CRTX

BrainsNotBrawndo

I have reviewed the patient dropouts in detail, and selection criteria, and everything else, and all of it is already accounted for in my assessment. I am satisfied with the dropout rate, low since there is no side effects, and actual patient families who show improvement are going to stay. Reviewing the Ads-COG scores of SAVA plotted against all the AA/BTD monoclonal Abs recently, the gap is just so profound, my impression is that the amount of any adjustment to be made for that is still going to go to approval, on no side effects alone, even if could just match efficacy of existing candidates. Alzheimer is a clinical diagnosis, it's not feasible to do brain biopsies to prove diagnosis, but that is the same for all Alzheimer therapy candidates. If anything, I would reckon future patient outcomes would need to be adjusted a bit to the downside as people who would like to see SAVA fail storm a site, and try to poison results by signing up by faking clinical symptoms (my understanding is that some shorts posted pictures of patients in a waiting room that they tried to go snoop in on, which is of questionable ethics and may be illegal in some locations, alas). I would be cautious with 'shorts pointed it out' as a reason, when you earlier say you don't trust neither shorts nor longs. The concern would be reinforcing a cognitive bias. I do salute you for taking your reward/risk acumen of Alzheimer drugs in good fun with a '*Bullet to the CRTX'* flair as a mark of Cain reminder on how that one went, though the story is never over. For everyone betting on a red, there is someone on black, we are just on different sides of this trade, the drug will get approved or not, and I will salute the winners.

BrainsNotBrawndo

Cannabinoids sit on the sidelines for some things if not a patentable molecule. While the recent CoVid finding was a surprise to me, though I haven't looked at the details, I would reckon there is not going to be any cannabinoid disease modifying for Alzheimer that makes it to market. Things like Metformin may end up having a role for many diseases of old age from a neuroinflammation, blood vessel protection, and 'Diabetes Type 3' neurological approach. That would be great since Metformin has a multi-year safety history, and cheap to make, but the challenge is getting someone to pony up the billions for the proof, though as I understand some poor countries are running some longitudinal trials. So it is what it is: patentable small molecules for now, that can then someday go generic. If one thinks that all the clinical sites are going to somehow collude and pull shenanigans with patients: dropouts, selection bias, faking results, putting patients in without Alzheimer, etc, there is not much I do to change that belief. Ditto on placebo at the 9 month mark: it's one thing to have placebo for pain or depression, but cognition is more like rabies: tougher to feel like you are better when the responses are just wrong. We already have good placebo data for other FDA candidates and just vastly outpacing. The thing is though, all of those those pitfalls are already in the calculus of my 40% risk of failure already, before any short petition existed. For following the Twitterati, like the poster you linked to, I would consider this: if the short petitioners really thought they were helping the world, why not pursue Aduhelm that was more likely to be harming patients? Why wait right to the Theranos trial start date to try to maximize fear, then comment that CEO and lead scientist are man and wife just like Theranos to try to cash in on people's cognitive bias of false equivalency? If thought that was all a fraud, why not let the SAVA price run, and then could short at $400 or $250 with very little short interest costs? For me, it just strains credulity to think that shorts are somehow out to help retail. The summation of all the data together is why I opt to be on the bull side of this trade. With regards to the strategy of waiting until the placebo trial is done, then investing in SAVA, some funds do exactly that, but with a recognition that at that point, that is more of an arbitrage type of play for a few percentage point gain with very little meat left on the bone. Moreover, because this is a disease modifier with a large unmet need, the timeline I reckon is not going to complete phase 3 before BTD. This is why the relatively small milestones along the point from here to a BTD cause such large gaps upward. I have reviewed CRTX in moderate detail as part of a standard competitive review of taking a relatively large (for me) position in SAVA. Although I won't invest in CRTX in the near term, I wish you good luck in the play there and hope that they can have a part to play in fixing Alzheimer.

