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.
Different diseases with different disease pathways. Not an apples to apples comparison.
The short position as of the last short interest report is 22.117 million shares which is a 10.6% increase over the previous reporting period. That is 2.12 million shares shorted in about 10 trading days. 200K shares shorted on average every trading day. That may not be manipulation since it is likely legit shorting, but it certainly can put significant downward pressure on the share price, especially since there is no near term significant news expected.
Average daily vol for the last month is 1.2 million shares so 200K is about 16.7% of the daily volume being shorted into the market.
The next short interest report is Wednesday after the close. It will be interesting to see which way it goes.
And who do you suppose bought those 242,000 shares? Another institution?
Compared to a company that was close to BK yeah, I'd say that is great progress.
Is it as far along as any shareholder wants? Of course not. Rett not making endpoints was a big setback. It is not a lethal setback.
The ship is not sinking although that seems to be the prevailing zeitgeist at the moment.
Drug development is a slow process.
Then there are the completed trials, the trial in progress, the money in the bank, no debt, MAA process started in the EU for a huge disease market. All in all a company positioned well for the future.
What was the company's condition back before the RS? Oh yeah. No trials, no cash, and debt.
I'll disagree with your statement.
Many people that are good at building things continue to do so long after age 60 because it is what they enjoy doing. For most of those people money quit being an object long ago. Warren Buffett is an example.
George. I have no idea what you mean in that post.
Could you explain it a bit differently please?
So, tell us what he said. All I recall is what he commented on Rett and that was around $200K /yr.
We will have to disagree on that guesstimate. As of the last 10K Anavex has an accumulated deficit of $239,000,000.
That needs to be recovered. Maybe with time and additional approvals the per pill price will get down to $16 ea. but I think that will take some time.
That's the question, what is a reasonable price and what price will Anavex charge initially.
There are a lot of R&D costs to amortize.
If that article is correct, you would think that NWBO should be able to subpoena that data for its lawsuit against the MMs and brokerages.
Losing your shares to naked shorting is not the issue. Losing the value of those share is the issue.
It may be prescribed for all sorts of off label CNS issues but the real question is how expensive will it be and will insurance pay for off label uses.
The FDA will be most concerned with the primary endpoints and the stats used to calculate them.
Correlations to a different disease are going to be a minor item, probably in the footnotes or an addendum.
Same for the genomic data, unless specified in the outcome measures, which some of that is. Even so, the genomic data is supportive of the primary endpoints. The genomic changes are not accepted biomarkers so they won't have significant weight. They will support the theory of the MOA.
Safety data will be included from other trials. But how much attention do you think the FDA will pay to Rett trial safety? Different disease, different demographics. It's worth a paragraph or two but the bulk of the safety data will be about the AD trials and the OLE trials. That is the population that the drug is being targeted for.
I understand your point. At the same time I don't think you appreciate the issues in a biological system compared to a semiconductor system.
First the is the numeric problem. Hundreds of chips are made in each wafer. That give a statistical basis that is very difficult and expensive to create in biological systems. Then there is the ability to control variables in a semi production system. Compare that to a biological system with thousands of different molecules, enzymes, gene expressions etc.
The tools available to the semi industry are far more useful than the tools available to the medical industry. The medical world is making big progress in the last decade, even so, compared to things like an atomic force microscope the medical industry has it's hands tied behind its back. Human testing has a do no harm or at least create a harm benefit ratio that is beneficial. In the semi world you can do whatever you need to that will assist understanding. Is there an ethics review committee for testing in the semi world. (yeah, that one was a cheap shot. My apologies.)
Then there is the access to the system. Chips can be probed, stress tested, and shaved off layer by layer to see what is going on or going wrong. The brain is in a bone case and getting inside that case to do testing is minimal. Of course doing repeated destructive testing is a no go.
Also there is a time frame issue. A chip run can be made in a few days. AD process seems to occur over 20 years. Many disease processes have long time lines which slow the research process down accordingly. Cancer drugs were typically measured in survival rate after 5 years. Now with surrogate biomarkers that is changing to a much more manageable time frame. The technology that allows for these biomarkers is relatively new.
Animal models do allow for more testing and increased numbers for testing, but animal models are not exact replications of humans so the results are instructive but not always representative.
