That's because institutions are not required to report their ownership of most OTC stocks on 13-F forms like they do for stocks on the three national exchanges. The reason we know the number is 54% is because the S-1 filing (relating to the warrants) required that institutional ownership be revealed, as well as how the exercise of all warrants would affect that ownership (answer: it would remain basically the same, around 54%).
Institutions already own 54% of Anavex as of the S-1 released this year. Of course, we would all like to see institutions buy in more like those named by ranger43a, but it's a good start.
I applaud the general sentiment, but the founding fathers didn't have a spotless track record either given the Native American genocide and the original Constitution's perpetuation of the slave trade, to name just a couple of easy targets. I do agree that our country is founded on admirable principles and I hope going forward that we'll do a better job of living up to them than in the past, both recently and further back. I hope Anavex can become a force for some of that positive change.
nope, not seeing things: preliminary is right
In 3-4 years I've seen 2 of the 6 little biotechs I own go on runs of 700% or better, and 2 others double up or better. Have seen many more than I don't own do the same. The problem is that they drop massively, too.
and even fully diluted it still would have just a 47M market cap. So if Anavex ever reaches a 4.7B market cap (not far-fetched at all if the science works on humans for either Alzheimer's or epilepsy), you make 100X your investment from here. If it runs up to 470M in the next few months anticipating P2 results, a mere 10X.
contra Dr. Tanzi of Harvard and Prana, mentioned and linked in another thread
Hope Anavex can stick it to the Ivy Leaguer
So he's the guy behind the Prana drug PB2? Hasn't that been a bit of a failure so far? He seems convinced it's all about amyloid, whereas Anavex is betting he's wrong.
The warrant holders are not possible future shareholders. According to the S-1 they are definite current shareholders (as of the date specified by the S-1), plus they own enough warrants to maintain their current ownership percentage after all warrants are exercised.
No, the S-1 states that Sphera owns 9.9% of the outstanding shares right now, not counting the warrants. Furthermore, Sphera also owns enough warrants to maintain that 9.9% ownership in the event that all outstanding warrants are exercised. The warrants do not automatically convert unless and until Sphera decides to exercise.
Yeah I think Fisher came in as the replacement for Vamvakides, as the new mad scientist behind the company's compounds: 2-73 was Vamvakides' baby, and 3-71 is Fisher's
I think the discovery of Anavex PLUS in 2012 was one major factor in the delay. The other I believe was raising money and planning an effective P2 trial design and location.