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.
As a fellow old timer with skills, play the "Core and explore" strategy.
$AVXL has been a very profitable trading stock for me over the last 8 years. I hook a hiatus from trading and went to buy side only over the last couple years, but truth be told I had to go to accumulation mode because I got too cocky selling premium rich covered calls against my very low cost basis positions. I got my ass handed to me on a silver platter in Feb 2021 whereby I lost a ton of opportunity cost that paled in comparison to the premiums received. I officially retired in 2020 and without a steady income stream it's been a slog to rebuild my position. The fact I lost bragging rights for holding sub $1.00 shares still irks and haunts me. LOL
Total side story, I have a $AMGN position in my inherited IRA with a $1.78 cost basis. I'll be sad to see that cost basis lost when the step up basis is created upon transfer out.
AUC analysis is not new...but spin it as bearish as you want. The science and analysis is solid and based upon standard measures.
https://towardsdatascience.com/understanding-auc-roc-curve-68b2303cc9c5
$AVXL has engaged Ariana for its advanced AI analytics for a reason.
Know what you own.
Events bullish and bearish can of course cause a reevaluation of technicals.
Nothing wrong with a range pattern for those who know what they own and why. The macro trading environment can't be fought, but it can be traded for those with the skills.
It's that 5% of value that prevents placing on "ignore". LOL
The LPC agreement is more like a "Put" agreement whereby LPC must purchase the shares per the formula up to agreed amounts. The formula mitigates the risk to LPC and is common in equity financing agreements. The terms of the price calculation are fair.
The Cantor agreement had no obligation of Cantor to buy, but simply for Cantor to act as an intermediary or placement agent for a 3% fee with discretion for Cantor to not act, but to instead act on good faith based on market conditions.
All market participants whether they will admit it or not are part of a cabal.
That's the beauty of technical analysis, it is what it is, math is math. But of course interpretations of the math may differ.
Since both methods might be presented in a final report our exercise in understanding the difference in the endpoint calculations and their application is probably futile.
But, good to exercise the brain nonetheless.
The money all spends the same and investment banking is a critical component of capitalism.
Are these complainers a bunch of commies, LOL? Or people with an agenda to spread negative narratives? I think we know the answer.
Seeing good counterpoints to the negative FUD lately, good work.
File this under "U" for uncertainty that both bulls and bears will speculate on:
This will give Anavex the flexibility to raise cash as needed without selling their soul to an investment Bank. This continues Dr.M's independence from Wall Street. Some people will view it positive some negative. When a capital partner has done well in the past, as LPC has, you keep the relationship going. LPC obviously finds no problem placing the shares.
Cantor Fitzgerald is probably pissy they didn't get the business hence their low price target. Investment bankers are a truly petty egoist bunch.
The Cantor Price target also needs to be put into context that the contract was drawn up in 2018 at below $5. Sometimes 100% targets get met... They will be back in another financing round someday in the far future and the "Strong Buy" will be right back on.
Some ancient history for you:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314052/000161577418006280/s111267_8k.htm
Thank you, so that definitely helps clarify the use of "AUC".
The idea of anchoring still seems like a valuable calculation to add, but what do I know?
FUD'sters got a lot of mileage out of that communication misstep.
I see AUC was added as a primary on the clinical trials site.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03758924
The MJFF trial is simply to prove a point and once proved it's done and with a small sample size is my guess.
I don't think MJF is personally involved, but the foundation has supported Anavex in the past with early stage trials too.
Some early stuff: "Evaluation of ANAVEX2-73 (blarcamesine) in Participants with Parkinson’s Disease" https://www.michaeljfox.org/grant/evaluation-anavex2-73-blarcamesine-participants-parkinsons-disease
The work that needs to be done before proper comments could be made regarding the AD data was mutually understood.
The questions were good, but Dr.M still stumbled over explaining RSBQ, RSBQ-AUC, CGI, and CGI anchored scores. So I think I'm understanding, due to small sample size CGI anchored RSBQ-AUC was used, but in a larger sample RSBQ and CGI are used and would that be "anchored" ?
AVATAR had 33 participants, the EXCELLENCE Phase 2/3 study (pediatric) will have 92 participants.
The data set of the combined Rett trials are of sufficient size to stand on their own. That clarifies one of the popular FUD factor themes often mentioned here.
The Michael J Fox foundation funded imaging study is still on and I noticed its description is no longer stated as indication specific for PD/PDD. This makes sense as S1R site occupancy is probably not indication specific.
These sites may help. The reporting requirements for the site were quite lax but have been recently revised.
https://www.socra.org/blog/clinicaltrials-registration-results-reporting/
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2786399
ST is garbage unless one is easily entertained by streams of animated gifs.
