Replies to post #177806 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[XenaLives]

You persist in framing my post as something it is not.

I find it difficult to engage in any sort of discussion with you as a result.

I have repeatedly stated that IMHO a discussion of
Short Interest MUST be viewed as "interest" in the Company
and not a static number.

I haven't seen that statement - you repeatedly stated that short interest had declined. I used the term "static", but modified it to say it was "relatively static", meaning more stable than previously and gave a 12 month link to show this.

I'll buy the fact that the shorts did not get active in AVXL
until Late Spring 2016 and not Winter that year as as I had
presumed. I use(d) 4M/36M then and 5M/46M as rounded equivalents.

Since I provided the data to support my disagreement with your original statment I will agree that you were wrong:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=145900941

Still, your numbers are WRONG again. Until 6/30/16 the stock didn't even hit four million, so 3M/36M is a more accurate figure, a little over 8% and after 6/30 of this year 5.5M is more accurate than 5M, approximately 12% of outstanding. Shorts increased their position by 50% in order to drive the stock down.

However, the basic discussion of short interest is not about
shares but about influence due to "control" of Float.

If that does not agree with your philosophy then
more power to you in analysis. I still think the shorts
have had much the best of trading AVXL since let's just call
in Spring 2016.

My "philsophy" has no bearing on anything and it is not yours to presume. It isn't possible to control the float with short shares, it is possible to control the price a stock is traded at by trading phantom shares when most of the real shares are being held and not traded.

If trading is the objective, this may not be an appropriate vehicle for you and it may not be appropriate for you to advise those with another objective, i.e. investment.

They likely have much more room before
forced covering is thrust upon them. As you note the physical
number of shares held short are more than at the point and given
that static number positions were likely widely held above $7
which was after all both the 2015 list price and last seen in 2016.

There is no point in speculating on timing, because that is unknown and there is a valid reason to expect possible provisional approval this year, perhaps within six months.

Since on three days last summer the short interest was traded 4x I think it is absurd to presume that those positions were static, they were most likely cross traded between colluding entities. This concentrated and statistically anomalous size also raises the likelihood that many of those shares are NSS.

So frame your contention as you wish. I will take what I consider
a more technical if perhaps Conservative approach. I am ahead,
even with missteps, in AVXL for my life in the stock.
Would have to re enter to participate further and that may be a
possibility. Sorry if that middle of the road approach does not
meet muster with those who see only positive assertions as worthy
of discussion.

My only contention was that your original statement was false, shorts have not decreased. False statements are neither technical or conservative and they can not be characterized as "middle of the road".

Please do not attribute attitudes to me that I do not have.