Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
We won’t have a prevention trial for years. I’d imagine they’d need more accurate predictors of CNS and then the trial itself would probably be 5-10 years long. This company will be sold before that happens (or as some here think, out of business)
Anyone who put their hard earned money into Anavex 4 - 6 years ago would be sitting on a 30% to 200% gain depending on the timing.
I'm sure there are better investments out there during this time frame. But there are also lots of worse ones to have been stuck with.
Ask the former AXON investors who were charmed by Wall Street darling Vivek if they'd rather have invested in Axovant or Anavex and let me know what they tell you.
Saying we need more data before jumping to conclusions isn't the same as having doubt. And there are more than one parent talking about the benefits of Blarcamesine. Maybe it is a fluke. I don't know. But you don't know that it isn't.
Sure, and the odds of a varsity baseball player making it to the major leagues is about the same. The odds started out at 1/100. I'd say the line has shifted significantly over the past 10 years for Anavex. The current odds are at worst 50/50. And the return on those odds is way better than even money so from a purely mathematical standpoint, the gamble becomes way more attractive today than back when the odds were around 1%.
I've learned not to rely too much on odds anymore. One childhood friend of mine grew up to be a successful pro athlete. Another was struck by lightning. I wonder what they'd say about beating the odds?
The parents of Rett children who share their experiences with others going through the same struggle might disagree about your claim of "no tangible benefits." Anecdotally, there seems to be a lot of leaking evidence that Blarcamesine works. Ordinarily I'd chalk it up to the placebo effect, but the data that has been reported backs up those claims and at some point enough circumstantial evidence becomes sufficient to draw permanent conclusions.
Let's check back in another decade and see if the market got it wrong.
I'd be willing to bet that whenever Lipitor or Viagra or [insert any other blockbuster drug] was in development, there were people like who you were convinced those drugs would fail and warned everyone to stay away. Nobody is correct 100% of the time. And yet people post to message boards as if they're never wrong. Maybe Blarcamesine becomes a big hit or maybe it flops. I don't know. But neither does anyone else so if I have to trust someone or something in this circumstance, it may as well be my own instinct instead of an internet stranger's.
Huh? There are all sorts of charts and data that provide supporting evidence that having a long-term perspective is the easier and safer path toward prosperity. Inherent in the long-term thesis is that there'll be a few period of downturn or loss but when the market rebounds those losses are quickly erased.
Traders can make money too but it's a lot more work for more risk and, again using historical statistical data, less overall reward after a 10-15 year or longer period. Missing the market's top 30 days over the last 30 years would have resulted in an 83% decrease in performance than someone who followed buy-and-hold. Plus, who wants to spend all their time in front of a computer babysitting stocks and posting on message boards?
There's nothing wrong with long-term investing if you're invested in the right companies. Anavex (for now) is not an investment, it's a gamble and as long as one keeps this in mind, looking at it objectively versus other stock market gambles -- its risk/reward profile is better than almost all of them.
No sour grapes. I couldn't care less how you trade. But just as you enjoy calling out the "cabal," I enjoy sniffing out hypocrisy.
You cannot be solidly in the WGT camp while also selling shares at the same time. The reality is that you are trader who intentionally benefits from short activity, and that makes you complicit. It doesn't mean you're a bad person or you have bad motives, it just means that your credibility is a bit shot when you act like shorts are so evil for trying to make money the same way you are: selling shares to someone else because you know they aren't worth much at the moment.
Of course not. There isn't a single person on this message board who can influence the share price with any purchase, sell, or message board / blog post. It's all parlor games to pass the time and maybe make a bit of money until the roulette wheel stops spinning. None of us have any control or influence over the outcome.
The act of selling your shares makes you no better than the people who you rant against every day on this board. You are also contributing to the share price decline and profiting from it, just like the shorts.
This is particularly the case when you sell shares after a short attack, but at the same time continue to post all the reasons why Anavex is a great company.
Traders trade. It's what they do and I have nothing against it as long as they're transparent. No company is perfect which means there is a short thesis for every publicly traded company -- some cases may be stronger than others, but this is why I don't criticize shorts if they're rooted in fact. Investor and Doc may have their own motives for wanting a low share price for now, but there's nothing wrong with them pointing out Anavex's weaknesses. People like Adam Feuerstein who just spew pure and obvious bulls**t on the other hand, deserve a special place in hell, but I don't see that from too many on this message board because I've ignored those who do.
