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.
A coterie of people who have made it their life’s mission to convince people to sell. Dozens of messages daily from the same posters, all fixated on doom and gloom. It’s just a coincidence that, after all these years, just when applications for approval are about to occur, suddenly the stock is tanking. It’s amusing. This is their attempted end game. How do they somehow get shares? A fake lawsuit and trading manipulation. How novel.
You’re an excellent driver. 12 minutes to Wapner. You’re counting cards with Charlie Babbit. Counting cards with Charlie Babbit.
Here’s a due diligence project for those who are so inclined. Try to find a message board for a clinical-stage biotech where the dedicated/hired trolls don’t accuse the CEO of being an incompetent, greedy thief.
Disclaimer: this will be a Gordian Knot exercise.
Missling communicates poorly but this, I am told by my biochemistry sources, is unlikely to have an effect on a molecular level. So the MOA, thankfully, will not be compromised.
What a pile of nonsense. I’m laughing at the hired hedge agents vs. the retail pumpers. Which is worse? Possibly equally moronic.
The XBI, the broader market and the imminent Iran attack are the more relevant factors here in the short term. I don’t see the dismissal of the lawsuit being a major factor, and it will be many months before a decision would be rendered.
Evan gives a management discussion nearly every week with a podcast. The issue is, are they going to sell enough models before they run out of money.
2022 results is a pretty weak baseline for comparison, so that comparison doesn’t help me much.
I would assume (hope) the audited results are the same.
The obvious answer is because A-273 already had years of trials on the books and they didn’t want to start from scratch with their next gen drug for those indications. Schizo is a new indication so they opted to try the new compound, which, as Doc noted, has certain properties that may be a good fit for that disease.
As opposed to your crookedness? Come on, face it, do you really expect people to believe that you are a Good Samaritan? lol. Tell somebody who might fall for it.
I know exactly what you’re doing. I’ve seen it many times. Citadel? Who’s your sponsor?
If you think George is so irrelevant and incorrect then why do you and your cohorts spend so much time on trying to undermine him? Oh, I forgot, you are good Samaritans, trying to “save” people. As someone said earlier, only a fool would believe this story.
I don’t care either way. My only point is that it amuses me.
Doubling down in an attempt to induce capitulation. It’s not going to happen. In my opinion. What you’ve got here is big money trying to force people out but it’s not working so they just keep trying. There are a lot of shares in admittedly retail hands that are not going to be turned over.
The “doom” scenario doesn’t add up to me. So we are going for approval and, after 10 years of BS, retail is going to sell now? Why? Doubt it. So the shorts keep adding on.
Haven’t you learned by now that any thought stayed with condescension is automatically correct. Anything followed with (paraphrased):
“Don’t give opinions that disagree with my non-real world, “textbook” understanding of the market. Be an investor.”
You’re doing great, George. Certain people live in great fear that you might induce people to buy or hold. It’s fun to watch, keep it coming.
Water is stronger than Coors light.
No need. I believe you. I was smart last week so I’m taking a break this week.
I understand that. But the URL simply said the case name and case number. At least the link itself only said that.
The URL doesn’t indicate RECAP. Hence my question.
I’ve never seen a federal judge issue a handwritten order on the motion document itself. Very strange.
That’s odd that the judge made handwritten notes on the letter motion, as if that is the court’s decision. Is that the way it was entered into ECF/Pacer? Where did you get this document?
“… he should present himself like any other CEO does with coherent talk and clear message.”
Physician, heal thyself.
The mm’s in companies like AVXL are dealing from a net short position, rarely maintaining inventory. It is the main reason they won’t permit a lasting uptrend.
80%+ of all trading volume is not investors voting on the value of the stock. It is traders attempting to gain a profit mechanically. Meaning, primarily, market makers. Many of whom are also hedge funds, separated by a laughable Chinese wall. The most appalling of which is, of course, Citadel. One of the defendants in NWBO’s lawsuit.
It’s amusing, the textbook empiricists who think they know what they are talking about when they denigrate the manipulation “conspiracists” and espouse the absolute horseshit “efficient market” theory.
Of course, some of them are not really ignorant of the truth. Kind of like when mobsters proclaim that “there is no mafia.”
Arbitrary time frame. SAVA is down from ATH similar to AVXL. 130 to 20. All based on substance, right? Since manipulation doesn’t occur. Why was SAVA fairly priced at 130, supposedly? And why is it now fairly priced at 20?
