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.
If Dr. Missling sensed someone was accumulating shares with intent, would quickly partnering with someone make us less attractive?
BB
We've often talked about how high the share price might go.
In a swallowing, what do you think would be the lowest price we could be had at?
BB
Is he legally bound to tell you the truth?
Also did he say yes to your specific question about preventing an unwanted and/or undervalued takeover attempt, or did volunteer that as the sole reason? Thanks.
BB
Why is it when I go to the Anavex homepage their pipeline graphics don't show the fading arrows?
BB
"Think clearly people."
Thanks for the laugh.
BB
This brings up a question.
When an approval body ( the FDA or Aussie/Spanish equivalent) looks at the results of a trial, would they be able to and would they be likely to look at research papers to aid them in a decision?
You're thoughts are exactly what I was pondering.
While 3-71 would be fabulous for those with for severe cases of AD, might 2-73's several year head start greatly reduce(permanantly) such cases?
Falconer also raises an interesting question.
While our pipeline page lists 3 indications for 3-71, the full menu might be eye popping.
BB
Just to be fair...
He thought Rett would be the quickest way to approval.
Not looking that way now.
He make the monster promise of 3 trials by the end of 2017.
I personally don't believe Australia and Spain were our first choices.
If Anavex is successful we'll probably find out the answer to that.
BB
This brings up an interesting scenario.
If things go the way we hope A2-73 will become the SOC for several indications.
A few years later A3-71 would become the SOC for several indications.
You don't really see that too often from the same company and that might be for at least Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, the addressable market would be essentially the same.
I wouldn't be shocked if we were bought out and 3-71 never saw the light of day if it meant the less effective drug would be more financially lucrative.
Or should I be looking at A3-71 in a different light?
BB
Not sure I follow your logic.
A2-73 isn't a potential remedy for Psoriasis or Raynaud's. Either it's beneficial in the CNS arena or it's not.
Anavex is either worth zero or north of a hundred.
Please explain $15.
What would a $15 dollar bid mean?
At the bottom of the Australian solicitation for patients it says media requests to speak to patients is available so I guess it's on the media.
BB
Do you know or have you theories as to why they began with 2-73 instead of 3-71?
BB
I don't know a bit about biochemistry and cellular biology.
Could you elaborate on "The future of Anavex Life Sciences Corp is not just Anavex 2-73, by any means" please.
BB
I agree with you and your numbers.
I've been beaten and bloodied by a few small biotechs in my investing lifetime. It's the nature of the beast. I get that.
But me no give blank check.
"Lenivec, we are two years behind where we could be because we did not get enough votes for the plan’s passage. Each of us should be ashamed of ourselves for causing the delays Anavex has experienced in these past two years. TGD had/has a plan to bring possibility the best hope to counter these diseases and we need to support him and Anavex with a big “YES” to that proposal. "
And here I thought Anavex was just a publicly traded biotech company.
I'll put being ashamed on my "to do" list.
I'm trying to understand something here...
The last time the preferred shares were voted on it didn't pass.
Consensus on this board was that institutions not voting was the cause.
If institutional ownership is higher now why would anyone expect a different result?
And if the institutions did feel compelled to vote this time why would one think they'd vote yes?
If I were in charge of one I would vote no.
Anavex has sufficient funds to complete their 3 trials, giving an unknown(Anavex and Dr. Missling) extra goodies would not strike me as financially prudent.
BB
Thanks
I clicked on your link and investors.
I got this both times.
Oops! That page can’t be found.
It looks like nothing was found at this location. Try using the search box below:
good post
It's just one of many things we're forced to guess about.
The PDD enrollment data was refreshingly clear and concise.
I'm almost shocked.
I find the statement below intriguing:
"I tend to give more credence to a hypothesis when its lends itself to prediction of future events."
Care to elaborate?
Since the company has never stated publicly that we have help funding the current PDD or the Alzheimer's trial, do we have sufficient funds and funds available to go it alone?
Great find!
I'm waiting for the spin from this board where screening over 80 patients is actually a very, very good thing.
Mark my words, it will come.
Isn't he just saying in the interest of covering all our bases we're making more than enough for the trials and if allowed we'll sell what's left over?
There doesn't seem to be a consensus on the sleep aid market.
https://www.google.com/search?q=worldwide+market+for+sleep+aids&oq=worldwide+market+for+sleep+aids&aqs=chrome..69i57.20501j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
I don't know what to believe because information is not shared by this company in the way I believe a publicly held company should share it.
Speaking of straw man arguments...
I'll be voting no.
Anavex has used up my entire store of blind faith.
A Question about double blinded studies.
I get it that no one except a computer knows who got what.
But is the company free to interview the trial participants in detail and at length?
BB
Why does it show Parkinson's in preclinical?
Glad to have access to capital.
All companies are.
It's getting harder and harder to imagine this drug failing at everything.
Do you know when the first quarter ended?
Just wondering if we had any/many results when the 1 million was spent.
I know the Rett and PDD trials have secondary sleep endpoints.
I've often wondered if a sleep trial wouldn't have been the fastest and cheapest
way in.
I'm guessing I'm wrong, but I'd love to hear why.
I'm sure the subject has been broached before, but if A2-73 were to be approved for Parkinson’s disease dementia would many of the doctors in all the approving countries prescribe it for Alzheimer's?
Are the 2 considered similar?
Wondering if my mom(who's suffering from memory issues) could temporarily
relocate to a memory care center in Spain until approved here.
Recent article about women's brains.
Regards,
BB
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/02/05/npr-scans-show-womens-brains-remain-youthful-as-male-brains-wind-down
Historically, yes.
I really think your point is moot.
The whole thing is binary.
If the Anavex trials fail I don't care how many millions I have to share nothing with.
If successful, past dilutions will seem trivial.
That seems to be the case up and down the line with Anavex.
If we do have successful outcomes from some or all of our trials, it'd be hard for naysayers to argue against the multiple world renowned experts we're associated with.
BB