DollazAndSense
Regular
If I was in Brainchip's shoes, I believe I would want the bulk of the customers signing licences with us through an intermediary such as Megachips. In doing so it eliminates the need to be transparent with the ASX about contract details about the financial specifics of said deal.Renesas is the number three supplier of MCU’s to the automotive sector and well ahead of Bosch which everyone has likely heard of.
However it seems clear that we need a motion at the AGM requiring Brainchip to cancel any IP licences not sold directly by Brainchip.
Apparently there is something wrong with those being sold by MegaChips on Brainchips behalf.
We only want customers buying their IP licences direct from Brainchip so the sales have to be announced on the ASX.
We don’t care about the money we just want the feel good factor.
I think we only need five hundred shareholders to request such a motion.
It’s just not good enough that Brainchip is allowing customers who want confidentiality to sign up via MegaChips.
We want Brainchip to double their sales and engineering staff, even triple them if necessary to make this happen.
The idea of keeping staff numbers low minimising overheads so that profit on IP sales and royalties can run to as high as 97% is a ludicrous idea.
All this sort of business plan will lead to is the payment of dividends early in the commercialisation process and who wants that.
My translation of the consequences of certain opinions only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
If someone has ever been involved in part of a multimillion dollar business deal, they would likely know it is unwise to let other customers / suppliers know the inner workings of a deal as it can work against you in future negotiations with other parties. The revenue however would speak for itself in the quarterlies.
Car dealers would be operating under very slim margins if they had to sell each car model at the absolute BEST price they have ever negotiated with a customer. In the real world - you earn more on some deals, you earn less on others.
The downside of this behind closed doors approach of course, is that we don't get the bragging rights and the skyrocketing SP based on a potential household name signing the dotted line in an official announcement. Instead, we would get appropriate SP re-rates based on revenue increases each quarter. The vibe I get from Tony Dawe's replies that some posters who have generously shared on this forum, is that he would personally like to see an IP licence announced officially as soon as possible. Maybe the company's executives share his view, maybe they don't. I don't care which way they play it to be honest, both seem favorable to me.