RVT-101 targets 5-HTG serotonin receptor as an antagonist versus Anavex 2-73 targeting sigma 1 receptor as an agonist. In preclinicals Anavex PLUS showed a substantially more meaningful clinical improvement in ADAS-Cog score than RVT-101 plus donepezil did in Phase 2. Hopefully Anavex PLUS can cement that performance in its own Phase 2. If so, and RVT-101 is valued at $2B after Phase 2, how will Anavex 2-73 be valued?
That is setting a very low bar for "good efficacy results." Preclinicals suggest Anavex PLUS should do much better than "good" in that case, but the proof will be in the pudding of course.
I'm just hoping it does 90% better than Aricept/donepezil (believe it was 80% better in preclinicals).
If trial results are disclosed, sure, anyone with material inside information could then buy or sell, just not beforehand. The principal investigator for the trial is not a director of the company (he's effectively a contractor), but the same rules apply since he has access to insider information. I think Missling's purchases are fine because they appear to be part of a regular buying program he has implemented, not a reaction to knowledge of trial results.
Another saving grace is that if the science works the company will be valued in the billions within 1-3 years
legally that would be a no-no, wouldn't it? I believe the trial leader is supposed to be independent of the company.
I was thinking 1000 shares was enough, but taking inflation into account, you're probably looking at 3000 to 5000 shares of AVXL in order to have future success along the lines of an AMGN or a CELG translate into the 2045 equivalent of a million-dollar retirement now. Still 1000 shares would be good enough for the 2045 equivalent of about $300K or $400K in today's value if all goes well. That'd be one hell of a souped-up Hyundai.
I don't necessarily expect Sept--agree that interim data or anecdotal remarks could come before then
would be the only company with a disease-modifying product if 2-73 does what AVXL thinks it does...probably not 10B right after successful 2a, but after ph3 it's not a stretch at all if the science really works
That about covers it--maybe an announcement that enrollment has completed for the phase 2a trial. Maybe a trial participant will start blogging about how much 2-73 is helping. That would be pretty nice. I don't expect an epilepsy or 3-71 trial to begin until 2016.
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.