BrainsNotBrawndo

Have a small stake in AVXL (\~1/30th of SAVA stake). I like that AVXL almost done a phase 3, have a big pharma partner already, decent results on cognition. Headwinds of I don't want to also pay for a long pipeline of other early stage stuff, has Australian base despite NY website address, and they didn't bother following Ads-COG scores nor really communicating with FDA for a proper FDA route for approval so while might get some international approvals, not likely going to USA for years yet. Never had a CRTX stake, though I wish them well as with all Alzheimer treatment hunters. For DeSPACs or other short targets (which I did play successfully albeit with small stakes), the major difference between them and SAVA is the value of an item on the end. Shorts can try to drive an Overstock toward zero so that confidence is impacted, and can't grow, then never deliver the shorted shares for a bankrupt company. But for SAVA, they don't need sentiment, nor momentum nor new investor cash to come in. If their drug works as in phase 2, shares are worth $500, period. I am not in the camp that thinks there will be a dramatic short squeeze, because I don't think the institutional shorts have conviction in the trade, and will have ponied up for calls to exit losses, since they know they can be in trouble quickly. The chart for the last few months for SAVA show how much things can spike up without warning, even on very small positive news items. So if there is a great news day, it's going to be a nuclear bomb on uncovered shorts. Which makes buying the calls expensive, which again makes it seem to me that there is less value for SAVA as a short target in and of itself, need to have a money maker elsewhere from the play. From a TA point of view, stock was at $140 or so in Aug prior to a short petition, and since then: FDA approved special protocol authorizations for phase 3 (notably, approving it *after* having received the short petition), the 9 month data came out as a home run, monoclonal antibody competitors got thumbs down from Medicare unless in a clinical trial, phase 3 trial sites are booming, and now some of the physicians/researchers/patients families are coming forward to speak about their experience with the patients of phase 2 trials directly. So for a derisked asset, it's roughly a third of the price, which to me as a value investor I am satisfied with. Though I agree not everyone wants to buy derisked, beaten-down value stocks, it matches my personality. Ask WFC shorts how their last 2 years went. I alas disagree with your statement that *"no one thinks their approval is imminent except the SAVAges"*. Check the [institutional ownership](https://money.cnn.com/quote/shareholders/shareholders.html?symb=SAVA&subView=institutional): Blackrock, Morgan Stanley, Vanguard, Charles Schwab. Samford Robertson on the board is a Silicon Valley tech legend and on the Salesforce board. The New Jersey pension fund opened a new stake in $60s last quarter *after* short citizen petition. May get some color on SAVA next week from the principal investigator physician at Princeton Medical Institute, who: correctly called that will plaques seem to be result not cause of disease, ran 300 drug trials, and was part of the original Aricept approval trial.

Unlucky-Prize

I'm only long CRTX of those, but following AVXL. CRTX has the best evidence of efficacy of the three (Because the placebo controlled evidence is very good). For short interest - that is a key question. Part of why I'm drawing attention to this is the 20% borrow rate. Stocks do not stay there unless a lot of money expects an imminent collapse. Short squeeze enthusiasts see it as a pending short squeeze, and that's true to a degree, but most of these massive % borrow fees lead to massive price declines - commonly seen on DeSpacs due to PIPE holders pre-selling when they can, or on other non-standard mergers of that kind (like with [support.com](https://support.com) and greenidge). 20% isn't yet absurd, but it's accelerating. At 50%+, it's a very strong signal of imminent collapse. As to who would do that? Well, someone with a lot of conviction as to the direction and the timing. I don't think the FDA would leak a decision, but I do think CUNY academic affairs could, and I think a journal could, and either of those would give a hedge fund conviction to swing very hard if they knew the approximate date. Of course, this could just be people wrongly playing the petition timing. But it's a large borrow rate, and it appears institutional given the news flow. In the case SAVA get's their IND pulled, they are back to square zero, and are heavily discredited, and owe $225m in bonuses already to execs. Those will likely be clawed back in that situation, but technically the company is worth $25m net value in that case, and there will be a lot of legal claims. Even if those bonuses get evaporated, that's 240m cash being challenged by shareholder lawsuits and government fines - could easily burn through 100m of that. Then you are talking about $5 a share. That's a good short - cover at $10. I don't think the market sees LLY/BIIB related to SAVA. SAVA is it's own beast. No one thinks their approval is imminent except the SAVAges.

