InvestorsHub Logo

McMagyar

08/19/17 9:37 AM

#116142 RE: nidan7500 #116140

We already know..
The only thing the establishments of BP may do is create
"Fear" that A2-73 is dangerous..

Maybe they willl do a dog study like with Prana..

Australia actually cares about it's people and will fund the entire process IMO. So BP is screwed..

I don't think even the FDA can killl this one..

tredenwater2

08/19/17 11:56 AM

#116163 RE: nidan7500 #116140

Hey Nidan how about this for Dr. Misslings recent purchases, all with Biogen of course:

1) the 750 share buy is for $7.5 Billion partnership (plus royalties) for an APPROVED Alz drug .

2) the 350 share purchase is for a 3.5 Billion partnership (plus royalties) for MS (if indeed there testing is working) with an approved drug.

3) the 375 share purchase is for a 3.75 Billion partnership for PK after a successful trial with an approved drug.

4) the partnership amount for Rett Syndrome is yet to be announced in the share purchase program......stay tuned!

Let me see if we take say 8% of each of those numbers for a partnership agreement for PRIOR TO APPROVAL DRUGS with STATE OF THE ART trial designs as a down.....my number at the announcement is approx. 1.18-1.25 BILLION down (add in RS)with a total package at the end in the 14 Billion range, for just A 2-73. In a year or two if you add in all the other piggy back CNS rare diseases, insomnia, possible heart disease, possible retinal degeneration....could be QUITE impressive. Funny how BIIB has about 14 Billion in cash! They/we would triple their market cap in less than 5 years. 14 Billion (1/2 of generated revenue conservativly) X multiples (conservatively) of 7 = 100 Billion plus current 60 Billion = 160 Billion market cap for Biogen. Where we would be at that point is not even comprehensible if we were still independent.

I know I know its all preposterous day dreaming at this juncture but I concur with the article mentioned and after reading it, those numbers in a period of time, in the not to distant future......, they can be VERY REAL!

Tred

polarbear77

08/19/17 12:56 PM

#116175 RE: nidan7500 #116140

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

OFP

08/19/17 1:29 PM

#116187 RE: nidan7500 #116140

Sterilized version?

astounding to me that this point is passed over so casually.

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.

Why would a quote from a staff writer on a penny stock website carry any weight with anyone?

If the new MOA constitutes BTD not only for AD but multiple CNS indications?

What makes you think there is a new MOA? NOTHING has been shown to be novel about A2-73's MOA. Just because something is repeated on this board constantly does not make it true.

This issue has been discussed before and no knowledgeable poster has any any answer to this other than "maybe muscarinic modulation will make a difference" or "maybe it activates the S1R a different way". Those maybes are dubious for a number of reasons but whatever the case they remain maybes and talking about a MOA as if you expect there's something novel is premature. Morever, its very unlikely.