But please don't act like there is a moral high ground when you are taking part and profiting from the same system you're railing against. That's the purest definition of hypocrisy. Taking profits is never a bad idea. I strongly encourage it. But selling shares into a short attack and not being transparent about it until after the fact weakens your position that you're somehow superior to the "collusive cabal" because you're taking part in the same game they're playing at the expense of those who are more fearful or less experienced with investing.
It all depends on whether Congress extends the deadline for a government shutdown by reaching a temporary compromise. Heading into election season neither side seems eager to acquiesce. If there were ever a week to wait, this is it, but I get that all the TA shows now is an appropriate time to buy.
I suppose there is a lesser risk that there is some Rett-related PR in early October for Rett Awareness Month, but I doubt it. The data will be made public when it's available. If it happens in October it's a fortunate coincidence. The company isn't withholding material information to time up with an arbitrary charity-created deadline.
It's not October yet. Yom Kippur arrived early this year. I'd wait another week.
Don't listen to anyone on any message board (myself included). Look at the Anavex's press releases and SEC filings for guidance, and then decide if the management is trustworthy.
Everything else is just parlor games to pass the time.
It could drop a lot more than that, perhaps to the $3/$4 range though I suspect the mid $5's is where we'll begin to slowly recover.
September is historically the worst month for stocks and compounded with all sorts of other events including but not limited to: global proxy wars, government shutdowns, upcoming elections, inflation and interest rates, and a general sense of malaise because the Covid bills are coming due, it's not a surprise that Anavex is down along with most of the market.
Nvidia and AMD were Wall Street darlings a few months ago and both are down about 23%. Anavex's current stock price is a reflection of macro events. Wealth is created when savvy investors pick up good companies that are drowning in the currents.
An investment in Anavex is a vote of confidence that the science will ultimately prevail. I believe that it will. And if it does, even those who consider Dr. Missling a buffoon will have no way of stopping what happens next: in time, word will spread about Blarcamesine. Caregivers who must drive patients to facilities for injections will ask about the oral tablet option and even the most reluctant MDs with longstanding relationships with BP sales reps will be forced to write prescriptions for Blarcamesine or risk losing business to doctors who will. If the drug works, if it's as safe as the current standard of care and if it's easier to administer it will succeed until something better comes along and there will be no way to stop the profit avalanche.
But until the FDA formally approves Blarcamesine, it's all speculation and hope for Anavex investors, and hope tends to disappear during trying macroeconomic conditions. That's where we are and for now, there's nothing any of us can do about it except wait. Some will spend their waiting complaining and others will go find other things to keep themselves busy. It's a choice each of us will have to make but the outcome cannot change. The roulette wheel is spinning and is starting to come to a stop. There's still time to add or remove money, but not much. If Anavex succeeds it'll be the equivalent of 00. I've always wanted to hit one of those. Maybe this time I will.
How many thank you's did you get when you were pumping this 10 years ago under a different alias? Lots of rookie investors trusted you and were burned when you sold them your shares at highly inflated prices while telling them that the stock was looking good. I can go back to the past year or so and find posts where you attempt to do the same but there aren't many rookie investors here anymore.
Timing is everything with biotech. Invest too early and get diluted out. Invest too late and the return isn't very big or the stock price goes back down. For those who added shares in the 2018/2019/2020 days, things are okay. But the best way to lose money is to take financial advice from internet strangers who more than likely are playing the opposite side of the bet.
Let's revisit this post on September 16, 2024. That's the day long-term capital gains kick in. I'd be willing to bet AVXL ends up the superior investment choice.
Anavex is not going to present at CTAD. The data it would have released was issued in a recent PR. We are past the conference stage — the focus now is on the FDA and the approval process.
I believe any new data we see for Alzheimer’s will be in a journal article or another PR. October could be an exciting month for the pediatric Rett data, although I suspect that arrives to us closer to Thanksgiving than Halloween.
I expect another article from Adam Feuerstein within the next 2-3 weeks, if not sooner. And that's fine. They'll take the stock price back to the 5/6s and it's going to cause all sorts of panic here -- people who used to be "pro-Missling" will be calling for his head and this message board is going to turn sour quickly.
And then, I expect we'll see a reversal about this time next year. Those who are patient enough to stick around will be rewarded or punished. We'll see. 12-18 months isn't all that much longer for some.
