Replies to post #116185 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[F1ash]

But Missling has stated they have enough cash for now. They will go to the well when the price is higher, IMO.

At a rate of 50,000 shares per day one can not cite a rate of $3.38 for LPC purchases.. just plain silly.

Why do I get the impression that almost no one here has ever actually read the LPC purchase agreement or Anavex's sec filings?




During the three months ended December 31, 2016, the Company issued to Lincoln Park an aggregate of 4,500,012 shares of common stock under the Purchase Agreement, including 4,472,841 shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $15,128,272 and 27,171 commitment shares. At December 31, 2016, an amount of $33,513,928 in value of its shares remained available under the 2015 Purchase Agreement.


(Anavex only averaged ~$3.38 per share during that 3 month period from LPC last year correct?)


http://secfilings.nasdaq.com/filingFrameset.asp?FilingID=11830127&RcvdDate=2/7/2017&CoName=ANAVEX%20LIFE%20SCIENCES%20CORP.&FormType=10-Q&View=html



So let's see, during a three month period Anavex sold ~4.5 million shares to LPC.

3 months is ~90 days so they would have had to sell 50k shares to LPC every single day including weekends and holidays.

Much more likely Anavex used the "Accelerated Purchase" clause.

Now maybe Anavex actually does feel like ~$24 million in the bank is enough. That remains to be seen. They certainly don't plan on a solo funded Alzheimer's trial if that's the case though. Anavex has been burning ~$1 million a month with only one trial (you say is mainly funded by the Australian government). Imagine what the burn rate would be with an actual trial designed and powered for efficacy running. $24 million would evaporate in a heartbeat.

[LakeshoreLeo1953]

Not my math Xena. It does have SOME merit in its methodology
of timing and cash to balance sheet.

Certainly enough money at present to pay salaries and incidental
expenses since many think the burn rate for ongoing "research"
is negligible. I, however, happen to disagree. I expect some
financial mechanism going forward BEFORE ANY future trial
enlists even one patient through a CRO.

Contrarian Opinion? I think it is actually more widely held than admitted.
As much as I often enjoy Jimmy's musings, one year later than cite
rings hollow for any intervening reality.