High times for German cannabis firm since legalisation
At an undisclosed site in Germany's Bavaria state, pharmaceutical CEO Philip Schetter opens a 75-centimetre (30-inch) thick steel door that secures his wares: vast amounts of cannabis.
"Better safe than sorry," he says during a visit to the compound run by Cantourage, a producer and distributor of cannabis-based medicinal products.
Marijuana has been partially legalised in Germany, but the firm fears its wares from as far as Jamaica, Uganda and New Zealand could make it an attractive target for criminals.
"We are committed to the highest safety standards -- for our employees as well as for our products," Schetter told AFP.
Inside the facility, staff wearing surgical gowns, hairnets and face masks were busy using small scissors to cut up dried cannabis flowers.
The brownish-green buds are used to relieve chronic pain and sleep disorders, treat certain forms of epilepsy and offer support for cancer, HIV and palliative care patients.
Medical cannabis has been a boon for the Berlin-based company whose website slogan says "we love cannabis" and whose Frankfurt Stock Exchange ticker symbol is "HIGH".
Last year it booked revenue of €51.4 million, a 118 percent increase on 2023.
The company with 70 staff says it allows producers to enter the European medical cannabis market by processing and distributing their dried flowers and extracts.
Competitors include the Netherlands' Bedrocan and Canada's Aurora, which also grows cannabis.
In Germany, the pungent green plant has been available with a prescription since 2017.
Employees of Cantourage trim cannabis flowers at the company's production site in an undisclosed location in Bavaria. (Photo by Daniel Peter / AFP)
One benefit of laboratory-tested and certified medical cannabis is clarity about its origin, processing path and active ingredient content, said Schetter.
"If I went to the black market, the choice would be rather limited and I would be given anything, without knowing what it contains," he said. "And often the product is contaminated. You may even doubt that it is cannabis."
Advertisement
'Frosted Cookies'
Cantourage markets its medicines in eye-catching ways, naming them after their cannabis strains.
Among its products are "Frosted Cookies", "Lemon Berry Candy" and "Chemdawg", complete with colourful stickers that help build brand loyalty even if they do not appear on the packaging.
"Classical pharma firms do classical pharma marketing," Schetter said. "We're just young and creative," he added, noting that the boundaries between recreational and medicinal drugs are sometimes "blurred".
"You can argue about when a product is recreational and when it is medicinal," he said. "Cannabis helps in the treatment of certain symptoms."
Most European nations have legalised medicinal cannabis in some form, but Germany has more liberal rules than most.
The former centre-left government last year made it easier to get cannabis on prescription. It also legalised possession of up to 25 grams for personal, non-medical use and allowed households to grow up to three marijuana plants.
"The change in the law meant lots of people became aware for the first time that you can get cannabis from the chemist without being gravely ill," Schetter said. "That led to a surge in demand."
Pharmacies filled over 1,000 percent more cannabis prescriptions in December 2024 than they did the previous March, before the law was loosened, according to Bloomwell, an online platform that puts patients in touch with doctors for cannabis treatment.
'Shame for country'
The legal change did not put everyone in high spirits, least of all Germany's conservative new Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who during the election campaign demanded the legalisation be reversed.
His ally, Bavarian premier Markus Söder, last year charged that the loosening of the law was a "shame for the country" and vowed his state would apply the law "as strictly as possible".
Advertisement
Since Merz agreed to share power with the centre-left Social Democrats, his coalition government has taken a softer line, pledging only an "open-ended evaluation" of the issue.
Schetter said he was relaxed about the pending review, telling AFP that "we're curious to see what comes out of this".
He acknowledged that "regulatory risk does come up as a topic from time to time" in his talks with investors.
But even a reversal of the latest change to the law should leave Cantourage's business model intact, Schetter said.
"We are a pharmaceutical company. We make medicines and deliver them to chemists."
