BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Damo4]

 

[McHale]

Trading activity or the LACK of it today especially after yesterday afternoon trading would seem to suggest that LDA have completed their PUT.

My GUESS is these CXXT trades are possibly shorts closing out slowly.
I also believe that most of the "SHORTS" held are for "Hedging purposes" by the Big Instos against their long holdings. Some smaller shorters exist which gives us that varying daily "shorts" being taken out. IMO

11:30am until 01:00pm has the ASX showing 99% trades being "Cross Trades" ie:CXXT and mostly only 1 >25 share trades.
Volume total ASX is 1.2 Mil for 3 hours of trading.

If this is the case the we can expect BRN announcement of close of LDA PUT with the amounts/$ values etc. Maybe this afternoon??.

Yak52

ASX DATA ONLY CHI-X NOT INCLUDED.

1:05:02 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
1:05:02 PM	0.462	100	46.250	CXXT
1:05:02 PM	0.460	5,000	2,300.000	XT
1:03:47 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
1:03:00 PM	0.462	68	31.450	CXXT
1:03:00 PM	0.460	3,434	1,579.640
1:02:48 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
1:02:48 PM	0.462	89	41.163	CXXT
1:02:48 PM	0.462	3	1.388	CXXT
1:02:47 PM	0.462	122	56.425	CXXT
1:01:05 PM	0.460	3,075	1,414.500
1:01:05 PM	0.460	3,068	1,411.280
12:54:33 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:54:33 PM	0.462	19	8.788	CXXT
12:54:33 PM	0.460	954	438.840
12:42:17 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:42:17 PM	0.462	10	4.625	CXXT
12:42:17 PM	0.460	593	272.780
12:41:32 PM	0.462	14	6.475	CXXT
12:41:32 PM	0.460	662	304.520
12:40:33 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:40:33 PM	0.462	47	21.738	CXXT
12:39:29 PM	0.462	24	11.100	CXXT
12:39:29 PM	0.462	1,197	553.613	CXXT
12:38:32 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:38:32 PM	0.462	50	23.125	CXXT
12:36:00 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:36:00 PM	0.462	50	23.125	CXXT
12:33:28 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:33:28 PM	0.462	56	25.900	CXXT
12:31:27 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:31:27 PM	0.462	76	35.150	CXXT
12:30:57 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:30:56 PM	0.462	89	41.163	CXXT
12:30:31 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:30:31 PM	0.462	70	32.375	CXXT
12:30:31 PM	0.462	3,499	1,618.288	NXXT
12:24:58 PM	0.462	17	7.863	CXXT
12:24:58 PM	0.460	849	390.540
12:24:42 PM	0.462	11	5.088	CXXT
12:24:42 PM	0.462	517	239.113	CXXT
12:23:21 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:23:21 PM	0.462	54	24.975	CXXT
12:20:49 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:20:49 PM	0.462	53	24.513	CXXT
12:19:18 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:19:18 PM	0.462	53	24.513	CXXT
12:17:47 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:17:47 PM	0.462	46	21.275	CXXT
12:16:47 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:16:47 PM	0.462	51	23.588	CXXT
12:16:25 PM	0.462	18	8.325	CXXT
12:16:25 PM	0.460	861	396.060	XT
12:15:54 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:15:54 PM	0.462	50	23.125	CXXT
12:15:54 PM	0.462	12	5.550	CXXT
12:15:26 PM	0.460	587	270.020
12:15:26 PM	0.462	7	3.238	CXXT
12:15:14 PM	0.462	360	166.500	CXXT
12:15:14 PM	0.462	18,000	8,325.000	CXXT
12:13:54 PM	0.462	3	1.388	CXXT
12:13:54 PM	0.462	149	68.913	CXXT
12:13:54 PM	0.462	25	11.563	CXXT
12:13:45 PM	0.462	7,412	3,428.050	CXXT
12:13:45 PM	0.462	1,260	582.750	CXXT
12:13:45 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:13:45 PM	0.462	52	24.050	CXXT
12:12:14 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:12:14 PM	0.462	55	25.438	CXXT
12:10:43 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:10:43 PM	0.462	58	26.825	CXXT
12:09:59 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:09:59 PM	0.462	66	30.525	CXXT
12:09:59 PM	0.460	3,334	1,533.640
12:09:12 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:09:12 PM	0.462	62	28.675	CXXT
12:07:41 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:07:41 PM	0.462	63	29.138	CXXT
12:06:10 PM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
12:06:10 PM	0.462	65	30.063	CXXT
12:04:38 PM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
12:04:38 PM	0.462	65	30.063	CXXT
12:02:07 PM	0.462	45	20.813	CXXT
11:59:05 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:59:05 AM	0.462	51	23.588	CXXT
11:58:11 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:57:16 AM	0.462	8	3.700	CXXT
11:57:16 AM	0.462	435	201.188	CXXT
11:57:16 AM	0.460	21,739	9,999.940
11:57:03 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:57:03 AM	0.462	55	25.438	CXXT
11:56:52 AM	0.462	5	2.313	CXXT
11:56:52 AM	0.462	217	100.363	CXXT
11:55:02 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:55:02 AM	0.462	57	26.363	CXXT
11:52:30 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:52:30 AM	0.462	45	20.813	CXXT
11:49:59 AM	0.462	34	15.725	CXXT
11:49:59 AM	0.462	48	22.200	CXXT
11:48:34 AM	0.462	94	43.475	CXXT
11:48:34 AM	0.462	204	94.350	CXXT
11:47:27 AM	0.462	129	59.663	CXXT
11:47:27 AM	0.462	60	27.750	CXXT
11:46:57 AM	0.462	1	0.463	CXXT
11:46:57 AM	0.462	89	41.163	CXXT
11:46:52 AM	0.462	61	28.213	CXXT
11:46:52 AM	0.462	20	9.250	CXXT
11:44:27 AM	0.462	73	33.763	CXXT
11:42:35 AM	0.462	2	0.925	CXXT
11:42:24 AM	0.462	169	78.163	CXXT
11:39:13 AM	0.462	86	39.775	CXXT
11:39:13 AM	0.462	3	1.388	CXXT
11:35:27