If I could like this post twice, I would. Agree on almost all the points here.
We can debate the merit of releasing the ADL-LSM value. I see both points and as an investor I want as much data as I can get access to. But if LSM isn't the data that will be reported to the FDA, and it's more or less moot at this point, I can also see how releasing tepid data can be more harmful than nothing at all.
I think you answered your own question. Anavex started out with humble beginnings, a company with an interesting theory that didn't have any cash. Anytime a small company steps in front of the FDA it's going to be scrutinized more heavily than a company that has a prior working relationship. As "the new guy," Anavex may only get one crack at submitting and needs to present its strongest case with the strongest evidence.
Sometimes collecting this evidence takes time. And sometimes the evidence points to new directions, which can cause further delays.
That's the thing with ambiguity. Nobody knows the truth. And because of this, you weren't able to answer the question I posed: do you think that Dr. Missling is truly playing fast and loose with the data and not retracting previously public information that both endpoints were met? Because that too should be a fireable offense.
The PR doesn't say anything either way. It says there are two ways to get to our destination and this is the one that we think is best. If it choose to take the scenic route, that doesn't mean the highway is on fire. I think reporting data that shows one endpoint just barely making a passing grade would do more short-term harm. I also believe Dr. Jin knows the best path forward and Dr. Missling is taking his advice under serious consideration. This is a good thing for Anavex investors.
This is going to be an unpopular opinion but I don't think Anavex should ever have been trading in the double digits. The idea that companies can be worth billions of dollars when they haven't even generated a cent of revenue or have a product for sale is absurd, and screams for attention as a symptom of a bloated economy.
I also don't care too much about current market sentiment, because I am not a trader. Sentiment changes all the time, at both the societal and the individual level. At the end of the day, I can be super long this stock and if I choose to take profits, I'll be criticized by some for not being "long enough". Same thing with those who are short. If you're a reader, I suggest "The Madness of Crowds" by Charles Mackay.
Does the current market sentiment make sense to me right now? Sure, why not. Some people don't trust either the science or the CEO and they're betting against it more than people who believe in the company. There was a time when Apple was in the same situation with Steve Jobs at the helm. Market sentiment can sometimes be wrong, too.
For a speculative investment, which is what Anavex is, the setup and investment thesis seems pretty good if the drug works. Why? Because word of mouth spreads quickly in the digital age and people will hear about Blarcamesine one way or another and will request their doctors to write an Rx. If they refuse or try to push something else like an injection, those patients will find another doctor. Capitalism usually wins and I trust that for now (key words because something will replace Blarcamesine one day) Blarcamesine has a legit shot to be the best drug on the market for a few different indications.
I don't know about that. My brain immediately reverts to the most obvious conclusion that you jumped to -- the data was not statistically significant and Dr. Missling is hiding something.
But then I ask myself, if a trial missed an endpoint after additional analysis and it was previously reported as having met that endpoint, there would be a requirement to file a notice with the SEC because that would certainly be a material event.
And seeing a CEO so blatantly and publicly flaunting the rules just seems unlikely, which makes me question my initial jump to conclusion.
Perhaps it's just a situation where the other endpoint just barely squeaked by and Dr. Jin recommended the alternate pathway toward approval: using stronger data from one primary endpoint and stronger data from a secondary. If his opinion is that the FDA will look more favorably at this, I'm not going to question it.
If the other primary endpoint failed to achieve statistical significance, that is not something the company would be legally allowed to hide. Dr. Missling presented us with the data he plans to present to the FDA. Blarcamesine passed the test for Alzheimer's and it looks like the ongoing extended trial will be sufficient for a confirmatory P3. Rett is on deck. Things aren't as bleak as the stock price might indicate. I mean, SAVA is our biggest competitor and it's down almost as much as Anavex. Did it fail an endpoint, too?
There was a time when a stock price dropping 10% or more in a week would have made me panic. I'm a more patient investor now, and I am more willing to accept the consequences of my actions. It's called aging, and it's both awesome and horrible at the same time. I can probably guess within 3 to 5 years most people's ages here solely on their message board decorum. This is how I determine who to ignore -- give me a respectful critic whose opinions differ from mine and I'll gladly listen without using terms like FUD, cabal soldier, paid basher, etc. This applies to all my investments.
