Ask operators on the supply side what actually keeps them up at night and it's rarely the grow. It's the invoice sitting unpaid thirty, sixty, ninety days past terms, from a retail buyer who took the product, sold it, and still hasn't sent a check. This isn't rare. It's common enough that people in this industry talk about it the way they'd talk about weather.
Why This Risk Is Worse Here Than Most Industries
Cannabis still can't use normal commercial credit tools the way most industries do. There's no cannabis-specific version of a standard business credit report that reliably flags a retailer's payment history before you extend terms. Federal illegality keeps banking thin and lending thinner, which means a retailer squeezed for cash has fewer legitimate options to bridge the gap than a business in almost any other industry, and the supplier who already shipped product is often the easiest bill to delay. Extending terms to a new retail buyer in this industry means extending trust with almost none of the normal infrastructure that protects that trust elsewhere.
None of this makes every late payment malicious. A retailer genuinely squeezed by compressed margins and slow foot traffic isn't always cutting corners on purpose. It does mean the supplier is the one absorbing that squeeze if nobody checks for it before product goes out the door.
What to Actually Check Before Extending Terms
How a new buyer talks about payment on the very first call matters more than it seems. A buyer who asks for extended net terms before you've even discussed volume or price is telling you something about their cash position before you've told them anything about your product. A buyer who's vague about when they typically pay, rather than stating it plainly, is worth a second conversation before a first shipment.
Talk to other suppliers who've sold to that buyer before, the same way you'd check a personal reference, and ask specifically about payment, not just about the relationship generally. "Good to work with" and "pays on time" are two different questions, and people will answer them differently if you ask directly instead of accepting a vague endorsement.
Start smaller than you're comfortable with on a first order, and get paid on that order before extending real volume on credit. A buyer with a legitimate operation and real cash flow has no issue with that sequence. A buyer already stretched thin is the one who pushes back hardest against starting small, because starting small doesn't solve their actual problem.
The Checklist Doesn't Replace the Network
None of this shows up on a license lookup. A license tells you someone's legally allowed to buy from you. It says nothing about whether they'll pay you on time, and that's a separate question every supplier has to answer for themselves before extending credit. The fastest way to answer it is the same way operators have always answered it in a small industry: ask around before you ship, not after you're owed money.
Getting paid late isn't a cost of doing business here. It's a specific, checkable risk, and checking it before the product leaves your facility is a lot cheaper than chasing it afterward.