He even dared to dream that the review could go the other way, meaning "further steps will be taken to turn partial legalisation into full legalisation".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
20 hours ago
- DW
How Munich became Europe's tech startup capital – DW – 06/04/2025
Founders flock to Munich, Germany, to access capital, expertise, and networks that can help turn ideas into thriving businesses. It's like navigating a labyrinth — a journey hundreds of young entrepreneurs across Europe embark on each year in search of opportunity, innovation, funding, and success. They're also looking for the country and city that offers the ideal conditions to launch a business. For an increasing number, that journey leads to Isar Valley, named after the river that runs through Munich, and which provided the informal nickname for the Bavarian capital's technology and artificial intelligence (AI) scene, inspired by the Silicon Valley technology hub in California. Munich's Technical University and its entrepreneurship center are essential for startup founders Image: UnternehmerTUM Munich ranks 17th globally in the latest Global Tech Ecosystem Index compiled by Netherlands-based data provider Dealroom. When measured by high-performance, innovation-driven ecosystems with strong per-capita output, Munich rises to 5th place — just behind US tech hubs San Francisco Bay Area, Boston, New York, and Cambridge. From hackathon enthusiast to startup founder Greek entrepreneurs Nikos Tsiamitros and Georgios Pipelidis also chose to launch their startup in Munich, even though Tsiamitros says there wasn't a "personal reason" to move to the capital of the German southern state of Bavaria. "I didn't know anyone here and had never even visited the city," he told DW, but added that he was well aware of the "excellent reputation" of the Technical University of Munich (TUM). Nikos Tsiamitros (left) and Georgios Pipelidis were drawn to Munich because of its excellent startup environment Image: Georgios Pipelidis Tsiamitros arrived from Athens to pursue his master's degree in Munich, while Pipelidis came to TUM via Austria to complete his PhD. "That's where we started working together on navigation software for public transportation," Pipelidis told DW. They joined a hackathon — an event where programmers team up for several days or weeks to develop software, often around the clock — and they won the competition. "From that moment on, we started to believe that our navigation and localization algorithm could become a real startup," said Tsiamitros. Then, in March 2019, they launched their first startup business called Ariadne — derived from the Cretan princess in Greek mythology who gave Theseus a thread to find his way out of the Minotaur's labyrinth. A fitting metaphor for their software, Pipelidis noted with a grin. UnternehmerTUM provides support with substance But having a strong algorithm is one thing. Launching a startup, writing a business plan, and securing capital is another. That's where Munich's startup ecosystem offers a crucial resource — the UnternehmerTUM entrepreneurship center based at TUM. At UnternehmerTUM, the two business founders learned how to start and run a company, Pipelidis said, adding that thanks to that support, Ariadne was generating revenue just a few months after launch. Ariadne's main product has since evolved from a navigation software into an AI-based people-counting and movement analytics tool. Today, it serves airports in Munich, Glasgow, and Los Angeles, as well as the German cities of Leverkusen, Bielefeld, and Regensburg, plus several malls and retailers, including IKEA. Startups like Ariadne also benefit from hands-on mentorship. Barbara Mehner, managing partner of the Xpreneurs incubator at UnternehmerTUM is one of them. "We help early-stage startups enter the market by connecting them with investors, mentors, and potential customers," she told DW. KEWAZO 'liftbot' and the robotic revolution in scaffolding Among the more than 100 tech startups founded annually in Munich is KEWAZO, a company led by Greek founder Eirini Psallida. Eirini Psallida is one of many successful startup founders who have emerged from the Isar Valley tech hub Image: Eirini Psallida KEWAZO's core product is a battery-powered, remote-controlled robotic lifting system called LIFTBOT. This robot facilitates the transport and assembly of scaffolding and other construction materials. "All industries seemed fully automated — except construction," Eirini told DW, explaining the idea behind the company. Psallida named the startup after the Greek word kataskevazo, meaning "to produce." And like Ariadne, this startup was born out of a hackathon at UnternehmerTUM. Today, the company's robotic lift system is in daily use at major industrial and construction sites — from the chemical park of BASF in Ludwigshafen, Germany, to oil refineries in the US. KEWAZO's liftbots are seen on many construction