Hi Yak, I don't look at the above trading as having anything to do with "shorts"

My take is that the above is classic "bot" trading - small trade parcels working to an algorithmic pattern toward a quantitative design, which in itself is pure market manipulation.

I don't see a relationship per se between bot activity and options trading. If any of the instos who deploy bots were found to be running options trading related to their quantitative analysed algorithms, they would be in deep trouble legally. However I would be very interested to know where legal boundaries lie with regard to any relationship with options trading campaigns and bot trading (HFT) actually sit, I believe ASIC and ASX should make this relationship clear.

Shorts or Put trading is done in contracts, usually a contract is for 100 or 1000 of the underlying (in this case BRN), it is the same with the other most common options strategy a Call (buying options contracts looking at an increase in SP).

Thusly options traders can play the market going up with Calls or going down with Puts.

You cannot just go to a trading platform or broker that I am aware of, and ask to borrow some shares for the purpose of shorting or going long. You look up options chains, you have to buy contracts (not just random numbers). Options trading is complex, and it is also risky if you don't know what you are doing, there is always someone on the other side of the trade, it is certainly no walk in the park - as I see so many posts here indicate.

This is not personal at all Yak, I see so many posts on here re shorters which IMO indicates a clear lack of knowledge about what is involved in trading options.

I may post re the LDA deal later (if I can find time) because I believe that it is not well understood here, this is in part because the wording of the announcement itself does not clearly elucidate what the LDA arrangement actually constitutes. To be perfectly honest I find the wording and terms used unusual.

 

[rgupta]

I'm not sure the standard liver can handle 164 beers in 20 days, averaging 23.4 beers a day

May be he sell brn before getting too sick to survive!

 

[DollazAndSense]

This forum is really slipping again due to the negative nellys.

Some people really aren’t mentally prepared to hold shares in a speculative company. Which Brainchip still is - it’s entry into the ASX200 was premature and due to a great plug by Mercedes. But Brainchip is a speccy.

Where anyone “feels” like Brainchip should be by now is irrelevant. It always goes back to having a plan. Take responsibility for your own investment. Whining here does nothing and the same whingers rarely contribute anything beneficial.

Why pay a membership for this forum, I can get whinging for free from the Mrs.

 

[Foxdog]

Too far to travel for what I think will be a rehash of last year's AGM - without the forward looking statements of course

 

[Foxdog]

I'm not sure the standard liver can handle 164 beers in 20 days, averaging 23.4 beers a day

I suspect he would be well and truly recovered by now - perhaps even a bit thirsty

 

[DollazAndSense]

Hi Yak, I don't look at the above trading as having anything to do with "shorts"

My take is that the above is classic "bot" trading - small trade parcels working to an algorithmic pattern toward a quantitative design, which in itself is pure market manipulation.

