Re: Transparency
I’m a shareholder of Anavex which makes me an owner of the company and stakeholder. Stakeholder status is a position shared by those afflicted with the diseases which A2-73 and our pipeline could potentially help, those at risk of developing these indications in the future, organizations who fund research to help those currently suffering these diseases (MJFF, RettSyn.org), governments and healthcare insurance carriers who spend trillions of dollars annually to maintain care for the collective burden of those suffering, caregivers, competing companies in the field of treating these diseases, and, yes, even shorts, as the last two listed have a “stake” in our company failing.
Since our company cannot, by law, only give news, positive or negative, to those investing with hopes of success, all news will be reacted to be competing sets of stakeholders.
One can see where this sets up a mutually exclusive outcome: the gain for longs is a loss for shorts and other competing companies. And the reverse holds true.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but under this scenario, a military mindset comes into view as the most pragmatic and strategic practice to follow.
Everyone, whether in the military or not, should understand that the adversary nature of competing stakeholders necessitates a “need to know” strategy and, unless material, for inner circle only.
How soon would a General lose a military campaign were he to disclose the time, date, and location of any future attack on the enemy? Or random inspection dates? What if we tell them our current position and disclose our complete arsenal? In the military, those are treasonous offenses. Instead, leaders talk in broad terms of “trying to weaken the enemy forces”. No specifics.
Missling: We have identified specific genetic biomarkers which will be revealed at an upcoming important prestigious scientific conference. (Paraphrase)
Anything more specific would tell the shorts exactly when to borrow shares and how many and we could brace for incoming.
Isn’t it common sense to tell your hostile stakeholders that you have the power and you will use it when you are prepared? I think that is informative enough for the longs and patients and vague enough to keep shorts from being overly prepared. Do we really wish to walk into an ambush?
Didn’t Truman drop a test bomb as a warning and demonstration before the Hiroshima strike? And when the Japanese persisted, Nagasaki followed.
And didn’t Teddy Roosevelt say that the best advice he ever received for dealing with foreign hostilities was to “Speak softly and carry a big stick”?
I think all the preclinical data being revealed as to sigma 1 r agonism restoring cell function and achieving homeostasis in a multitude of indications is a warning bomb and a big stick. I think the absence of data contradicting this or showing adverse effects means the big stick is made of strong wood which won’t splinter easily...when the time comes to use it.
Maybe Missling is practicing the art of war as it applies to drug development in a hostile environment, whether real or imagined, which is not an ill-judged, imprudent approach. We don’t know what he knows one reason for which may be because it would be revealed to everyone. Maybe, just maybe, until the coast is clear, the strategy is classified for security reasons, not incompetence?
I would argue that a person capable of developing an adaptive approach to trials, and pioneering the first of its kind precision medicine trial designs in the field of CNS utilizing genome sequencing and discovering genetic biomarkers of dreaded CNS diseases, is capable of communication at the stockholder level. If that’s his gambit, he is also smart enough to know that the buck stops at his desk. Career suicide if he fails. I doubt that he plotted this entire strategy (3 trials, 3 different indications, the possible MS tie in with Biogen, grants for funding, an All-Star team Scientific Advisory Board - who all agreed to work with him, no debt, very sparse tapping of the LPC, frugal budget) just to end up in way over his head on communicating news and ending his career as a failure in that manner. That doesn’t add up. And if something smells fishy, could be from off the coast of Japan where they tested the initial bomb drop - lot of dead fish as a result.
War is Hell.
Bio