sites Image: Flint Hills Resources "I can't imagine how we would have done it without UnternehmerTUM," Psallida told DW, as the incubator gave them access to hardware, software, legal and business advice. "And we got help securing public funding without giving up any equity," she added. One in four German unicorns founded by foreigners The KEWAZO team includes six founders from four different countries, reflecting the diverse nature of Germany's startup landscape. According to the latest Migrant Founders Monitor compiled by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation and Germany's Startup Association, a significant number of founders in the country have a migration background. "Fourteen percent of startup founders were born abroad," said Vanusch Walk, senior researcher at the Startup Association and lead author of the report. Among the founders of so-called unicorns — startups valued at over a billion dollars — the share is even higher at 23%, he told DW. The survey shows that migrant founders stand out for their "strong entrepreneurial mindset, willingness to take risks, and resilience" — traits that are crucial for startup success. Migrant founders still face higher barriers Despite their strengths, migrant founders also face notable challenges in Germany. "Top of the list is access to networks," said Walk, adding that coping with Germany's infamous bureaucracy is also difficult, as well as gaining access to funding, no matter whether public or private. Germany: More support for migrant entrepreneurs? To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Pipelidis from Ariadne experienced this firsthand. One German venture capital firm made its investment conditional on replacing him as CEO with a German national. "They wanted a native speaker as the public face of the company," he recalled. "I understand that customers prefer dealing with someone who speaks fluent German — that's why all our salespeople are native speakers. But replacing me as CEO? That was too much," he said. In the end, Georgios Pipelidis and Nikos Tsiamitros secured support from a Greek VC firm. And despite the setbacks, their enthusiasm for Munich hasn't wavered. At the end of their own Ariadne thread still lies the Bavarian capital. This article was originally written in German.
Int'l Business Times
a day ago
- Int'l Business Times
The Risks of Foreign Investment in U.S. Life Sciences Companies — Why Founders Should Take Heed
In recent years, Chinese investment in U.S. and global biotech and medtech has increased significantly. These partnerships can serve as strategic footholds, raising complex questions around security, sovereignty, and long-term strategy. Consider Grand Pharmaceutical Group, also known as Yuanda Pharmaceutical and Grand Pharma, which jointly acquired Australian firm Sirtex Medical, forged a nuclear medicine collaboration with Sirtex Medical U.S., and took an 87.5% stake in BlackSwan Vascular, a U.S.-based developer of vascular embolization technologies. On the surface, Grand Pharma looks like a modern success story. Hu Kaijun, a Chinese billionaire, holds a majority stake in Grand Pharma, positioning him as a key figure in the company's global expansion in the life sciences sector. Under his leadership, Grand Pharma has diversified its portfolio through strategic acquisitions and collaborations, enhancing its presence in the international market. But for U.S. life sciences stakeholders, don't be misled: Grand Pharma's rise isn't just a story of business savvy—it's a case study in how state-backed capital can reshape a company. And for founders, it's a reminder that funding sources can carry strategic baggage. Grand Pharma's aggressive expansion may reflect a broader trend of Chinese firms investing in advanced markets to access Western R&D and expand China's presence more deeply in the future of global biomedical innovation—a trend that raises serious concerns for U.S. interests. From State-Owned Roots to Global Reach Through strategic investments and collaborations, Kaijun and Grand Pharma continue to expand their footprint, resulting in the transfer of cutting-edge medical technologies from European and U.S. startups to China. Behind Grand Pharma's rapid rise lies a more complex history—one that raises questions about influence, oversight, and strategic intent. Before Grand Pharma was a global healthcare investor, it was a modest state-owned enterprise (SOE) in China under the purview of the Poverty Alleviation Office. Its mission: deliver pharmaceutical products as a public good, not a profit engine. But in the late 1990s and early 2000s, that began to change. A 2013 investigation by China Finance (CNFINA) suggested that Kaijun played a significant role in transforming the SOE into China Grand Enterprises through a series of complex transactions that have raised questions about corporate governance and asset valuation. One notable transaction highlighted in the