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.
So what you are saying is when a stock price goes down index funds buy more of it. ROFL.
What is the problem with have a small portion of one's portfolio set aside for investing in high risk, high return investments.
Call it my entertainment portfolio.
Of course Apple at $12 was a high risk investment at the time. Nvidia back when it was in $5 range was getting beaten up by Intel and looked quite risky.
Bio tech companies that have no approved drugs are very risky and if they succeed produce outsized gains.
I'm sure you will agree that one shouldn't invest more in developmental bio techs than you can afford to lose.
You and me both. Nvidia would have been a much better investment.
Alas.
Hind sight is 20/20.
So since I didn't invest in Nvidia I'll stick with my investment in Anavex as my best chance for outsized returns.
Please feel free to post your calculation of what the value of the short position is if you don't like mine.
Actually I think the shorts have made well over $100,000,000 shorting Anavex and that is a net value.
Remember they started ramping up the short position several years ago when the SP was much higher. It seems pretty likely that there was a lot of shorting done when the SP was in the $20 range.
The delay you suggest is not that significant compared to the difference in the what the deal is worth to Anavex before and after approval.
Part of the approval process for the EMA is a review of the labeling and literature for the drug. So that will be done at approval time. Ramping up a sales team that already exists to a new product that is not complicated, i.e. a once a day pill, doesn't take long.
As a practical matter, the leverage Anavex gains in making a better deal more than outweighs the little time gained in getting revenues by partnering prior to approval.
The one caveat is a partner might see the inevitability of approval and make an offer assuming approval. Somehow I doubt that is the way it will go down.
If 2-73 gets approved there will be many companies trying to find ways around the patents to cash in on the new market.
You're right is 2-73 is never approved then all the patents are worthless, however, see the above sentence.
Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.
Missling has made some mistakes. The Rett trial did not turn out as planned. There are 22,000,000 shares short that are officially acknowledged. That short position is worth well over $100,000,000.
Do you think that no one is trying to protect that large amount of funds?
All of these things can be true at the same time.
Perhaps you should try to charge George rent, because right now he is living inside your head rent free.
What you seem to be missing is they are debating the timing of the MAA approval not the likelihood, which is considered to be very likely.
You didn't answer my question.
For all the bitching you do, you seemed seem to have forgotten the EMA process has started.
I am curious, what did Missling do to you to give you such a hard on for Anavex and Missling? You post almost exclusively on AVXL and all of them are the most denigrating that you can think of.
If only Missling had done it Wall Street's way things would be better. Maybe, and shareholders would own a smaller piece of the company.
Missling has the confidence of the board because they see where the company is headed and have a longer term horizon than you apparently do.
Doing things differently subjects one to criticism. It goes with the territory. You or I won't know if his way was a better choice until there are approvals and we see what partnerships the company has made. So until then throw all the rocks you want. Your argument is based on supposition. WS is perfectly willing to throw a company under the bus if there is a short term profit to be made.
Which explains why in most cases when I cut and paste I provide a link to the source so each reader that cares can make their own evaluation of the source.
Of course not.
As a casual observer of any political campaign ad will see, it is more effective to scare people into action than it is to entice them. Shorts and those wanting to buy at a lower price employ scare tactics to influence shareholder behavior.
Attempting to manipulate buying is more difficult. Sure you can paint a rosy picture of the future, after all that is what most ads on TV do, but most investors have already done their research and have a pretty good idea what they bought and why they did. Enticing them to buy more runs up against some real resistance in terms of dry powder, portfolio allocation limits, and other competing investment opportunities.
I suggest that the total effect on the share price of "pumping" is minimal and thinking that a single poster or even several have any effect on the share price is quite a reach.
Compare the relentless drum beat of the multiple negative posters vs the few hard core positive posters and the numbers of posts are heavily skewed toward the negative. But then it is much easier to make money on the short side in the absence of significant progress. Once that significant progress happens, being on the short side will be a bit more challenging. Of course 20,000,000 share short position with a value of $100,000,000 or more has no real competition on the long side so far, although the tutes seem to be increasing their positions. Remember that the vast majority of the shares held by the tutes are in index funds and are not actively protected as are the short positions.
We await significant progress to see how this will play out.
