I’ve been curious lately what kind of demand there is for the chain length homologs of CBN (CBNP, CBNV, etc.). Does anyone make or buy/sell any of these at any considerable scale?
My group has long had an effective synthesis for CBN from very inexpensive starting materials, allowing us to make CBN cheaper than the next guy - and the same synthesis is viable for any chain length. On my own, I consider that work low priority - but it is work we would consider performing on a contract manufacture basis if there are parties interested in those cannabinoids.
Also, not sure what category this thread would belong in so I kinda just guessed and added some tags - move if necessary?
Depends on which homolog. We can synthesize CBNx from CBDx or THCx. So, for CBN and CBNV the cheapest available starting material is naturally occuring, hemp derived CBD and CBDV isolate, respectively. It would be very expensive to synthesize CBD or CBDV compared to what the plant already produces, and it’s readily available on the market.
There is not much in the ways of a natural reservoir of CBDP, CBDH, THCP, THCH from hemp. So the cheapest available starting materials for CBNP or CBNH would probably be synthetic. Does that make sense?
I mean, the real question you should probably be asking, is do these compounds actually do anything? Why seek consumer demand for something before actually knowing if they have any real medical/recreational potential? I understand everyones gotta keep the lights on but it just seems to be a backward/purely money based approach.
I’m describing contract manufacturing/synthesis. Like any other API contract manufacturer, I’m not equipped to do clinicals or whatever else you’re describing. If someone WANTS those molecules, we can MAKE those molecules for them. If someone has a demand for whatever reason then we can perform the synthesis that they cannot. That is the model plain and simple.
We synthesize things. I’m asking if anyone has a demand for my group to perform a specific synthesis. If the answer is "no, because no one wants that molecule or “that molecule has no application” those are reasonable responses - but its also not necessarily in my scope of work ponder what you’re asking me to ponder.
Again the question is - does anyone know of a reason to make these molecules, or would anyone like us to make these molecules for them?
Unfortunately, that’s probably too small a scale for us to justify running a batch. Our smallest reactor is 5L which is something like…1-1.5kg of starting material, which would produce something like 700-1000g of final product post distillation/crystallization. Our smallest distillation equipment is also 5L, so distilling just 100-200g wouldn’t be very effective. If we were to run a batch that small, I’d probably have to charge something exorbitant.
I reckon our minimum quantity to justify running a batch would be at least 1kg of final product, which corresponds to 1.7-2.0kg of starting material.
With so many cannabinoid options already, you have to attack a market gap/need somehow. Will any of these put you to sleep or wake you up better than what’s currently available? Are any of these pleasantly psychoactive?
Realistically you have to make and sample these compounds before you can sell anyone on it. Usually costs something like $80k to synthesize the first kilogram of a new cannabinoid and that’s a very difficult sell to someone who’s never tried it.
Agreed, which is why I’m not intending on shouldering the cost of making these kilograms unless there is already a demand, and on a contract manufacture basis. It’s not my forte to do a sales job on anyone. I’m not trying to convince anyone this is the molecule(s) for them, or make a bold (high liability) claim about efficacy. What I am doing is stating that if someone has a need for the molecules, we can manufacture them for that party - saving them the hassle of owning a lab and confronting a research project.
To clarify, I’m saying that if anyone knows of a demand, I’d like to learn more - and if someone already HAS some sort of demand, then we are capable of manufacturing for them on a contract basis. But no, I do not intend on just making a kilogram for the purpose of giving out samples and seeing if it sticks - we can’t spend precious time and reactor space doing chemistry that isn’t paid.
I would say no. If you were to focus on any of them i would focus on hhcv. Cbn is still not the most desired cannabinod as its quite specifc in its use.
If its less desirable then the other variations of that will be less desired.
Thc is top dog d9 and d8 all of their variations sell well.
fwiw a considerable amount of CBN is being sold to Europe, just probably not nearly the same volume as HHC. But I get what you’re saying - non psychoactive compounds don’t sell in the same volume as psychoactive ones. But they definitely do sell at some rate, and small volume for high price rare cannabinoids that aren’t being made elsewhere is attractive to a lab my size. But I do hear you - they’ll never be anywhere near the volume of those other cannabinoids, although in theory their price would potentially hold longer since no one seems to be making them. Which I suppose is only relevant if someone wants to buy them haha.
I’m unlikely to revisit hydrogenation chemistry anytime soon because there is basically no technological barrier to it - anyone with access to THC can do it. At this point in the game everyone knows the formula for HHCx is THCx + metal + hydrogen + a big factory full of minimum wage workers. Because its so easily achieved, the price of HHCV would rapidly trend towards the price of THCV + whatever small margin it can be marked up for the hydrogenation labor the moment a couple of labs decide to start making it. Its just not worth the time and reactor space to make HHCV and making a tiny margin by charging just sliiiightly more than the THCV starting material costs. Its hard to make a profit making something everyone else can already do for almost no money per kilo, right? It would necessitate making A LOT of kilos.
My actual interest in CBN homologs specifically is that despite how non-novel CBDx/THCx > CBNx synthesis should be at this point, lots of labs still struggle to actually make decent CBN - and most of them rely on sulfur via THC starting material which my process can always undercut by starting from CBD rather than THC. I know of maybe two labs doing respectable CBN work - anyone using sulfur has to do multiple distillations and crystallizations and accept an inferior yield. With CBN homologs we actually have the advantage of a more efficient process, that historically has allowed us to undercut any lab of any size - and after 4 years still no one has caught up. There is more of a technological barrier there than with hydrogenation, evidently.
That’s a good question, I’ll try to answer it to whatever extent I currently can.
It takes roughly 1kg of CBDx to make 500-750g of CBNx isolate. For the sake of the argument (and easy/conservative mental math), lets say it takes 2kg of CBDx to make 1kg CBNx. The minimum size I would LIKE to work at is 1kg of finished product, or at least 2kg of starting material.
I haven’t done a true economic analysis of CBNP/CBNV/CBNH but here’s some back of the napkin math:
the price of 1 kg CBNx must be at least 2x the price of 1kg of its corresponding CBDx parent if the overall mass yield is 50%
If 1kg CBDP costs $5,000 then 1kg of CBNP would cost no less than $10,000
The work needs to be profitable enough to justify doing the work - which probably relates to a markup of at least 50% - meaning in this example that 1kg of CBNP would be at least ~$15k.
Ultimately, the price of the starting material and order/batch size will kind of dictate the down payment and cost per kilogram. If a client wanted to contract us to make only a single kilogram, we would likely need the money up front in order to get the starting material and protect ourselves from a situation where the buyer flakes out (which is absolutely common). If it were contracted for many kilograms, then the down payment would have to again cover all raw materials and some portion of the remaining costs - again to protect against a situation where the client under contract flakes out leaving us with material we’ve invested labor and materials into.
Somewhat common in API contract manufacturing is 100% of raw materials down and another 20-30% down to cover labor and O&M. That way if the contract manufacturer does all the work and the client bails on pickup/final payment the manufacturer isn’t out the costs of raw materials and labor expenses they’ve invested in that contract.
No doubt, its a salient line inquiry. I appreciate you bringing it up.
Without knowing which molecule and starting material, my answer could only ever be so accurate - but if nothing else, it illustrates the line of reasoning on what a kilogram costs and how much/why down payment would be necessary.
modified iodine procedure, conversion rate 85-95% available CBD to CBN molar basis. Sulfur is the wrong answer if you ever want anything close to that.