CNFINA report involves Yanhuang Real Estate, a private firm not previously affiliated with the company. The firm purchased 50% of China Grand Enterprises from two state-owned shareholders for 50 million yuan. This transaction was justified using China Grand's initial registered capital of 100 million yuan. However, estimates based on the net assets held by China Grand at the time suggested that those shares were worth at least 145 million yuan, indicating a potential undervaluation of approximately 95 million yuan. The CNFINA report details that two additional state-owned entities transferred their 50% stake to four private investment firms, including Beijing Taihua Yongchang Investment and Beijing Dongfang Weichuang, for similarly underpriced amounts based on outdated registered capital. CNFINA's analysis estimated the value of these two transfers combined to have resulted in a total undervaluation of over 218 million yuan. This suspicious restructuring is significant because it offers a window into how power and capital were initially consolidated, and under what terms. Transactions that undervalue assets and move them out of public hands raise fundamental concerns about transparency, governance, and intent. When such origins lead to foreign acquisitions in sensitive sectors like biotechnology, it becomes even more important to scrutinize the business culture and strategic motivations behind the capital. In short, where the wealth comes from and how it was made offer important clues into how business leaders operate their companies. The Fine Print of Chinese Capital For U.S. life sciences startups, the lesson is clear: capital isn't neutral. The wrong investor can bring not just regulatory headaches but long-term strategic consequences. A growing list of cases tells a cautionary tale. Sirtex Medical When Grand Pharma and CDH Investments outbid Varian by a reported 20% to acquire Sirtex Medical, observers raised questions about the surprisingly high acquisition price. Through its subsidiary Chengdu Shetai, Grand Pharma has since leveraged Sirtex's platform to accelerate its development of nuclear medicine therapies. In cases of majority foreign ownership, especially by companies with potential state affiliations, it invites questions about data governance, manufacturing control, and regulatory visibility. More Lessons from BGI, WuXi, and Others Grand Pharma isn't the only example. Chinese biotech giants like BGI Group and WuXi AppTec have drawn attention in recent years over concerns related to data use, military ties, and participation in U.S. research networks. These cases underscore a growing sensitivity: capital flows from companies with strategic state interests may pose challenges in sensitive sectors like life sciences. A recent TechTimes article breaks down the core risks facing U.S. life sciences companies in the face of growing Chinese investment, from academic partnerships enabling access to sensitive research to financial ties that quietly shift control, and nefarious enterprises evading regulatory scrutiny. The piece argues that while the proposed BIOSECURE Act legislation is a step in the right direction, it lacks the enforcement teeth needed to truly safeguard American innovation in the life sciences sector. Ultimately, U.S. biotech and medtech startups must take proactive responsibility for who they partner with because policy alone won't protect what's not carefully guarded from the start. A Critical Reminder for Founders and CEOs: Capital Comes with Consequences U.S. life sciences startups face an increasingly complex landscape. Fast, global capital may seem like an obvious win, but it can introduce long-term complications. These include heightened regulatory oversight, potential deal restrictions, and reputational considerations. As geopolitical tensions evolve, particularly between the U.S. and China, biotech and medtech are emerging as points of scrutiny. In an interview on Chinese firms facing U.S. Commerce Department action related to AI, Gordon Chang, a senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute and a specialist on U.S.-China relations, stated, "all Chinese companies are a threat." While his comment was made in the context of national security and advanced technologies, it reflects a broader concern among some policymakers and analysts: that Chinese firms, regardless of sector, may operate with implicit state alignment, especially when national strategic interests are involved. For biotech and medtech companies, choosing the right partner now depends as much on who they are as what they offer. For the foreseeable future, U.S. startups should approach foreign investment, especially from state-influenced entities, with caution and care. This isn't just about one company or one country. It's about building resilient innovation ecosystems that can withstand geopolitical shifts while preserving trust, competitiveness, and scientific integrity.