I have my tickets to the show and will have popcorn at the ready when the show starts.
That would depend on what information the directors have compared to management. It is entirely possible for management to have information that the directors are unaware of.
Still that does look like splitting hairs.
Which begs the question, why are you here? 😉
I find it very useful in the contentious environment of this board. I call it quoting the source as opposed to expressing information second hand.
Joseph, Thanks for taking the time to find that and post it.
Did Missling mention Fragile X in the recent CC?
Your complaint assumes that somehow magically trials could have been run and completed 8 or 9 years ago. That is nonsense.
Bio tech is a slow methodical process governed by a strict series of protocols.
It is not aerospace where the Skunk Works can throw a bunch of highly talented engineers and a boat load of money at a problem and crank out a world class airplane. Even Kelly Johnson and his team took close to 4 years and had funding of the 2023 equivalent of $758 million Dollars to build the A-12s.
Anavex is moving forward with its drug development. We all would like it to be faster, even the FDA thinks the process is too slow and is making changes to make it faster.
The problem with that theory is there are very few terahertz sources outside the laboratory.
Anavex drug candidates.
https://www.anavex.com/therapeutic-candidates
That is an expansion of an already issued patent so it should go pretty quickly in patent terms.
Your sympathy for the class action law firms is heart warming.
That was the point of filing the law suit. It is designed to be distracting and expensive for the company and more importantly depress the share price for the shorts.
So you think the previous lawsuit was legit?
You do remember that it was dismissed with prejudice don't you?
Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
Except it was not a paid for article.
Your angst is misplaced.
Where are the disclaimers for the "stuff" you post?
You should have read a bit further. Looks like that was mostly an article to generate interest in their newsletter.
Looks like AD stocks are on somebody's radar. AVXL +8% SAVA +9.6% as I type.
With Aduhelm the market performed the cost benefit analysis.
Apparently the answer is sort of.
As I understand it there are two things to consider. First is there is a great deal of commonality between the EMA and FDA filings, so much of the work only has to be done once. For the differences between the two there are outsourcing companies that can do the multiple language requirements for the EMA that the FDA doesn't have.
There are also companies that specialize in creating NDA and MAA packages at what ever level of capability a company requires. All they way from complete NDAs to individual sections as needed.
So to me that means that Anavex can do what it can in house and outsource what it feels it doesn't have the resources to do.
One other consideration is that the staff Anavex has is very well equipped to supervise any outsourced work and verify the quality and correctness of the work product prior to submission.
Missling has said he wants the OLE data before filing with the FDA.
Somehow I doubt that the FDA is that concerned with the EMA. Given what Missling said about starting with the EMA first because their process is the longest, he may be planning for the FDA and the EMA to have decisions in about the same time frame.
The EMA has a greater sensitivity to the costs of a drug and the costs to the economy than does the FDA. I suggest that is why the EMA was "pulling" on Anavex. The FDA doesn't weigh those considerations as we have seen with the mab approvals.
I may be naive in my thinking on this. Certainly the FDA and all other agencies would like to see a successful AD drug that is easy to administer and comparatively cheap make it to the marketplace. That would be a political win, a bureaucratic win, and a medical win.
Never mind. It seems to be working properly now.
Schwab doesn't seem to be providing LVL II in its data feed. Is that Schwab of Medvedtrader?
Missling has options on 6 million shares or so. So buying shares has little personal benefit.
So that leaves the "send a message" as the only reason for him to buy shares. Another word for that would be manipulation. Or as it was just described a cheap publicity stunt.
I suppose that might result in a short term SP bump. Whoopie.
Trial results are all that maters, the rest is entertainment.
We shall see in 9 days or so. I'd be very happy to be wrong on this.
I read this from the GOV.UK website linked below.
As I read that it means the assessment i.e. the 150 clock starts after validation. ChatGPT sees it differently.
If that is case then the clock started Jan 24th.
80 days for the Phase 1 assessment would be about April 16th. If there was a RFI it would have occurred about then. With no RFI then the clock times out about June 23rd.
If the clock started on the validation confirmation add 43 days to June 23rd and make it about August 5th.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/guidance-on-150-day-assessment-for-national-applications-for-medicines
"The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."