Physics and quantum mechanics is far better understood than many disease processes. As you point out, the root cause of Alz is not yet known. See the above points to help understand why that is.
The NWBO trials were over a much longer period of time with a more complicated treatment process. I suspect that had a significant effect on the required size of their submission along with the manufacturing information for their novel and complicated manufacturing process. Their manufacturing process is customized for each patient and involves living cells with all of the biological contamination protocols involved.
AVXL is a small molecule that is manufactured in dry pill form and a liquid form. It is a much simpler process to produce the drug.
On the other hand, Anavex has to submit EU labeling and marketing materials in multiple languages as part of the approval process.
What I have seen on FDA NDA average size is closer to 100K pages.
Missling's presentation skills are not the problem or the reason that the share price drops after a presentation.
Where do you get the1 million page document value from?
Stuff your condescension in the appropriate place.
Actually that "brief cut and paste was carefully considered. I didn't want to overwhelm you with facts.
The second sentence concerns type 2 errors which may well have occurred in the pediatric Rett trial. For extra credit explain what a type 2 error is to the board.
You seem to have difficulty with the word potentially. Let me help.
I hope you don't mind if I save this post and bring it up in the future.
The qualifications for the subjects are pretty tight. Also requires a longer stay in the facility. That may slow down recruitment a lot.
Looks like they expect the recruiting to take along time.
You may not have noticed but this board is heavily weighted against Missling and slightly less towards Anavex in general.
I agree. One should understand how index funds operate. For example.
What is an index methodology?
Broadly speaking, an index methodology is a set of rules or criteria that govern an index’s creation, calculation, and maintenance. The rules determine the assets that are eligible for inclusion in the index, the formulas by which the index value is calculated, the process for modifying the components, and a timetable for updates.
The indices underlying many of the most popular equity ETFs are market capitalisation-weighted benchmarks, meaning that the companies with the largest equity values receive the largest portfolio weightings. But while the ETF industry has helped to reinforce the popularity of these indices – such as the S&P 500, S&P/ASX 200 and MSCI World – it has also given increased visibility to alternative weighting methodologies.
A number of issuers offer equity ETFs that seek to track indices that are not based on market capitalisation, including:
equal-weighted indices
earnings-weighted and dividend-weighted indices
indices where security weightings are based on top-line revenue, and
fundamental weighting methodology.
Still looks like they haven't found a lead plaintiff. Hmmmm.
It's still hard to reconcile the share price difference between SAVA and AVXL. Any thought on that?
The question is... how will it take for the future to get here? 😉
So, in essence the argument is the market price is the true price. Which is of little help in the face of market manipulation either up or down.
Management fraud is a special case where the bad actors have been discovered and the fraud has been disclosed with the resultant effect on the share price.
If the NWBO case results in a judgement there will be another point of reference for determining true value. Till then the subject is opaque.
That paper covers fraud by management and methods for determining the loss due to the misrepresentation.
It has no bearing on share price manipulation by shorts or share price manipulation by Reddit types.
As an aside, I am only familiar with the Reddit game stop event. Has the Reddit crew engaged in other short squeeze events that had any impact?
I agree with that.
It is hard to reconcile the share price difference between SAVA and AVXL.
Which one represents the "true value", if there is such a thing or is the "true value" somewhere in between?
Gloating becomes you.
So when Reddit traders take the share price up no one should pay attention but when shorts take the share price down everyone should pay attention.
Manipulation works in both directions.
I get that manipulation on the down side is more difficult to experience, it is still manipulation of the value of the company.
Check and report back.
No doubt the share price sucks. It's back where it was in Jan 2021.
Of course in Feb 2021 the share price went up quite a bit. It hit $30 before settling down to the high teens.
So we will see what the future brings.
I bought Anavex for the drug potential. That hasn't changed. Trading a bit along the way hasn't hurt either.
Overall market is red today. But why pass up on an opportunity to dis someone?
XBI -2.33%
AVXL -2.33%
SAVA -10.95%
NWBO -3.46%
NVDA -2.75%
UK and the EMA have very different timelines.
The EMA has a 7 month delay from the time a letter of intent to file is approved till the actual MAA can be filed with the EMA/CHMP.
From reading the NWBO board it seems that the UK doesn't have anything like that delay in the process.
Not really a good analogy. Nicholson got a lobotomy. I hope to do better with Anavex. 😉