BrainsNotBrawndo

I agree with you on the value on original verifiable items, or the least steps between oneself and the data. I am not sure that the short interest motivation is to make money off shorting SAVA directly, since I assess the risk/return as so asymmetric to the upside. Some shorts have been apparently been short since single digit share price, so they may have a cognitive bias, but I don't think the cognitive bias is enough by itself to explain the short interest. My impression for the next two years for SAVA is a 60% chance of a ten-bagger (based on market cap change in BIIB and LLY on their antibody approval news release days) and a 40% chance of SAVA being cut to cash value (\~$7). While I appreciate that some of the possible shorts like Point72 perform poorly lately (pulling up last years graph of their performance), SAVA is a still a bizarre choice to short currently, considering there are many biotechs are going to face poor sentiment with a rising rate environment, debt, cranky VCs, and candidates 10 years down the road. This is in contrast to Cassava with $240M in the bank to finish a phase 3, no debt, and the CEO on ER reports a non-dilutive infusion is pending (which I reckon would be a big pharma partner, my odds-on favorite being Pfizer since cash-rich, PFE on their own ER that wanting to go shopping for juniors, and PFE's Aricept license runs out in 2022). So when risk/reward benefit is so tilted against shorts, I reckon the gain would need to be elsewhere. I do comment that BIIB wiped off around $27B from FDA approval through to the Medicare ruling, so perhaps one could gain from trying to temporarily protect a BIIB or LLY long position, or fundraising for a junior before the VC biotech market dries up markedly. I hear you on FDA caution to not have egg on their face, but I think the political push to have a functioning, relatively low cost, disease-modifying pill for fixing Alzheimer would be a giant win for everyone involved in the country. The most jingoistic could use a modified line from the announcer from Watchmen: "I repeat, the super pill exists, and it is American". Anyways, best of luck in the trade. The world needs more people that are at least putting a spotlight onto investing bets on Alzheimer meds (whether it be SAVA, AVXL, CRTX or others), not fewer.

Araniet

You remember GME back in January right? Was my initial answer but can seem condescending and not funny. So I'll go with: While you have a point, SI means nothing if that is accumulated at around 8$ and higher. Look at CRTX for example. It has a massive SI but that goes all the way to 100$. The problem with BBIG is that people need to hold until those price levels are achieved. To force shorts to cover it needs to be like PROG which held the SP long enough to force covering and margin calls. And seeing how it gets hyped on social media I just don't believe it will sustain the share price needed for it. Again, as I said, I really hope it goes your way as I detest the way a supposedly free market is being used to rip off money of those who are in need of it. Also don't missunderstand, what I'm saying is not to stay away from BBIG but to make careful decisions and to not YOLO into it because of hype. Fundamentally BBIG, MMAT, SEAC (to name a few) should all trade higher than they currently do. Even tho BBIG had had its issues it still is promising when merging and becoming ZASH. But that doesn't matter if they can't build confidence in it's shareholders. And it also takes time. Something most traders here aren't interested in.

Nofapdeity

Sorry, meant CRTX not CNTX. Same shit basically. Their pipeline had bad news and the stock tanked.

prbsrmdm

CRTX🚀🚀🚀🚀🌚🌚🌚🌚

sammy2607

AVCT AMC CRTX are the plays for now

risc9558

No it’s not the same. u/unlucky-prize is a different person :) That’s a fairytale you’re trying to tell me now. This would imply that SAVA thinks they have a miracle drug that reverses AD where the average (!) person improves in his/her ADAS-Cog11 score over time. That would mean there must be patients in the sample (in the top decile, e.g.) who show a difference compared to placebo of at least 10 or 12 points, if not more. The scale of ADAS-Cog11 goes from 0 to 70, with a higher score indicating greater cognitive impairment. Their Day 1 mean score was (according to their poster) 16.73. That is extremely, extremely mild AD. To the contrary, Cortexyme’s Day 1 mean was 23.70. They also had mild to moderate AD patients in their GAIN study sample. Next, SAVA only has 46% of females (see poster lower left) whereas CRTX’s average is 58%. It is known that AD is significantly more likely in woman than in men. Further, SAVA’s MMSE sample mean is also significantly more skewed to very mild forms of AD, with a mean of 22.7 compared to 18.5 in CRTX. Nobody believes this out there without a phase 3. There is even natural aging that lowers your score in this age group over time. Cells that are already “dead” can’t be brought back to life through Simufilam. This can only be achieved if there are people in the sample of 50 who don’t have any AD, or if the (very small) sample of 50 people is highly, highly selected. This form of sample selection is impossible in a randomized phase 3 as mentioned above (FDA standard). I think they also use the clinical word “baseline” in a different meaning (i.e., for the placebo group rather than in relation to month 0). Where can this interview be found?

