
least getting better at it for the most part, when changes were coming. When I first started
working in the space, changes would just happen and our stuff would break and then we would
get a notice a week later that there was a change to the API. You know, that's not helpful.
So they have improved in that sense, which I think has made everyone's life easier. But
even then, one of the challenges that you're going to run into if you're providing services
or operating in multiple states, regardless of whether or not you're a cannabis company
or a third party company, is just keeping up with all the changes across all the different
states too. So that's not necessarily their fault. But how do you communicate that in
such a way that you're not that you're notifying the people who need to know in a way that's
efficient with enough time for them to adopt it and a reasonable end of life support for
the stuff that you're deprecating? It's hard. It's a hard problem that everybody has to
deal with, you know, regardless of the scale of your customers. But it's something that
I think is going to be critical for them to address.
And I agree with you. I think almost any company can improve to make improvements by improving
communication. It's one of the hardest things to get right. But it's something that is approachable
and everybody can improve. And so, like you said, just just simply letting you know that
changes are coming. I mean, that's I mean, an email and that has an enormous amount of
value. I mean, that can I mean, if it's a minor change, I mean, like you said, that
can prevent your software from breaking down and unhappy clients. And then I think things
like things like maybe backwards compatibility is maybe easier, but item potency, you know,
you have to be a little clever. Just about I mean, it's, you know, like you said, you
have to have some forethought about how you're going to set things up. But you have to, you
know, you have to do a little thinking there. So I think that may be a little trickier to
a that may be a little trickier problem to approach. But communications, the dead simple
one.
Oh, boy. That's that's exciting. Well, we're sort of nearing here to the end, if anyone
has any last few things to hit on. But I guess I just wanted to thank you, Ryan, for for
coming and joining the cannabis science meetup. And it's data science meetup. Normally, I
have a presentation or something and some data that we can chew on. And so for next
week, I'll I'll have some stuff and they may even just email or message you guys like a
handout for this week. I was going to have a company better carbon solutions come and
talk about how they're doing waste management. But there was a breakdown in communication.
So but I can still send you some material. And then also, Nick, it was awesome hearing
hearing from you about your
your experience in multiple states that is quite the
quite the hurdle to jump.
Yeah, yeah, it's a lot. I mean, because you're looking at facilities in each state. So because
you can't transport across the Alliance. So
endless questions there. So we may have to day to pick your brain about that next time.
And then Charles, as always, you know, it's always good to see you and hear your perspective
from the data science angle.
Yeah, yeah, thanks. And now that was interesting. I've written software for Ford and my wife
works in the semiconductor industry. And if you were down for two weeks, man, it would
be ugly. You'd never be back.
Well, that's basically what happened in Washington State is, I mean, leaf data systems, they
did the small update. And there was endless amount of noise about it to the point where
Washington State basically said, Okay, we're actually going to relook at the contract.
So then they basically did this whole, you know, reexamination of the contract, which
is, you know, a big deal.
So
but you know, in metric, it sounds like it may have been out of their hands, you know,
they may have been tied to the wildfires or this and that. So I'm going to do thanks for
sharing that link, I'm going to go start reading up about this metric outage.
Yeah, the wildfires were separate. That comment was mostly that I hoped that they treated
the people trying to stay compliant in the same way that they they had in the past, where
farms had struggled because of the wildfires, hopefully, they're a little bit more supportive
because of the outage.
Well, a similar thing, like in Washington, they gave they gave everybody lenience, they
said, Oh, you can just, you know, attest that you've had things tested and this and that.
But I mean, people just aren't happy when there's any disruption to their and you can't
blame them. I mean, that's, you know, that's lost revenue. So
to the I think the lesson from the day is, do what you can to keep your systems online.
And it takes some forethought.
Alright, crew. Thanks for coming today. I think I'll go ahead and conclude it here a
couple minutes early just to let Charles get to his appointment on time. And I've kind
of run out of material. But thank you all for coming. I'll try to send you some material
throughout the week and then we can touch base next week and maybe do a little forecasting
or something like that.
Sounds good. Nice meeting you all.
Awesome. It's gonna be great. Nick, Charles, until next time.
Thanks for having me.
Bye. Nice meeting you, Ryan.