Thanks Nidan for the reply and for highlighting the below quote from the insider financial article:
"Quote:
This is one we have covered before on quite a few occasions. It’s also one that, across the period, has taken a bit of a beating in mainstream financial news media. The mechanism of action of its lead candidate has the potential to render what amounts to billions of dollars of Alzheimer’s research wasted and wider market forces seem not to want the asset to successfully reach commercialization."
My thoughts at this stage:
(1) no one at this point can convince me that the company has anything but promising/positive/encouraging efficacy results through 18 months. Just my opinion but ONLY the company could convince me otherwise and they've done NOTHING to indicate anything negative. Some posters here can choose to wait for phase 3 trial results to hit the Alzheimer's journals or for 60 Minutes to tell them about it on a Sunday night, but I'm not waiting that long and likely neither will the competition.
(2) greed is a very powerful motivator; it is simply illogical to think that those with a current VESTED INTEREST in the current SOC and current treatment options/facilities/systems for CNS disease sufferers to support/champion/get behind this small cap biotech company and make it in any way easy for them to succeed. We are not in the big pharma club nor (yet) widely held by the power brokers on Wall Street or by many of the large institutions and fund managers. To allow us to march through unencumbered and shift the paradigms (move their cheese; their billions) is unfathomable to them.
(3) pride is also likely to inhibit the embrace of the many scientists/researchers with ties to the billions in BP research funds from the past 20 years; and they will likely be quite reticent to admit that a2-73 has the promise that they themselves were unable to achieve.
The deck is not stacked in our favor. For those of us that are instituting common sense (and picking up the breadcrumbs and piecing them together in a RATIONAL way) are assumably two or three steps ahead of (in terms of due diligence) the general investing public. This is also a contributing factor to the low market cap today IMHO.
To believe the determined skeptics, on the other hand, would be to believe that:
• the years of fact/dot connecting/research here by longs has reached the completely wrong conclusions re the efficacy,
• the greed/pride obstacles have not caused any price/value/press coverage issues for us, and,
• the company/SAB/BOD has basically decided to overstate/bluff their efficacy hand and otherwise point us to the wrong conclusions.
Everyone can make their own decisions and do their own DD as I'm not without a bias to the long side, and I'm sure that my opinions/logic will receive backlash.
None of that changes the fact, however, that it's a much farther leap to believe the skeptics here than to believe the optimists. Okay actually that's an opinion too.
Go Anavex
AI