risc9558

Sold AMC with 600% profit and currently breaking even on CRTX. So I'm fine with that. FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. I'm not spreading FUD. #1 and #2 are facts. They are public information that can be verified by everybody who can read financial statements and SEC filings. Hence there is no Uncertainty and no Doubt. #1 and #2 are just true statements. If this brings fear to you, then you should not trade based on emotions, but based on rational expectations / decision making.

NFG89

Where is that dude that was shilling CRTX long plays here a while ago. Biotech man, shits volatile.

Ngabbard84

Is anyone in CRTX? Been holding this bitch for a while and it keeps going down. Or sideways

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought BFRI RELI CRTX AVCT AUVI were the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

Aren't CRTX and RELI SI higher?

prbsrmdm

CRTX 🚀🚀🚀🚀🌚🌚🌚🌚

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought RELI CRTX and BFRI were MOASS

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought CRTX was the short squeeze play

B1gChuckDaddySr

Not a RELI bagholder yet.... But holding bags on ATER PROG CRTX ISIG BFRI and DWAC

henrypdx

I think this is a sleeping giant. Not sure when or how it will be woken, but many of the key markers seem to suggest some great opportunities hidden in CRTX.

B1gChuckDaddySr

You sure....What about RELI BFRI and CRTX

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought it was over.... BFRI CRTX RELI and ESSC were the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

CRTX and BFRI are the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought AERC CRTX RELI SYTA and ESSC were the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought it was BFRI CRTX PPSI PTPI ESSC RELI and SYTA

Green-Clerk6

AVCT, ESSC & CRTX . All looking great and display a beautiful green color this morning 🌄.

B1gChuckDaddySr

Nope, RELI BFRI and CRTX are the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

RELI CRTX and BFRI are the plays

tradingrust

Sure, I've spent plenty of time on their IR site. Needless to say, it does not mention changes in the strategic direction of Pfizer. Those are the kinds of threads industry insiders pull together. The CRTX subreddit isn't too active either. I am long CRTX.

Silent_nutsack

Let me guess, CRTX?

Unlucky-Prize

I wonder when the SAVA shoe is going to drop. FDA petition response is soon. I think it's unlikely they'd stop, but theirs a LOT of evidence of fraud or at least gross incompetence at this point. Have put in a small put position, so I'm pair traded long CRTX short SAVA lol.

Green-Clerk6

ESSC, AVCT, CRTX: Do NOT sell ! Add ITM CALLS. Just do it.

Green-Clerk6

CRTX, ESSC, AVCT. Add ITM CALLS folks ! This should get things moving faster in the right ⬆️ direction.

itsleis

I,too,played CRTX

Petrassperber

Yes, these two are the plays. But don’t forget CRTX. This stock needs at least small catalyst to boom. Not in yet, but looking at it. Maybe after RELI reaches 40$ I will put 0,5M $ in CRTX.

thesacred

CRTX got you too, huh?

Green-Clerk6

AVCT, CRTX. Will squeeze.

henrypdx

What would compel a person to comment about unrelated tickers on a post about CRTX? So annoying. I’m in on CRTX. I too am confident that this is a ticking time bomb.

NoGoose343

CRTX

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought ESSC BFRI CRTX and RELI were the plays?

1Learningloser

I believe CRTX will fill the gap pretty soon.

Nofapdeity

CRTX

Mcbronco32

Ahh tell me the bio was CRTX so I’m not alone

hayskee

Who the fuck said CRTX I want to eat your eyes

VisualMod

I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: CRTX. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.

Andrey_from_Atyrau

Doing same on CRTX 💪💪💪

Stacking-Dimes

I'm adding every dip on CRTX, but please come pick me up at 10.53 on PPSI 

tradingrust

Are you in this space? Curious where you are getting some of these catalysts. I can/did come up with most of these catalysts from CRTX own filings + knowledge of the market but I'd never see Pfizer selling out due to their internal direction on neuro treatments until blindsided. I guess I'm clumsily/rudely asking if you have personal experience/knowledge that's driving those kinds of insights or if I'm missing out on another forum or discord that I should be a part of :-) Thx for posting!

