Replies to post #293446 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[Graniteguy]

Well stated TempePhil. We all suspect that there are nefarious forces afoot here, and plausible deniability as it pertains to the importance of Anavex’s ongoing trials is right out of their playbook.

[Talon38]

Phil....excellent points. The tempo of commercial competition is intense and the BPharmas are aware of leading edge science in their product areas. Each company has both technical and market analysts who are sifting through intelligence on the competition and promising Biotech drugs. The market potential of Anavex's drugs, their safety record and the meager SOC's for our disease targets make our little company the focus of a number of companies. The interest grows with positive data. There maybe competing companies in discussion with Anavex over various disease applications , but the "Keytruda Syndrome" and the "Big Enchilada....Alzheimer's" make those negotiations very challenging. IMHO mid to late this year we see offers!

By the way, this probably occurred with Biogen's interest in 2-73 for MS. The trouble was 2-73's Alzheimer's application and Biogen's competing drugs Aducanumab/BAN2401. CM did not lose sight of the "Big Prize". Remember Biogen's vicious attacks afterward at subsequent ACAD's.

[nidan7500]

Temephil

Any
pharma, is interested in the competition and their products. Evidence of the interest is rarely seen. These functions are NOT publicized. Larger pharma companies will have a technical department devoted to competitive analysis. These competitive analysis (CA) departments, will study competitors products, and frequently reverse design them. With the help of the patent department, and published trials, CA tries to see what direction the competition is heading. Formal reports are produced for management and the scientists, analyzing technical data and the product, as well as estimating pricing. This is just the formal technical CA that a company does.

Agree w/this, very common in tech industries to shadow competitors. Many ways to do that, including recruiting. It works both ways, for example the entire AD Amyloid plaque thesis put them all on the same wrong road, as willing participants over a cliff. No one payed attention to or would listen to those who pointed out contradictions. Had they analyzed real world findings and conflicts they would have at least looked further into root causes. Thankfully, Bias and politics are alive and well in BP, thankfully. So, AVXL have an opportunity to clear the field any day now. It will be obvious when it happens.

IMO, Dr.M. has them all talking to themselves w/his silent trials and thesis/MOA proof multi-protocols. AVXL trials both bundle and advance new thinking based on knowledge being trialed and validated-gained elsewhere in other AVXL trials. We have a learning exponent unknown to the herd. The AVXL multi-upstream MOA thesis has/will actually leverage and accelerate CNS disease virtual learning capability. These are not to be seen as (one Off), each CNS disease w/common MOA serves to accelerate/leverage all in-house learning. No one would ever try to go after multiple Rare CNS diseases as AVXL have b/c of excessive costs and specialized constraints. (you can do one or the other but not both). We can actually do N+ for almost the same $$$. It's all brilliant, IMO. The other news is, ROW have not figured out what he is doing yet. The price for AVXL is exploding behind the curtain every day, but none of them can see that. Those who say, "not to worry, we buy Bio Micro's all the time". Are just wrong on this one. Not only is their technology wrong but their management strategy is ALSO wrong.

They will all be standing around w/their mouths open when he wins the first of MANY TRIFECTAS . Musashi would be proud.

[Boopka]

TempePhil, nice post. One area not mentioned but key is in the area of Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A). Information gleaned by mktg., scientists, etc. could also be used by the folks in M&A to further the corporation's interests. Within that realm one could be quietly investing in a given company for the purpose of acquisition, JV, or even as an investment. A strategy, for example, could be deployed whereby a company wants to accumulate shares in a given company below the 5% threshold as cheaply as possible. Sound familiar?