Replies to post #432027 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[georgesk]

That's correct. If we get AA, it'll have a label like any other approval and doctors will be free to prescribe it.

One thing that might be more complicated is insurance however. They may not cover a drug that is available under AA.

[Investor2014]

What do you mean by "if", FUDster?

If we get AA

You can't even get your WGT thesis consistent during the same posting day, geez and you even have copy of the pumping script.

[tootalljones]

who said, "If we get AA, we are not limited...."
sure thing.
If a frog had wings he would not womp his azz on the rocks every time he jumped.

Do not engage in wish fufillment fantasy baby talk.

"they only learn who suffer." - Aristophanes.
Do not think this little chat board of semi mentals, Cali Crazies, speaks for the stock.. The price action the past 2.5 years does. Pay attention.

[LakeshoreLeo1953]

ReRead my argument how the two are intertwined.
IF the trial to confirm has "demands" upon those participants
which outpace the cost Anavex would place on sales (not covered by Insurance, likely)
then filling the trial may be problematic as those wishing to pay to try the molecule
will reduce the patient pool. That scenario would also reduce your estimates of revenue
since the price would be minimal to create that situation.

On the other hand, IF Anavex reduces trial demands or chooses a price point for sales
that encourages cost/benefit participation by patients then sales obviously suffer.

In either case Revenue you cite as "missed opportunity" income favoring AA over standard approval
would be relatively insignificant.

While there is a difference in the eligible pool in USA AA approval over the Australian experience,
those that anticipated the same revenue stream or misread those eligible for sales
the result is likely the same.....unrealistic expectations of revenue.