Most likely, the stock price will continue to drop in the short term, especially if the economy tanks leading into an election year. Investors do not like to see paper profits fade and when a company like Anavex has zero revenue, it's possible (until there's a patterned cash flow) that those losses become permanent. There isn't even a product available to sell yet, and Big Pharma has a lot of influence over small cap startups. In a worst case scenario, there's nothing to even turn around -- Dr. Missling should have enough cash to start over, but even the most patient longs will not be willing to reset the clock with A371 or something new.
Additionally, Dr. Missling has fumbled the ball a few times. Fortunately, he's recovered each time but a pattern is starting to emerge that should give people like me a bit of pause for concern. I don't buy into Adan Feuerstein's theory of shifting goalposts, but I do think Dr. Missling made some errors in judgement in how he presented past data. That said, fumbles happen. Nobody is perfect. I don't watch a football game and not expect to see a few fumbles.
I wish those with critical opinions would be as objective as I've tried to been, because I never see any of them highlight the positives -- of which there are many. For example, we've advanced from a broke company with an idea to a company that is in discussions with the FDA for P3 approval for a rare pediatric disease. That's all kudos to Dr. Missling.
Hiring Dr. Jin has relieved my concerns that we'll continue to see errors in judgment or "funny statistics" going forward. And I absolutely believe Dr. Missling timed certain press releases to pump the stock before his options expired. He's greedy. One may argue this is a good trait for a biotech startup CEO. He knows that if Blarcamesine does work, it's worth a lot more than what someone will pay for it now or even 3 years from now. I want a CEO with a long-term outlook.
There are two paths for FDA approval and Anavex is pursuing the one it believes gives it the best shot at success. It may be less common and less known (admit it: how many people were aware of this second pathway -- I wasn't) but if it's good enough for the FDA it's good enough for me.
When I was single, someone once told me that if I wanted to date women out of my league I needed to be kind, funny or rich. I didn't need to be all three, but two of the three helps. I believe Anavex has two of the three. It's safe and effective. It doesn't have to be a full-on cure. It just has to work as well as the Lecanemab jab.
I would be 100% fine with that strategy, even if it takes another 24-36 months.
10 years on average to bring a drug to market, and the pandemic undoubtedly delayed things by at least 2 years. So that’s 12 years from when Dr Missling took over, starting mid-2013.
My only concern is that my January 2025 calls may expire but I should be able to roll them into 2026 without taking too much of a hit.
Probably not a bad strategy but my guess is that the tax implications for most negate any benefit. I’m a buy and hold guy.
Many years ago, my son had an issue with a classmate and the teacher refused to address it. I told my kid to ignore the other child as best he could, that nothing good would ever come from retaliating publicly.
I don’t think the kid ever stopped bothering my son, but my son learned to not it bother him. That’s the approach Anavex is and should be taking. AF wants the company to engage, it draws more attention and gives him a platform.
A few years later my kid and the classmate ended up on the same football team. During a practice, my son threw a high pass that the other kid had to go up high to grab, and that kid got completely leveled by a roving free safety. To this day my son swears that pass slipped out of his hand but I guess we’ll never know the truth.
Things have a way of resolving themselves in due time. Consider the FDA approval committee as the free safety Adam’s followers should be aware of before they get hurt badly, too.
I can already tell you that no matter how air tight the data is, there will be someone who attempts to invalidate it or downplay it. Only third party validation, either a respected journal or the FDA itself, will prevent a drop in the share price.
If Blarcamesine works, patients will demand it and doctors will be forced to either Rx it or risk seeing patients find a more willing provider. Shareholders will be rewarded either through increasing revenue from which future cash flows can be modeled, or through a buyout if someone decides they want all those profits.
No blogger or message board poster can stop the ball from rolling downhill at this point. This is why Dr. Missling isn’t responding. His focus isn’t on the short term stuff that is irrelevant to the long term.
Patient shareholders will either be punished severely or rewarded well.
And yet look at who is doing the fleecing? Some of us have been around back when you used to post under your CTIX handle, touting Blarcamesine as a wonder drug. I read of more than one poster who trusted you and while I generally try to lead a caveat emptor way of life, I felt bad that people lost money buying into the hype of internet pitchmen/traders.
