That's not been my experience when I've reached out to so-called analysts and authors of articles who respond by saying that they've never heard of Anavex. LOL They are mostly lazy and only cover the large established popular companies. It's how their bread gets buttered. It's rather pathetic.
Just curious is this the late stage boilerplate verbiage that is used to continue to squash all the positive to date trial data? Is that the best you can do? Support ignoring the data until "we" give you the nod.
So the first thing someone researching Anavex today does is starting by discovering some Seeking Alpha bloggers ‘revealing’ the corner printing shop scam that Anavex is and in the process completely ignores the present context leading them to dismiss everything current about Anavex and the science?