I don't see a relationship per se between bot activity and options trading. If any of the instos who deploy bots were found to be running options trading related to their quantitative analysed algorithms, they would be in deep trouble legally. However I would be very interested to know where legal boundaries lie with regard to any relationship with options trading campaigns and bot trading (HFT) actually sit, I believe ASIC and ASX should make this relationship clear.

Shorts or Put trading is done in contracts, usually a contract is for 100 or 1000 of the underlying (in this case BRN), it is the same with the other most common options strategy a Call (buying options contracts looking at an increase in SP).

Thusly options traders can play the market going up with Calls or going down with Puts.

You cannot just go to a trading platform or broker that I am aware of, and ask to borrow some shares for the purpose of shorting or going long. You look up options chains, you have to buy contracts (not just random numbers). Options trading is complex, and it is also risky if you don't know what you are doing, there is always someone on the other side of the trade, it is certainly no walk in the park - as I see so many posts here indicate.

This is not personal at all Yak, I see so many posts on here re shorters which IMO indicates a clear lack of knowledge about what is involved in trading options.

I may post re the LDA deal later (if I can find time) because I believe that it is not well understood here, this is in part because the wording of the announcement itself does not clearly elucidate what the LDA arrangement actually constitutes. To be perfectly honest I find the wording and terms used unusual.

I hope you do elaborate mate. Keen to hear more thoughts on the LDA situation.

 

[FrederikSchack]

Just imagine what it would like if the BRN management team and staff were to be reading these posts !!!!

I consider his move to Brainchip a knowledge transfer.

 

[FrederikSchack]

Hi Yak, I don't look at the above trading as having anything to do with "shorts"

My take is that the above is classic "bot" trading - small trade parcels working to an algorithmic pattern toward a quantitative design, which in itself is pure market manipulation.

I don't see a relationship per se between bot activity and options trading. If any of the instos who deploy bots were found to be running options trading related to their quantitative analysed algorithms, they would be in deep trouble legally. However I would be very interested to know where legal boundaries lie with regard to any relationship with options trading campaigns and bot trading (HFT) actually sit, I believe ASIC and ASX should make this relationship clear.

Shorts or Put trading is done in contracts, usually a contract is for 100 or 1000 of the underlying (in this case BRN), it is the same with the other most common options strategy a Call (buying options contracts looking at an increase in SP).

Thusly options traders can play the market going up with Calls or going down with Puts.

You cannot just go to a trading platform or broker that I am aware of, and ask to borrow some shares for the purpose of shorting or going long. You look up options chains, you have to buy contracts (not just random numbers). Options trading is complex, and it is also risky if you don't know what you are doing, there is always someone on the other side of the trade, it is certainly no walk in the park - as I see so many posts here indicate.

This is not personal at all Yak, I see so many posts on here re shorters which IMO indicates a clear lack of knowledge about what is involved in trading options.

I may post re the LDA deal later (if I can find time) because I believe that it is not well understood here, this is in part because the wording of the announcement itself does not clearly elucidate what the LDA arrangement actually constitutes. To be perfectly honest I find the wording and terms used unusual.

There's of course always the general short funds, that just short broadly:

BRN Institutional Ownership and Shareholders - BrainChip Holdings Ltd (ASX) Stock

BRN Institutional Ownership and Shareholders - BrainChip Holdings Ltd (ASX) Stock

fintel.io

B.t.w., interesting that if you click into ROBT an AI and robotics fund, they own more Brainchip than they own nVidia:

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

fintel.io

 

[Cardpro]

Seems to me that this is now confirmed as a slow burn. Doesn't appear to be any chance of a sudden ground-breaking announcement that will see a re-rate any time soon. The use of the term 'interested' when referring to customers doesn't really mean much in my opinion, it appears as though none are willing to commit to this new tech and are quite happy to wait and see what each new version will bring. 'AKD1000 never intended to be a revenue stream'....really? I thought Sean said the company would be self sustaining by Y/E 2022 on the back of AKD1000, perhaps I misunderstood. Personally I'm not expecting much from the next 4C or the AGM. Producing better and better chips/IP is fine but not if potential customers keep sitting on their hands waiting to see what's next. Nice, professional looking presentation thothough

Although I am quite annoyed at the current share price, to be fair, I think he was saying that the physical chip was never intended for massive sale as we are focusing on IP deals...