Try stronger bourbon on them cornflakes.
I hear the FB group is great, but heavily moderated to keep bullshit to a minimum.
I do recall the comment the PET imaging study may not be needed, but not any follow up. And, not knowing the details of MRI versus PET as it applies to target engagement and/or hippocampal volume I will await more information from the company or scientific explanation as to why or why not it's needed at this stage.
I still think it's in good taste to replace the rat skulls with human ones. LOL.
Oh that's right I knew that, duh. I remember making a joke about finally getting the murine (rat) skulls updated with human ones. LOL!
LOL and why not? and to be blunt, from a caregiver perspective dementia sucks all the same in overlapping symptoms.
What will the MJFF funded PD/PDD PET scans be looking for?
It is similar to AD use but with alpha synuclein? or only:
I genuinely chuckled!
I hear some of the $AVXL fans do love his hair! LOL!
Of course "pumpers might believe in their perspective" of a faster approval path and a P4, because it is possible. Just as I can also agree there could be a decision to see an accelerated approval and another P3.
We'll just have to wait and see, as Luke Brown was literally just hired. My assumption is his focus will be to further develop relationships with new and current institutional level shareholders. This will free up Clint so he can focus on his real function as VP of operations. Anavex may still contract with Andrew J. Barwicki to handle "retail" level investor relation services.
The title "Senior Director" is more related to his pay scale and responsibilities versus managing a staff.
Review Luke Browns profile on Linkedin, he has the right experience and credentials for the role.
I can gladly say I've been on team pump since day one!
Even when I had open covered calls I was still bullish through and through. But, of course I bitched and complained when my pennies basis were called away.
Being a bit of a cynic on government matters I agree the "real story" may never be told.
The context in my head missing from my comment is that companies that have vulnerabilities are often the targets of Naked Short Selling and $AVXL does not have any real vulnerabilities besides the unknown and the angst it causes waiting for it to be revealed.
$AVXL was among a portfolio I started focusing on cannabinoids. They all basically failed except for GW Pharma ($JAZZ) and $AVXL which in retrospect didn't really belong in the allocation in the first place. Edit that allocation just barely beat the norm with 8 fails, 2 wins.
The article that got me interested for all the wrong reasons. LOL
https://www.anavex.com/post/anavex-encouraged-by-scientific-data-confirming-sigma-1-receptor-s-beneficial-direct-interaction
The current real and documented "issue" regarding $AVXL is legitimate shorting. There are both positive and negative implications to this fact. I'm simply focusing on my own personal gut on the topic.
There is zero certainty to my opinions, hence my comment the real story is yet to be told and my guess is via a Netflix special on the topic.
We all know it's "just around the corner".
We need a glossary for new eyeballs of the Anavexism's here. LOL!
Ah I see you too probably had a green screen quotron on your desk and maybe even ran tickets to the cage. LOL!!!
I had a short term gig where I reviewed the retail level REGSHO and FTD (fail to deliver) list often simply getting grandpa to deliver his certs from the safe deposit box. LOL!
It's a whole new world and adding in the freaking leverage ... Like I said before, I'm waiting for the Netflix special to tells us we weren't crazy.
My motivation was my dad's PDD which was later changed to Lewy Body Dementia. I've since become interested in the rare disease possibilities and indication expansion with S1R and muscarinic modulations.
Similarly, I avoided OTC socks until I had too to play the game and rode the "Green Rush" quite well. Interestingly that's also how I ran across the $AVXL ticker for the first time.
How easy is it to test for Sigma-1 Wild Type?
"Naked shorting" is a very popular theory among retail conspiracy lovers, but the fact of the matter is "Naked shorting" impacts OTC and "AMEX" (now owned by NYSE) level equities as the intent is to drive the price into oblivion and/or destroy future equity finance raises.
Anavex is now at the NASDAQ Global Select Tier (the top), it is NOT a target for "naked short", I repeat $AVXL is NOT a target of naked shorting.
That said do I think flaws in REGSHO, DTCC and dark pool ex-clearing needs reform?...Yes I do. I would be satisfied with even the most basic of reform such as tracking such that a stock share could only be allowed to be shorted ONCE and the marketmaker exceptions were limited and tracked.
$AVXL has very important developments to announce, it's a shame this distractive off-topic discussion continually appears on the $AVXL page. Naked shorting probably DOES impact the OTC level garbage Ihub caters too, but not Anavex.
Agreed, but the geographic dispersion of Sigma-1 (Wild Type) as shown in the research from https://www.sotcanalytics.com/ is interesting and may someday have a real world impact on global efficacy numbers.
An tactic of spreading FUD is to use distraction and tangents create board chaos.