DW
a day ago
- DW
NATO likely to hike defense spending despite economic woes – DW – 06/05/2025
The military alliance looks set to satisfy US President Donald Trump's demands to commit to a massive increase in defense spending. Some creative counting proposed by NATO head Mark Rutte could soften the financial blow. A NATO defense ministers' meeting in Brussels on Thursday showed "broad support" for signing off a historic hike in defense spending at a crunch summit later this month. This was their response to the growing threat from Russia and a "more dangerous world" in general, the military alliance's Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters. "I will propose an overall investment plan that would total 5% of gross domestic product in defense investment," Rutte announced, following months of pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to more than double the present target. Current NATO guidelines encourage states to spend 2% of their economic output on their militaries. But not all of the alliance's members meet this target, raising questions of how they will reach an even higher spending goal. Splitting the bill In response, NATO chief Rutte has specified a division of the new spending goal that could allow Trump to claim a headline figure, while giving the other 31 nations room to maneuver their national budgets. Thus, of the 5%, 3.5% of national GDP could be allotted to "core defence spending", while the remaining 1.5% could be diverted to "defense- and security-related investment like infrastructure and industry," he said. Allied defense ministers gathered at the NATO headquarters in Brussels Image: Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu/picture alliance Trump has long criticized NATO allies for relying on the US' large military might as a strategy to defend the European continent. In 2023, more than two thirds of the 32 NATO countries' collective $1.3 trillion (€1.14 trillion) military spending came from Washington, according to data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). On Thursday, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth drove home the message to the rest of the alliance once again. "Every shoulder has to be to the plough. Every country has to contribute at that level of 5% as a recognition of the nature of threat," he said. Leaders of the world's most powerful defense alliance are set to gather in three weeks in the Dutch city The Hague. Topping the agenda will be discussions on the ongoing war in Ukraine, and Russia's resulting massive rearmament drive. It seems likely that NATO members will officially commit to the 5% goal at these upcoming talks. Giving in to pressure Under US pressure, and with Europeans alarmed by Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO military spending has already burgeoned in recent years. Most countries now meet the 2% threshold, which was agreed upon 11 years ago. But around one third of the alliance still doesn't, including Portugal, Italy, Canada, Belgium, and Spain. Most NATO states had indicated willingness to spend more, but the 5% goal was considered far-fetched when Trump floated the idea earlier this year. Almost half a year on, the message seems to be resonating with many in the alliance. Earlier this week, 14 NATO states, including the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and the five Nordic states, published a joint statement in which they said they were "moving towards reaching at least 5% of GDP on defense and defense-related investments." Specter of war: Are Europeans really ready to rearm? To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Last month, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadepuhl also indicated Germany could get on board with the goal. Several NATO countries, including Poland, Estonia and Lithuania, have already committed to spending 5% or more in the future. All are former Soviet states, and two of them share a border with Russia. Since taking office in January, the "America-first" president has strained the NATO alliance with threats not to help defend alliance members that didn't meet spending targets should they be attacked. His designs on the semi-autonomous Danish territory Greenland have also alienated allies, as have his attempts at bilateral talks to find an end to Russia's war in Ukraine, which sidelined European partners and left Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy largely marginalized. Questions remain There are still many open questions to be answered, one of them being the timeline. On Thursday, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur spoke of committing to reaching 5% within five years. "We don't have time for ten years, we don't even have time for seven years, to be honest," he said. But the official focus at this week's meeting was on working out what exact capabilities NATO would need and may currently be missing to defend itself if a member of the alliance were attacked. After the talks, Rutte spoke of the need to upgrade air defense systems and long-range missiles, among other things. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Germany might need as many as 50,000 – 60,000 more troops in its standing forces to meet defense needs in the coming years. Increased spending amid economic downturn While consensus appears to be forming, it is also clear that increasing military spending to 5% of GDP would be an enormous strain on public finances, particularly as Europe's two major economies, Germany and France, face tough times. Paris and Berlin are touting increased defense spending as a chance to fuel economic growth in Europe, but there is a risk of public backlash. In April in Rome, the opposition Five Star Movement led a protest against an EU drive to rearm the bloc — a move supported by the government of far-right Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni — reportedly drawing tens of thousands of people. According to Cullen Hendrix, an expert from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a US think tank, a 5% spending target would essentially put NATO countries on "war footing." US secretary of State Pete Hegseth was in Brussels for the last NATO gathering before next month's summit Image: Bob Reijnders/Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images "In 2023, just nine countries spent 5% of GDP or more on defense: Algeria, Armenia, Israel, Lebanon, Oman, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and South Sudan," Hendrix wrote in February. "Most are, or were, at war. Five of these are authoritarian petro-states, unencumbered by competitive elections or the need to tax their populaces to fund this military largesse." There is also a risk that increased spending will make Europe less safe, Hendrix warned. "Increasing military spending to this extent would likely catalyze an arms race with those near-peer competitors." On Thursday in Brussels, Rutte argued there was little choice but to spend significantly more on defense, pointing to recent comments by the German Chief of Defense Carsten Breuer, who posited that Russia would be ready to mount an attack on NATO states by 2029. "We live in a more dangerous world," Rutte said. "We are safe today, but if we don't do this, we are not safe in the foreseeable future." Edited by: Maren Sass