 

[Pappagolla]

Too far to travel for what I think will be a rehash of last year's AGM - without the forward looking statements of course

Sounds like you have a lot on the line!

 

[Bravo]

NVDIA A100 versus AKIDA - US Department of Homeland Security

Talk about getting champagne for beer prices!!!

Meet the $10,000 Nvidia chip powering the race for A.I.

The $10,000 Nvidia A100has become one of the most critical tools in the artificial intelligence industry,

www.cnbc.com

Robust Classification of Contraband Substances using Longwave Hyperspectral Imaging and Full Precision and Neuromorphic Convolutional Neural Networks

Several agencies such as the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) seek to improve the detection of illegal threats and materials passing through P…

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[mrgds]

Hi Yak, I don't look at the above trading as having anything to do with "shorts"

My take is that the above is classic "bot" trading - small trade parcels working to an algorithmic pattern toward a quantitative design, which in itself is pure market manipulation.

I don't see a relationship per se between bot activity and options trading. If any of the instos who deploy bots were found to be running options trading related to their quantitative analysed algorithms, they would be in deep trouble legally. However I would be very interested to know where legal boundaries lie with regard to any relationship with options trading campaigns and bot trading (HFT) actually sit, I believe ASIC and ASX should make this relationship clear.

Shorts or Put trading is done in contracts, usually a contract is for 100 or 1000 of the underlying (in this case BRN), it is the same with the other most common options strategy a Call (buying options contracts looking at an increase in SP).

Thusly options traders can play the market going up with Calls or going down with Puts.

You cannot just go to a trading platform or broker that I am aware of, and ask to borrow some shares for the purpose of shorting or going long. You look up options chains, you have to buy contracts (not just random numbers). Options trading is complex, and it is also risky if you don't know what you are doing, there is always someone on the other side of the trade, it is certainly no walk in the park - as I see so many posts here indicate.

This is not personal at all Yak, I see so many posts on here re shorters which IMO indicates a clear lack of knowledge about what is involved in trading options.

I may post re the LDA deal later (if I can find time) because I believe that it is not well understood here, this is in part because the wording of the announcement itself does not clearly elucidate what the LDA arrangement actually constitutes. To be perfectly honest I find the wording and terms used unusual.

Thnx @McHale .................... im sure alot of forum readers would be interested in your thoughts on the LDA Capitol deal, me included, so if you can find the time that would be great.
I agree that the wording of the arrangement was not something i could fully understand, ie quite vague.
@TECH seems to be optimistic regarding news of it, or at least thinking it should be released for shareholders.
Id certainly like to know ......... why it was done, when it was done?
......... will the funds be spent on something major ( like are BRN supporting the Renesas Tape-out ? )
........... is the money just going to ongoing R&D and staffing, as no revenue expected in the near term?
........... why was the period so long and at what price BRN set the floor price?
It was stated to be finalised end of March/early April, .............. well i guess technically we are still in "early April" as the month has 30 days, and its the 14th today , like @TECH i feel we shareholders need to get a clear account of why and how this capitol raise was executed.

AKIDA BALLISTA

 

[FrederikSchack]

I just looked a bit further into it, try to look at how much the AI and Robotics fund invest in these selected companies:

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

fintel.io

So they invest more in Brainchip than NXP, Qualcomm, Micron, nVidia, Intel, Google, Amazon and Tesla

 

[FrederikSchack]

I just looked a bit further into it, try to look at how much the AI and Robotics fund invest in these selected companies:
View attachment 34256

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

ROBT - First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF - Portfolio Holdings, AUM (13F, 13G)

fintel.io

So they invest more in Brainchip than NXP, Qualcomm, Micron, nVidia, Intel, Google, Amazon and Tesla

Of course, they have obviously divided the companies into three tiers, but we're still not down with Intel, Google, Amazon and Tesla

 

[TECH]

I believe the context is that the actual "chip" was not meant to be a revenue generator. They did not have an enormous amount of the chips manufactured, and those they did manufacture were put into the devices sold to EAP partners, evaluators, and developers.

The AKD1000 IP is still a very viable and marketable commercial product. MegaChips and Renesas have licensed it for their products and customers. BrainChip spelled this out long ago on the roadmap shared at the various technology and investor conferences.

