Retired
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.
Glad to see Anavex is actively engaging the Rett community, academics, and the regulatory agencies to achieve consensus and agreement.
I totally agree your analysis on why a trader would jump on it intraday, and my comment had the value of hindsight, and I do trend conservative to watch for confirmation. We all have different styles and emotions driving our trades.
A good non-market dynamics answer as yes, the "story" matters.
IMO, volume is always a good sign.
My reference to a "liquidity event" was related to the supply/demand dynamic of the morning run up and looking at the chart again, can be equally applied to afternoon fade down.
I like this volatility and volume. Wheeee!!!
True, this was just a weekly contract expiration and not the old school monthly contracts.
I'm of the bullish opinion something is up, and option market makers and shorts wanted to adjust their holdings sooner than later.
Or I can be lazy and say...It's the evil cabals keeping us retailers down with rampant manipulation and collusion! LOL!
Bottom line is it's safer to trade a confirmed break out than to trade an intraday breakout, especially on option expiration day in a known volatile and illiquid stock like $AVXL.
I think today was a one day liquidity event due to option expirations. My mid-day closing guess was for a $9.50 close, which was the closing VWAP area, and a friend picked $9. Our guesses were influenced primarily by open interest in the calls contracts.
Today was definitely exciting but $AVXL closed back into the established range bound zone and completely negated the intraday breakout. To me such liquidity influenced volume and volatility means nothing good or bad about the longer term due to closing back within the range.
Cool, I didn't really think so, but wanted to state it. Old fiduciary habits. BTW appreciate your opinions too.
Please know my posts are never to recommend "you" take action. I'm merely stating my personal option and actions based on MY investor profile and risk tolerances.
Don't fight the system, embrace the chaos and play the system.
Meanwhile in related news... $BIIB is fielding questions very well at the FDA meeting.
$BIIB and $AVXL are very different mechanisms of action, their good news is NOT $AVXL bad news. Here's an old timer tip for biotech, treat each company individually, but also be cognisant of the broader markets.
Same, but for long term gains. Was going to sell puts, but no bid by $1 ... no thank you.
Looking back I'm amazed at the changes in technology and only those who can change and adapt survive.
I used to play the SOES system a bit when I had direct access and I had worked with clients that used to arbitrage off of the regional options exchange system via auto execution. LOL the option MM's used to fight and try to kill the orders. LOL. Those were the crazy old days.
Win, lose or, draw on this play we'll have fun.
This range bound trading has delayed myself from employing a put writing scheme, so some volatility would be nice.
At 5% my cash is sticky to the T-Bills, but I'm looking for some action.
Uncertainty on how to evaluate any FDA decisions on $BIIB will bring retail selling is my hunch.
Now my gambler ass is looking a pissing away money on long calls!
Pls stick around, your technical analysis posts save me a lot of time and effort. I respect and appreciate what you offer.
$AVXL rarely goes flat for so long so interesting to see the Bollinger Bands have pinched to the actual price range.
Interesting, thanks. I have multiple scenarios and speculations in my head as to what services JP Morgan's investment bank arm could do, but I'll let the crowd chatter on that topic for now.
From stocktwits I saw that Nell has been working hard on "midtown meetings", forensic experts on the interwebs postulate the location is the JP Morgan building.
I personally did some sort of combination of exercise and hold depending on my income and cash situation at the time. There are many possibilities and all of our guesses are probable.
My guess is that Dr.M will exercise and hold all 500,000 shares purchased via the stock options at $1.60.
My reasoning is since Dr.M seems like such a frugal person, he has the cash squirreled away for this event.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314052/000173112223000573/e4559_def14a.htm
Your understanding is correct as is your solution.
In a rare, for me, complaint, everything is taking "too long".
I believe it's the frugal mindset which is sometimes good and sometimes bad, but I believe the rate of progress will accelerate in due time.
Remember Biotech isn't for everyone.
Agreed, but.... I had incorrectly assessed the state of the industry as it applied to short stock, as did everyone except the "stonk marketeers", when the Meme stock short squeeze happened. It was honestly among the freaking coolest market events I've watched unfold.
