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.
We could start with the smallpox vaccine then move on to the polio vaccine. Probably should include the measles vaccine in the conversation also.
Those would be a pretty sound foundation.
If 75% of the shareholders voted with their feet and exited Anavex, where did those shares go? The OS certainly didn't decrease.
According to Investor 8% of the institutional investment is in strategic not index funds. Argue that fact with him.
The rest of your post is the usual over the top bashing.
Could be. Overall I don't think there is that coordinated a plan. But then stranger things have happened.
Shorts don't have to collude to have a common goal. They have a common interest. Obviously there is a lot of money at work with a 20,000,000 share short position.
They also must have a plan in case there is a sudden drop of very positive news. We saw in the case of Game Stop that literally several hundred million Dollars was employed to defend the short position before it was overwhelmed.
The market is full of opportunists. That is not a bad thing, it just is. If there are some whales out there the think that Anavex has a good chance of success and the attendant share price rise they might well be watching to see what the shorts do and seize the opportunity if it presents itself.
In general the whales will accept smaller profits for less risk.
As far as the MM's go my sense is most of them that make a market in AVXL are just making market and don't have a big agenda. There are companies that are also MMs that are willing to manipulate. If you keep up with the SEC fines you will see there are clear rule violators that are willing to do illegal things in pursuit of profit.
I did a spreadsheet some time ago that was a swag at how much money the shorts have made while building this short position. I figured it was about $250,000,000. Obviously I had to make many assumptions since hard information is not available. Even so, that provides a clue about how much money is involved.
Sure. There is no way that a 20,000,000 share short position with a value of $100,000,000 or more could have anything to do with the dropping share price.
Oh yeah, every Dollar the share price drops is worth $20,000,000 to the shorts. There is no way they would do things to make that profit, is there?
Nothing to see here. Move a long.
There are segments of the market that are more manipulated than others. In some of those segments retail is at a clear disadvantage. Other segments of the market retail is much less likely to be taken advantage of.
Developmental companies are more subject to manipulation than most companies. Toxic financing is a good example of that. Game Stop was another example of manipulation both by shorts and retail.
Those law firms are paying for those "news releases". Depending on the company they go with a "news release" can cost between $300 and $1000.
https://www.trustradius.com/products/pr-newswire/pricing
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-04-mitochondrial-roles-antiviral-immunity-manifestations.html
Possible support for 2-73 in mitochondrial homeostasis restoration.
That has been posted on the board multiple times. https://insidereg.com/preparing-for-an-eu-maa/ https://www.scendea.com/drug-development-in-the-european-union-attaining-accelerated-assessment-aug2020
Um.... you do know that the MAA can't be filed until 7 months after the LOI, right?
Filing the MAA will have nothing to do with the class action case.
I don't understand how you are connecting these things.
So why do you care? If we are such a bunch of losers what is the value of you posting to us about being losers? Do you just like to gloat?
Apparently you don't know much about bad news.
So you discount the 20,000,000 share short position that is valued at roughly $100,000,000. You don't think there are people that are working to protect that very large amount of money?
It is likely that the shorts have made enough off of their shorting over the last year or two that they have zero cash involved in the present short position. That is they could close it out at $8 or more and still be possibly $100,000,000 ahead. Even so they have have a very large exposure at 20,000,000 shares.
You may be right however I am skeptical that any financial organizations would let that amount of potential profit and even larger potential liability just ride and look in on it every once in a while.
Remember that the potential loss on a short position is unlimited. Just ask the Game Stop shorters about that.
That should pay off in the long run and I hope it pays off in the short run.
I'd like to add some at this price myself but alas, I have all the AVXL I need. I am buying a few other stocks with my high risk money.
Why do you think this lawsuit is happening now?
Somehow I must have misinterpreted this.
Does that post have any meaning or is that just your usual deflection?
You may want to read the next sentence which I have copied.
I guess the FDA and the EMU will decide if 2-73 is dead no matter what you believe.
3-71 has been on the corporate drug development chart for a long time.
Fragile X and PD trials are also on the development chart which are 2-73 trials. Doesn't seem so dead to me.
BULLSHIT. NO criminal complaint.
It's a lame civil suit by trolling class action attorneys.
Your misrepresentation is quite straight forward... and OBVIOUS.
Fud much?
Not defending anyone. Pointing out how you misrepresent what he said.
As is your custom you twisted the words that George used. He said that Ern improved. The story did say that he recovered some lost abilities. No one said that he recovered. That is a different situation.
Ern maybe in heaven by now. He was fairly old when that TV story was made. Turns out no one recovers from old age either.
My bad, the if it makes it that far was a paraphrase of the conversation.
I should have just left it at taking the appropriate action.
Which is why he said taking the appropriate actions.
You'll likely stay, maybe independent, but not unbiased.
Rather, as German physicist Max Planck somewhat cynically declared, science advances one funeral at a time. Planck noted “a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
There are no "alleged crimes". Get your stuff straight. This is a civil matter.
Unless, of course, creating more uncertainty is your goal. Then the misrepresentation is deliberate.
That is how the shorts work to keep the SP down. Create FUD.
You remember how will that last lawsuit worked out for them.
Even so, it was not the case dismissal with prejudice that counted, it was the FUD that was created in the process that worked for the shorts.
Bitch bitch bitch.
Either be patient or sell. Those are your two options.
Well there is a third, bitch bitch bitch.
Patience Grasshopper.
These things happen on their own time schedule.
Had a phone conversation with Anavex IR today.
One question I had was about the class action law suit.
He said the company was not concerned but would take the appropriate actions to defend the suit if it makes that far.
Wow, just wow.
Because if you are not looking for them you won't find them when they do show up.
But we want you here.
If you are using that many emojis you are a board menace.
You know the answer to those questions.
MAA can't be filed for 7 months after the LOI.
Missling has said the AD NDA will be after the OLE is complete.
I agree with your post. I would suggest one small change. It is not that an NDA or MAA can be filed but rather that one is approved.
There have been posts that suggest most companies don't discuss the results of meetings with the FDA until there is a hard decision from the FDA on something.
The EMA decision qualifies as a hard decision since that was a go/no go decision.
I agree with you about the reduction in brain vol loss as being a valid biomarker.
As I read the draft it was making clear that there are few valid measurements for AD in the pre stages and stage 1. Their point being that there are biochemical tests being developed that show very early stages of AD where there is still not a measurable cognitive deficit. Hence the need for biomarkers to follow the disease development.
Overall the draft had little to say about later stage AD development.
My sense of this is the FDA is recognizing that by the time there are measurable cognitive deficits it may be too late in the treatment process to recover much lost ability. Therefore the FDA is focusing on very early detection and treatment before significant damage is done to the brain. To do that will require biomarkers of the disease process rather than cognitive measures of decline which reflect the extent of brain damage already done..
This new focus does suggest that there may be an opening for 2-73 or 3-71 to be used as an early treatment to prevent or significantly slow disease progression. That bad news is that the trials to show that will be long and won't have any impact of Anavex for several years if ever.
The immediate problem is to get 2-73 approved for any indication and get the MOA validated. For AD that will fall under the stage 2 & 3 AD patients in the current trial.
Notice that the draft didn't mention any biomarker other than plaque. I read that as a call to the medical establishment to find and validate new AD biomarkers and it indicated a willingness of the FDA to consider new AD biomarkers.
That is not a final document. All in all it doesn't change much. It does mention surrogate endpoints but only lists amyloid plaque as an accepted endpoint.
The document suggests that other surrogate endpoints and biomarkers may be useful without saying what those might be.