Correct.
That’s your opinion. Which happens to be wrong.
There is no legitimate reason for the share price, considering AVXL is very likely to be approved for AD by the EMA and FDA. The stock is being suppressed. Supposed fumbled readouts, poor speaking skills and bad haircuts are immaterial to the equation.
I refer you to my last point. Many stocks have been manipulated and then go on to make a lot of dough. If you can identify them as such you can still win. If the market was always accurately priced there would be little opportunity for gains.
Weak logic. If a retail investor buys Apple, same as many institutions, should they get out? If a stock is misvalued temporarily because of manipulation can they acknowledge the manipulation and yet take advantage of the misvalued price?
It is not a “one or the other” proposition.
I could not put odds on whether any other law firms try to join in. It would be essentially a guess. But judging from the weakness of the allegations in the existing complaint, and envisioning that there doesn’t seem to be a viable way for another firm to have ascertained any additional material facts, I would say it’s fairly unlikely. I agree with Boi that the main purpose of this lawsuit was likely to serve shorts’ interests.
Discovery is not going to happen in this case unless and until AVXL's motion to dismiss is denied.It is exceedingly rare for an exception to be made.
The PSLRA, enacted by Congress in 1995, established a “stay of discovery provisions” until after a complaint is sustained over defendants’ motion to dismiss or defendants answer the complaint, whichever comes first. Congress reasoned that “discovery should be permitted in securities class actions only after the court has sustained the legal sufficiency of the complaint,” except “in the exceptional circumstance where particularized discovery is necessary to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to a party.” This broad stay of discovery was supposedly intended to prevent plaintiffs from leveraging the threat of damaging and costly discovery to achieve favorable settlements, especially where a complaint was meritless and unlikely to survive a motion to dismiss.a complaint
Seeking discovery for the purpose of trying to support a complaint, by examining the merits of the case, is not permissible.
That is incorrect. The judge will not order discovery while a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is pending. Period. There is a reason that such a 12(b)(6) motion must be filed before an answer to the complaint is filed. A plaintiff cannot file a flimsy complaint that is met with a motion to dismiss and then go on a discovery fishing expedition to try to justify the complaint. Doesn’t work that way. The allegations of the complaint alone must first surpass a certain threshold. That is the standard of review for such a motion.
Truth.
Okay, so we agree, no discovery regarding the underlying merits of the case (or lack thereof) would occur unless and until after the motion to dismiss is denied.
I should have said discovery on issues related to the nature and definition of the class and the class period. Is it your view that discovery concerning the merits of the case will occur before the motion to dismiss is decided?
Correct. Any discovery permitted before a motion to dismiss is decided would be limited to such issues as identifying members of the class. Discovery would not occur as to the merits of the case itself.
You seem to be missing my point, or addressing issues other than my point. It is simply that no discovery can occur until (and unless) the motion to dismiss is denied. It will take months for a motion to be fully submitted, argued, and then decided. Depending on the briefing schedule the parties work out with the judge, and then how long it takes the judge to decide. Judges face no hard deadline to decide. Sometimes it takes a judge 6-12 months. Sometimes quicker.
Please take your medication.
Your rambling nonsense worries me.
It’s window dressing. A tail wag. This case will take years, assuming it’s not dismissed shortly. By then the verdict will be in on the approvals or rejections. In other words it has little relevance, other than as a talking point for the short interest and an excuse for trading manipulation.
“Someone thinks they have a legitimate gripe and is angry about losing money.”
The odds that an actual investor just happened to contact the same ambulance chasing law firm that targeted AVXL years ago with a frivolous lawsuit are slim-to-none. You can bet that the short hedges fed this person to their friendly attorneys. It would be a good bet.
They are overextended and they need a means to cover their shorts before the EMA application is filed and accepted. A plan for an FDA application will make it even worse. They will not find that many shares, or even a significant percentage of them.
The lawsuit is a stunt, just like the last one.
Incorrect. A district court judge will not order discovery while a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is pending. If your point is that a defendant would voluntarily consent to such discovery, that would never happen.
There will not be a pre-trial conference while a motion to dismiss is pending. There won’t even be a Rule 26 initial conference to set a discovery schedule.
Bottom line: there will be no discovery unless the motion to dismiss is denied.
And Iqbal sets a high standard to survive such a motion.
It will be dismissed.