NVISO makes its human behavior SDKs available for the AKD1000 platform but also demonstrates substantial performance differences between BrainChip's technology and more well-known competitors.

My point is that it was not a "throwaway" first pass that was never intended to be a product; quite the contrary. Yes, neuromorphic is still quite a new concept in AI hardware and will require adoption. I imagine the first adopters are making neuromorphic sensors, such as those for vision processing. More will follow over time.

In the meantime, it makes no sense for BrainChip to stop working on its second-generation technology influenced by other companies whose interest has now been piqued. I imagine they will be treated to architectural improvements that will provide the functionality required to fulfill their vision while providing enhanced performance for specific applications.

There are plenty of applications that can be fulfilled using 1st generation Akida architecture.

I did listen to Sean's presentation in the early hours here in Perth, I'd have to disagree with his comments surrounding AKD 1000, he obviously knows best but before he came onboard the engineering samples were just that, samples, then we did the tape out with TSMC, that batch of chips performed better than was initially hoped for, then we completely changed tack, moving from a semi-conductor chip supplier to an IP service provider first and foremost, that was the point that I believe that AKD 1000 become known as the reference chip, all along Peter had all but completed his workings on AKD 2000, having a working model in the lab at Perth and sent it off to Anil and his team in the US.

We maybe even designing specific IP for specific clients, working in with and tweaking designs to accommodate the client, I did like how Sean corrected himself at one point last night when referring to customers, changing that to prospective customers, just keeping things real, not being tempted to get ahead of himself, that showed good discipline on his behalf in my opinion.

Lumpy revenue is a damn site better than no revenue, we continue to grow, continue to gain traction in the key areas that we are and have been targeting for a number of years now, we all know that the "edge" is the new gold, and it's coming in a big way, keep a cool head, you like me are invested in a great developing company, as Sean alluded to last night, our team of staff are ALL highly intelligent, data centers have their place in this world, but the edge is the future and I and you all know it.

God bless Brainchip and the flock Tech.

 

[suss]

Hopefully another revenue lump appears before the AGM!

 

[Rise from the ashes]

Hopefully another revenue lump appears before the AGM!

What do you call a Pegasus that is being sus? A megasus.

 

[DollazAndSense]

Just to give an example of how long it can take to implement new technology for the depressed/panicked posters here..

DEEPX has signed a memorandum of understanding with Hyundai Motor Co. and Kia Corp. to further develop its artificial intelligence semiconductor technology designed for robots.

Hyundai Motor is the parent company of Kia Corp., and they both share a robotics lab at the Uiwang R&D Center in Gyeonggi-do, South Korea. The companies have used DEEPX's technology as part of a proof-of-concept phase over the past year to run algorithms that allow robots to smoothly complete their tasks.

DEEPX said its semiconductor technology demonstrated that it offers high AI computational efficiency and low power operation, making it suitable for mass production.

As part of the agreement, Hyundai and Kia plan to take this technology out of development, commercialize it and then mass-produce it. The companies said they will integrate DEEPX's system-on-chip (SoC) into their own products that are being developed at the robotics lab.

“I expect we can lead the excellent robotics service development in both performance and price by combining the SW technology of the Robotics Lab and DEEPX's HW technology,” said Dong Jin-Hyun, leader of the Hyundai and Kia Robotics Lab. “As soon as we confirm and examine the superiority of DEEPX NPU chip products, we will carry on with further cooperation and apply it to the robot that is under research and development.”

DEEPX Pens Deal With Hyundai and Kia to Commercialize AI Semiconductor Technology

After testing out its technology at its robotics lab for the past year, Hyundai and Kia have signed an agreement with Tokyo-based DEEPX to commercialize its AI semiconductors.

www.robotics247.com

At least 12 months in and even when there is confirmation of the chip performance, further cooperation (testing) will have to be performed.
So LOL at the disappointment of waiting many months for new licence agreements with Brainchip. How’s this for realistic @Foxdog ?

Brainchip have built a solid foundation. I will stress again that impatience is what is breeding the anxiety on here.

 

[supersonic001]

#solution #innovation #automotive #cutting #teksun #teskuninc | Teksun Inc

Teksun offers cutting-edge automotive electronics solutions that empower the future of transportation. Our solutions range from advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) to in-vehicle infotainment systems, enabling safer, smarter, and more connected driving experiences. Focusing on innovation...

www.linkedin.com