But then I think that maybe, inadvertently, you could have given these novice investors the best investment tip of their lifetime. Eight years later, here we are chugging along with a hundred million in the bank, no debt, and still under 90 million shares O/S with a P3 trial about to read out that could net an additional $100mm priority review voucher. Perhaps those who bit off more than they could chew back in 2015 and have been in the red ever since -- who would blame them for not averaging down -- might end up becoming the big winner sometime in the next 24 months? I like that ending and to be honest, I'm starting to believe that might be how this all plays out.
Doesn't make me a homer or a WGT cheerleader. I started out giving Blarcamesine about 5% odds of approval and invested accordingly. I now have the odds closer to 80-90% for Rett, and 75% for Alzheimer's. These are just my odds but Anavex is in an objectively better position today than it was back then. Dr. Missling isn't perfect but he's a big reason we are where we are.
Do you really think that's the most likely explanation, Leo? That Dr. Missling is holding onto shares of what many believe to be a fraudulent company because he doesn't want to see his paper profits shrink? I guess it's possible but I wouldn't say that's as likely an explanation as he believes in the company and believes those shares will have a future value greater than the lump cash invested elsewhere would earn. In other words, he chose to reinvest his cash into his company. I might take 50:1 odds on your suggestion, that he's vain enough to rather be paper rich and cash poor against the advice of every financial planner in the world.
Ambiguous usually ends up in court, and ambiguous usually loses. It doesn't make sense why he'd like when he can simply say, "the drug didn't pan out, we are going to pivot to..." and use the $100 million in cash to start over. People lie when they don't have options, when their backs are against the wall. Blarcamesine could be a complete dud and the company still has a second life (this is rare for most startup biotechs, by the way). I'd imagine if Dr. Missling were trying to bleed the company he wouldn't want to risk exposing the nest egg to lawsuits.
So we are basically saying the same thing worded differently. I agree that right now Anavex is not an investment-grade security. It has zero revenue and zero salable products. Fund managers aren't looking for home runs; they're looking for singles and doubles and every now and then they'll strike out or hit a home run. If Anavex goes up to $1249 there isn't a single fund manager who loses his or her job over not buying it; if it goes to 0 there may be an exit interview in that manager's future.
Anavex's potential rests with FDA approval and health insurance companies providing coverage or reimbursement. More than likely the federal government will get involved too since most elderly people are on Medicare. When these hurdles are cleared, we'll see a massive flow of shares from retail to institutions and that will provide the price surge we're all waiting for.
Whether the cabal exists or not is irrelevant. Either the drug works or it doesn't, and if it does no amount of message board posting will scare off fund managers from placing large buy orders. I wouldn't want to be short in this scenario.
As for the delay, I don't believe it's due to bad news as some here are speculating. Dr. Missling isn't attending these investor conferences to serve the investment community a giant sh*t sandwich. There are just too many other actions that make me believe he's pushing forward on all fronts. The silence is intentional, and it's probably because he's learned that it's best to remain silent at this point and let a journal or the FDA speak on his behalf at some point in the future.
Let's put it this way. There are 80 million shares outstanding, give or take. There are probably 30 regular posters on this forum. Let's call it 50 who post on a semi-regular basis. Let's also assume, generously, that this message board controls around 10 million shares collectively. And of these 10 million shares, let's also assume that 2 million shares are in "weak hands" who might panic and sell because of a stranger's postings.
2 million / 80 million = 2.5% of the outstanding shares that "might" be influenced by a message board basher. That's hardly enough to move a stock on a day-to-day basis.
I agree that Adam Feuerstein coordinates his articles so his audience can short together and profit. But their gains are only temporary. In the long-run this type of manipulation is irrelevant and offers patient investors more buying opportunities. It's the HFT algorithms that can cause real damage to a stock. And the firms that use these supercomputers aren't paying people $18/hour to post nonsense on message boards. The Feuerstein's and internet bashers of the world are bush league. That's why I don't give them much thought other than to ignore them, a tactic I'd suggest you try. Because try as you might, engaging with them isn't going to do anything to boost the share price. That will happen when funds decide they want in and have to buy shares from patient retail holders who won't sell for peanuts.
Pretty much. And I'll tell you something else. In all the stocks I've made money on, each one had its share of message board bashers. 25 years later I still remember some of their usernames on the old Affymetrix board. I view their presence as something of a good omen.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again: if you have actual evidence of collusion, please provide it to me and I will forward it to three contacts I know at the SEC, all of whom are enforcement attorneys.