MontaukMonster2

$CRTX

BUDDHA_LAUGHING

This sub goes for the ripest, lowest hanging fruit and ignores the next level until they are closer to the ground. CRTX getting juicy but probably not ripe enough.

VisualMod

I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: CRTX BODY. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.

VisualMod

I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: CRTX BODY. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.

risc9558

Let’s hope so. I just checked the relevant SEC Form 4 filings of insider trades. Given that Lynch (CEO), Dominy (CSO), and the Lamond Family already own most of insider shares (30.75% of all common shares outstanding of CRTX), I expect other execs and directors to buy. Most probably buys made by Lowe (CFO), Detke (CMO), and Margaret A. McLoughlin, PhD (independent director).

SnooDingos5333

How about CRTX?

ClimbaRoc

Yeah its only 20% SI... CRTX has 46.32% SI looks more appealing

ClimbaRoc

I bought into CRTX today. To me it looks like a perfect setup. Hedgefunds are even buying it heavily. I think it will gap up back to $60 easy

B1gChuckDaddySr

I heard of BFRI CRTX ESSC ISIG SPRB

NoGoose343

CRTX!

ClimbaRoc

Correction CRTX****

VisualMod

I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: CRTX. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.

Andrey_from_Atyrau

CRTX to the moon 🚀🚀🚀

FullTarDish

BITCHES LOOK CRTX SI65‰, low volumen, OSS is just 15M

B1gChuckDaddySr

Higher than BFRI BBIG CRTX SYTA and SPRB?

B1gChuckDaddySr

Arent BFRI CRTX and SPRB SI higher?

B1gChuckDaddySr

Arent BFRI CRTX and SPRB SI higher?

Green-Clerk6

AVCT is going nowhere. CRTX is at least moving. ...in the right direction.

Green-Clerk6

CRTX is it.

Andrey_from_Atyrau

CRTX best deal right now 🚀🚀🚀

Dapper-Career-3877

Already in CRTX. BIRD looks like it has potential

VisualMod

I am a bot from /r/wallstreetbets. You submitted one or more banned tickers: CRTX. Message /u/zjz if they're above 1.5 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.

Top-Rent-8748

CRTX heavily shorted stock, going all in

prbsrmdm

CRTX🚀🚀🚀🚀🌚🌚🌚🌚

MyNi_NotYourNi

Woah WoaH WOAH.. one ticker at a time man.. Who's got the headspace to balance two at the same time 🥴 Especially when none of the following have anything to do with each other: the tickers, the strikes, apples (PIXY), oranges (CRTX) and the awkwardly placed "get" in the title.

Green-Clerk6

CRTX. Don't care if pre market or not.

Green-Clerk6

CRTX is a no brainer for it's potential EVEN without the squeeze factor. Adding the high SI and low float, thus squeeze potential added to an effective drug ( on certain groups), it a clear strong buy.

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought BFRI and CRTX were the plays

B1gChuckDaddySr

BFRI and CRTX have much higher SI

B1gChuckDaddySr

CRTX is due for a upward correction right?

B1gChuckDaddySr

I thought it was either BFRI or CRTX?

LongboatsNerd

Bluewhales has 100k+ karma yet almost no post history. Skittle and them were made mods at almost the same time. https://www.reveddit.com/v/Shortsqueeze/comments/rnhr8b/crtx/ was a post made by 7BlueWhales , when they thought they were logged into their skittle account. It's a post shilling CRTX. They're doing their best to scrub their history, but not smart enough to actually do it. Look at all the clear bot names in that subreddit. There's bots in the "what are you buying tmorrow?" sticky thread shilling ISIG as their first and only post after 11 months.... That subreddit is illegal market manipulation as the mods attempt to run a concerted effort to pump and dump tickers that their company owns.

FullTarDish

$CRTX anyone?

Inside_Western_2499

Similar to CRTX. I think those drop off plays are very difficult to put on here, at least for now. None of them have shown potential. Only one is BBIO that I’ve seen move forward.

DearDamage8113

CRTX pumpers at it again…