Replies to post #200012 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[McMagyar]

Right FUDsters have short window..
Very short..

[BAR123]

Personally I think we are all getting a bit too far ahead. I think the idea of the $250 million potential that we can grab when needed is out there for as a stated, growth purposes. The company has stated in the past that they will probably go it alone for Rett and PDD. I have never heard them say anything different. Now keep in mind for those two indications we are only in phase 2. I would have to think that we were going to need a fair chunk of money to do a phase 3 with many more people involved in those trials. That is why we need this potential funding.

As it relates to Harold Hampel, after thinking about this for a while I believe the answer is simple. He now works for a potential competitor or may be a potential partner which creates a conflict of interest. He is no longer on the scientific side of things or academic side of things, he is in it for the money. If you look at everyone else on our scientific advisory board it certainly seems that they are all truly on the research side and not employees of a corporation. I think this makes sense and we now have a strong ally with a potential far east partner.

[nidan7500]

sokol:

And why not file only one, but make it large enough for the future - next 3 years. A shelf offering is good for 3 years

IMO, all of this is about time. We are compressing events over time by having the shelf processed now before any backlog of what's next questions develop. We have multiple/repetitive trials running in separate countries, concurrently. This strategy will accelerate the #events/compress action to accomplish more in as short a period as possible w/o compromising results or process credibility.

We should also be aware that by having multiple trials running with different country regulatory agencies we increase the power/strength and validity of the treatment data. Multiple systems in different environments each independent of each other when providing identical or very similar results makes a strong statement about treatment robustness and efficacy validation.

We have asked the question on why 3 countries, why multiple trials simultaneously, WHY, WHY, WHY...? The answer is to save time and b/c the stuff works. AND, A lot of very sick people are depending on us.

BTW, this is NOT the kind of thing one does w/a weak product.For obvious reasons.

[ignatiusrielly35]

Exactly. Baby biotechs typically register a large cushion of available shares. Registering shares costs nothing but the filing fee. Better to have it available rather than wait until the last minute if and when registered shares are needed.