Sorry for the Error.
I used the wrong word. "Questionable" might have been better.
Intended thought was that there are at least two views of the potential for Anavex success, derived either (inadequately for some) from the Australian data, or alternatively, from eventual Phase 3 data.
Clearly, those taking early AVXL positions have done so lacking the solid positive or negative data the Phase 3 trial will yield. They have weighed the factors as they've seen them, and have decided the risk/reward ratio is favorable.
Others, will want to see more data, from a much larger trial population, before taking a new or expanded position.
Could all of this explain the rather static share price of AVXL, that those who've decided to get in early, while prices are still low, have done that in the majority? At the same time, the broader investment public hasn't yet determined Anavex to be a rewarding, low-risk proposition. That segment of the investment public won't be participating until new trials data appear later this year, or sometime next.
I doubt that any new data, PK/PD, or otherwise, to be revealed in the upcoming conferences or presentations, will cause any changes. If they are all positive, they will merely support the get-in-early crowd's view. They are already in. The new results are unlikely to prompt many new share buys.
Conversely, those concerned about the accuracy or validity of the low n= numbers (numbers of participants) in the Aussie trial aren't likely to change their views, either.
Nothing of significance likely to change until data from the three trials are released, probably some time next year.
Until then, we continue our good-natured discourses.
Thanks for the note.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