Feuerstein is playing by the rules. The rules may suck, but he's a man entitled to his opinion and others are entitled to trade based on his opinion. If there's an unwritten signal that everyone shorts the stock when he posts an article, it's no different than how everyone banded together a few years ago to take down Melvin Capital.
The gamble Feuerstein's followers don't seem to realize is that he has no actual skin in the game. So while some of them may make money for a while, it is a dangerous game with a CEO who just recently said he plans to release news at the time of his choosing with a stated goal of taking the market by surprise. I wouldn't want to be a short caught off-guard any more than I'd want to be a long who was trying to flip shares or sell calls. Maybe my approach is old fashioned but I like to buy, hold and take profits when it allows me to ride free shares.
Market collusion exists but it's not like it used to be back in the 90s. Hedge funds still run the show but they don't use message boards anymore, they use supercomputers running software programs designed by MIT quants who would prefer to build rockets for NASA if the salaries were the same. Maybe some really. low-tier funds try to use archaic scare tactics that were effective back when information was not so easily accessed, but I'm not too worried about message board stock bashers. They have pretty much zero influence in today's era. Most people block/ignore them immediately instead of choosing to engage them.
That interview was from the 90s or early 2000s. The market, and the ability to manipulate it, is much different.
Feuerstein is a blogger with an audience who can cause panicked, inexperienced retails into prematurely exiting their positions. Institutions and fund managers don't pay him much attention and neither should you.
If they have started the trials there would be a PR about it as that should be considered a material event. It involves cash transactions that affect the company's balance sheet.
But silence is supposedly golden. I don't understand why so many people think it's a bad thing. When you fly on a plane, you don't expect the pilot to tell you how everything is going every 15 minutes. That would be so annoying to all the passengers. It's the same thing with our CEO. It's not as if he hasn't been working since December. We've advanced the Rett trial to near-completion. We've signed a marketing partnership with an AI company. We're running an extended trial that may be sufficient for P4 confirmatory evidence. We're attending investor conferences and we're seeing an uptick in institutional ownership. Our CEO swapped cash for more shares, has assured us the overall data is worthy of FDA approval and has, for the first time, indicated that partnership discussions have occurred. Allegedly, Dr. Missling met with an investment bank per a report on TheFly, and who knows how many more he's taken in the years since -- that's the world he comes from so I doubt he's lacking in contacts.
I am fine investing my own money in Anavex. As confident and hopeful as I am, I would not feel comfortable risking anyone else's money. It's not investment grade, yet. If things pan out the way I hope and expect, one day it will be. And for that risk I expect to be rewarded for my patience, or punished for it. Time will tell. In the meantime, nothing posted here is going to change anyone's opinion. Only time will. And at the end of the day, the health insurance companies and the person who makes decisions for Medicare will be the ones who are ultimately responsible for deciding whether Blarcamesine becomes the next standard of care. FDA approval isn't the final hurdle. It's just the next big one.
Popularity and influence may be an 8/10. His credibility is far lower than that. He's had a few correct calls, rooting out fraud -- enough to help him build a following, but he's also had his share of bad picks, too. For a while he touted a theory that small-cap stocks do not stand a chance going into FDA approval meetings. I believe the exact number was 120 days before FDA decision, if a company wasn't worth at least $300 million it had no shot. Needless to say, nobody references the Feuerstein-Ratain theory anymore because it's bulls..t.
Sometimes he's right, sometime's he's not. Considering the failure rate of biotech he should be more right than wrong even if he did literally zero research and picked names at random.
His track record of late hasn't been very good, but it doesn't matter because he will never admit when he's wrong. Nobody is perfect, but he's like Trump in that he refuses to ever own to up to the times he got it wrong. It might be a useful trait for a politician but certainly not for a journalist. Retractions are a huge part of establishing credibility. Instead, he disappears for a while and re-emerges with a new P1/P2 target. That's his MO and it's not going to change. Anavex will be in his rear view the moment the FDA approves Blarcamesine for Rett. There'll be a few parting shots and then he'll be out of sight, out of mind. Just like Jean Fonteneau and Nathan Michaud and all the others who trashed the company during its infancy and haven't said a peep since.
