Replies to post #391199 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[FitzyP33]

Already posted. Check the board first.

[Mister Nobody]

I apologize, I see that the article has already been posted. I should have assumed as much.

[williamssc]

"We are short" No surprise.lol

[frrol]

It's a well written article from someone with professional financial and biotech analysis chops. It's what a valuable bearish view looks like. He's short, we're long. He's got a natural bias, so do we. Unlike unserious pumping or bashing, he knows his stuff and has an opinion worth hearing.

He doesn't like a few things:
1. Didn't like some calculations, particularly the SE, which affect the p-vals. Anavex did generalized (I think actually "general", which is slightly different) linear modeling and I don't think you propagate an error from baseline to EOT for endpoint score means. Our biostatician would know know better unless this analyst has a grad degree in stats. I'll go with our numbers.
2. How we handled drop outs. CDR looks fine so his criticism really only applies to ADAS as far as we can know (ADCS figures not provided), and we didn't have many dropouts so not a big deal to me.
3. Omission of ADCS change. Nothing new here. Yes, it's missing.
4. Objection to Responder Analysis (odds ratio). His objections to Anavex's focus on it are valid, nothing new here either. However, he is wrong about the Aduhelm threshold being more "stringent" than ours. It's in fact the opposite. So that latter part is wrong.
5. "New" endpoints and not pre-specified. Only half right about "new" (only the outcome analysis changed), and according to Missling he properly pre-specified that. Just without publicly disclosing it, which is unwise and tiresome, but not wrong.
6. No IND. Yes. Not mentioned in Next Steps.
7. Needing capital for a phase 3. He's not even considering the possibility of a partner from the results. That's an omission on him.

He's intellectually honest about the risks in his short position. That's an experienced investor. (He doesn't consider the risks that he's wrong; many longs do that too. A warning to all.)

He doesn't convince me, but it's good to hear this view. And he said he sent this to the company but didn't hear back. That's not surprising, and his "hear back" is hopefully coming soon with a proper TLR.