I met a guy who has a mobile testing facility for on-site testing for non-cannabis related services. The is a very high-end deal comparable to any certified University testing facility with HPLC, GC-MS etc.
His idea is to use this for R &D testing for growers to be able know exactly what they have before offering it to the market. The benefit for the grower would be that if the end user came back and said that his product was tainted, they would have proof to the contrary.
So, growers, does this seem like a viable business plan? Is this a service that you would use?
He is located in So. Cal. and would be targeting the burgeoning Coachella Valley growers.
@BG305, I know you’re in The Valley and would particularly appreciate your input.
1 Like
What proves it didn’t become tainted between field testing and the custie?
2 Likes
Hplc don’t like being driven around. GC’s especially the SRI-GC don’t mind at all.
A mass spec is required to get at “contamination”, and they REALLY don’t like being shaken at all.
Mobile potency testing is not unreasonable. I’d wager mobile pesticide testing IS unreasonable.
10 Likes
That’s exactly the point. If it did, would that be the grower’s fault if the custie is the transporter?
The problem with this model is you’ll quickly have to deal with the reality of laboratory testing in California and other places.
Usually the third party testing is still significantly inflated. Imagine being a farmer who gets +3% cannabinoids on the COA from a third party AND that third party is usually very certified with the states.
I tried to do the r&d testing business myself in California and ended up basically just using the instruments for myself. It’s the best way to know what you actually have but the market won’t really appreciate knowing what they have as much as you’d think
7 Likes
He has assured me that his unit is travel safe. It’s tested and proven.
2 Likes
Unless it was tested there in front of the custie, you’re still gonna argue about the week from test to delivery, dry time, etc
1 Like
And either they are certified by the state, or I STILL Have to pay someone else to test before sale.
Knowing the answer before taking state mandated testing is great, and probably something that folks concerned they might fail would pay for.
If they ARE certified by the state, then any failures would need to be reported.
Yeah, there may be a niche there, but I’m dubious
8 Likes
As far as I know anyone can submit research samples for testing to state certified labs in most states. Is that not the case?
Most farmers and labs I ran into have had front row seats to the inconsistencies between labs and want to do their R&D testing at the same lab as their compliance testing.
5 Likes
True enough but there is the peace-of-mind factor knowing 100% that it is your sample that has been tested. Hasn’t nearly everyone had a test come but with undesirable and wondered if there wasn’t some mix-up? With a few exceptions we all know testing labs are notoriously suspect and inconsistent.
I know Colorado labs licensed for Metrc used to be limited to other metrc license holders. A few had parallel companies to deal with hemp tho.
Orange Photonics for the win. In fact, buying one of their fit-for-purpose HPLCs would be a great start for a business like this. It is a more durable, portable solution. Doesn’t test for everything, but for cannabinoids and terps, it’s great for field work. I love anything that gives more data to the farmers.
There was a test lab in Vancouver, WA with a mobile lab in a repurposed ambulance. To @cyclopath 's point, the instrumentation hated it. It was novel but not practical.
4 Likes
^^^This is the kicker with the plan…The need for RD testing is pretty low if you are heading towards a compliant market. It’ll just be a redundant cost. Most people selling into a compliant market will have a certified lab relationship. In my state at the lab we use, we can get an RD test from the same lab, not reported to the state. But, it’s rare to use it.
I fully support the idea of testing at each step. It’s a CYA move for all parties, moreso for the buyer as I see it. But, there just aren’t tons of growers that’d go through that. Food for thought…what does a grower do with a failed RD test? I see the hazard of knowing you have failed flower as being greater (from a financial perspective) than it is to not know and risk a customer coming back to complain. One means you won’t make future sales. The other means you won’t make this sale, or will have to sacrifice your scruples to do it. I’m not saying it’s right, but “ignorance is bliss” is in the financial best interest of everyone except the people that have to show the compliance testing to monetize their product. If someone doesn’t make you test it before paying for it, then you don’t risk failing.
1 Like
I can’t wait until the mass spectrometer-on-a-chip devices go commercial.
3 Likes
I could see lc-uv being mobile, the pumps would probably not like being jostled but could maybe be dampened somehow, depends on how bumpy the roads are I’d guess. But gc-ms, I would say the ms is going to hate that but maybe there is some really robust detector out there that could handle it. I know there are some mobile ms systems used for bomb detection. Not going to be doing pesticides with ms/ms though.
Either way it sounds like a nightmare to upkeep and kind of a waste of time given the demand VS costs. Buying an orange photonics and running around to grows/buyers for quick and dirty potency testing might be profitable depending on market.
3 Likes
Very much appreciate your taking the time to reply.
Assuming, as stated that all machines are of the highest quality, travel proven, no costs spared and all the logistics have been ironed out, would the growing population use this service. That is the only question.
The answer is no, unfortunately. I think you need to overcome too many barriers. Sending samples to a lab isn’t enough of a hassle to warrant a mobile solution that isn’t certified
2 Likes
Here’s the tricky part, you can only be in one place at a time. I could see this being useful in a breeding program maybe? This is a reference test, not a compliance panel, right? So the cost would need to be much less wine the overhead is greater and the access is limited. It’s a tricky model.
Cannatest ran TLC testing to your door on the back of a motorcycle once upon a time.
1 Like
That is unlikely to be successful in Coachella Valley, unless it’s cheaper or has quicker turnarounds. There are too many labs that come to me and pickup up samples within 24 hours of contacting them, then provide r&d results roughly 48-72 hours after that.
Most local buyers want their r&d testing done by their sweetheart labs that always give them 30% results. Most of it goes out of state anyway and they don’t care about testing…it’s funny how many distros there are within a couple miles of Palm Springs Airport.
1 Like