Not to go too off topic, but that event put a microscope on the industry and revealed just how flawed the margin rules of hypothecation, rehypothecation and the back end accounting by the DTCC and ex-broker clearing systems allowed to be created extreme levels of short stock to remain in the system and the fact in practice over 100% of the float be shorted. I'm doubtful reforms will be made to correct the system at this back office level as there is too much money to be made, but there are some proposals currently being reviewed that create more disclosure and reporting. IMO most current proposed changes to short disclosures are weak.
Bottom line is that this flawed system remains in effect and COULD make for upside fireworks should any positive binary event for $AVXL occur and of course would be nice, but short market participants learned from the past and hedging strategies have been implemented and adjusted so I think a squeeze effect will be tempered. Regardless of the details and of hedging, on the most basic level the shares shorted represent pent up buy pressure should the stock move against the shorts position.
My skills and knowledge are aging in this era of electronic trading but some things should remain true.
Side note, I appreciate all of your posts. Peace out!
My advice would be to do some soul searching on the value of spreading uncertainty under the guise of presumed expertise.
I'm already a successfully retired biotech investor and have researched and learned much over my years. I wish you the best as an investor.
A number to watch is Days to Cover.
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/avxl/short-interest
I've managed risk during a few short squeezes in my day. They are quite exciting.
Now you're just going off topic...I stand by my opinions as I'm sure you are too.
Totally accurate... and yes I agree FAIR pricing is needed and drug companies deserve proper compensation. I've been a biotech and big pharma investor for 30 years I have my opinions.
From the article:
""Big Pharma regularly forces Americans to pay many times what they do customers in other countries for the exact same medicines," White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement on Tuesday. "We are confident we will succeed in the courts. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents Medicare from negotiating lower drug prices."
HEAVY LIFT
Ameet Sarpatwari, a lawyer and professor at Harvard Medical School, said in an email that Merck's lawsuit stands on weak claims."
Agreed. Lane is lame... his ideas were an interesting read 5 years ago, and his attempts to translate his repetitive drivel to "stock value" is amateurish at best, to seriously flawed at worst.
It's a known issue within the Rett community that the best endpoints to use are up for debate, whether they are RSBQ, RSBQ AUC alone or anchored to CGI-I are up for debate.
What is important is that the FDA and Anavex have mutually agreed on them, and as of today we know that discussion has occurred. That is very bullish and team FUD hates that fact.
No need to catch up, I'm way ahead of you. I'm an optimist an look toward the future.
The context of that discussion was regarding agreed upon endpoints and data analysis with small sample sizes and thus AUC was used in that analysis.
But guess what you should have learned today that "The Rett Syndrome Behavior Questionnaire (RBSQ) total score and Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale (CGI-I) score are co-primary endpoints in the statistical analysis plan with specified linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures (MMRM) as the primary analysis methods."
To be an effective bearish FUD'ster explain more fully the issues with MMRM. Not dredging up an out of context comment on AUC
The context of that discussion was regarding agreed upon endpoints and data analysis with small sample sizes and thus AUC was used in that analysis.
But guess what you should have learned today that "The Rett Syndrome Behavior Questionnaire (RBSQ) total score and Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale (CGI-I) score are co-primary endpoints in the statistical analysis plan with specified linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures (MMRM) as the primary analysis methods."
To be an effective bearish FUD'ster explain more fully the issues with MMRM. Not dredging up an out of context comment on AUC.
Please provide the quote of such from the record.
Nonsense and I'm a lone bull who sometimes agrees with your comments.
Such the pessimists drive to always manufacture fear with manufactured uncertainty.
I agree with everything you said, but just want share my opinion that positive a Rett Syndrome top line result will be the first trials to represent applicable proof of concept for S1R modulation and investors of many levels should understand it's larger significance.
Anavex provided answers and reduced the Uncertainty spun by the FUD narrative. Trofinetide was approved on the same endpoints Anavex will also be using, thus, for the final analysis, there is more clarity now than the uncertainty your comment is elicits.
Regarding endpoint guidance, notice that the agreed endpoints are RSBQ and CGI-I and will not use AUC (Area under the curve) as was used in the adult Rett trial analysis.