Adam Feuerstein is an investment strategy. People know that if they subscribe to his newsletters, they may get access to potential short ideas. And then when he publishes his articles, most of the time the stocks go down. To date he's been trying to kill Anavex and has failed to do so. The company is not only surviving, but thriving. Whether that's because Blarcamesine works or Anavex has the most foolish shareholder base remains to be seen, but what I do know is that Adam Feuerstein has about as much influence over the FDA outcome as he has credibility among his peers.
Don't confuse credibility with popularity. Feuerstein will never be credible so long as he refuses to publicly admit when he's wrong.
I'd argue that share price is not necessarily linked to intrinsic value, particularly with a stock in the startup space that has for years attracted the attention of aggressive short sellers. I do not believe in the theory of a cabal, though I do acknowledge there are a few rogue actors who wish to see Anavex ruined -- at this point it almost feels personal and a point of pride, as much as it pains the Adam Feuerstein's of the world who never imagined we'd be finishing P3 trials back when he said that Blarcamesine is as effective as a few cups of coffee.
I believe Dr. Missling when he says that right now with regards to the AD trial there is nothing to report. If we are waiting for peer review, it could take some time. It took a little less than a year for another one of my stocks -- that trial concluded in 2022 and we just got JAMA publication in June. Journals like to present new data, so it makes sense that Dr. Missling is waiting to release a PR until a peer-review is complete. Or it could be that he knows he only has one crack at the FDA and he wants to be 100% sure he can back up any questions or criticisms that the FDA may have. More data would be helpful. As long as one believes the top-line data is accurate, it should be all good. And of course, if the data weren't good, the company has 4 days to report any material failures to the public via SEC notice. The fact we haven't seen that, nor have there been any law suits, is a good sign.
As for the hedge fund managers, even if the company is a small piece of the overall portfolio, investors are paying these managers to actively manage all securities. If one turns out to be a dud, that happens, but if there are obvious signs of malfeasance it would expose these funds to potential liability
Okay, so 10% of the company is owned by active fund managers. Where is their displeasure with Dr. Missling's performance? Why are these professionals so content with sitting by the wayside when there is an obvious fraud in their portfolio?
You replied to my post but failed to answer either of my two questions. And I think the reason for that is because there isn't a good explanation other than Dr. Missling is bullish on the prospects of Blarcamesine. It's possible he's wrong and the drug is a dud and in that case he loses with the rest of us longs, but his actions are those of someone who believes the hand he was dealt is worth playing to the end. I think it's more plausible Dr. Missling is bullish than it is that he's trying to keep a house of cards from collapsing when he's got $100 million in the bank. That's a pretty solid foundation.
I am not too worried about the silence. I can think of dozens of explanations if I let my brain wander for a few minutes. Some bullish, some bearish, but all of them mere speculation. For now, Dr. Missling told us that he expects to have more data sometime in 2H '23. We'll see if he delivers. I think he will.
Just 2 questions:
1. Why would Dr. Missling not take a lump sum of cash over more shares if he knew those shares were backed by garbage data?
2. Why would Dr. Missling lie or hide the truth when he has $130 million, no debt and a huge pipeline of drug candidates? If his intention is to scam investors, wouldn't he be better off abandoning Sigma-1 altogether and use some of that cash to acquire a late-stage company or hire a dream team of scientists to invent something new? Blarcamesine is over 10 years old, there's not much left to extract if Dr. Missling's goal is to bleed out the corporate coffers.
Someone recently asked me what skewed my opinion from neutral to more bullish? I acknowledge the possibility that anything can happen, which excludes me from the WGT crowd, but that's okay. I'll judge the company at this point based partly on the conviction I see from the CEO. I don't see someone who looks panicked or someone who is trying to bluff his way out of a bad hand. I see a CEO who is confident that he has the goods and isn't in any hurry to appease a few impatient shareholders.
Anavex is something like 30% institutionally owned. And yet not a peep from a single fund manager, at least publicly, about any of Dr. Missling's perceived shortcomings. Not a single one has proxied shareholders for a BoD change. If things were so bad, where are all the activist fund investors? To me, that speaks volumes more than the opinion of a bunch of message board amateurs on their home office PCs.
I have never seen a contingent rights deal pay out its max amount. Delays happen, intentionally or otherwise, and when milestones are met they are often not met by the various contingent deadlines -- allowing the acquiring company to have its cake and eat it, too.
My fear for Anavex is this type of partnership. I'd prefer to see us grow the company and partner by offering a percentage of profit in exchange for manufacturing, marketing and distribution pathways.