BRN Discussion Ongoing

So, again this is ringing those memory bells, who holds the voting rights for all those shares currently registered under Citicorps name?
Citicorp or the individuals/entitys that have relevant accounts with Citicorp?
Was just checking into that side of things haha

A blog post found so far.




1657688299006.png
 
  • Like
  • Fire
  • Love
Reactions: 17 users

Moonshot

Regular
So, again this is ringing those memory bells, who holds the voting rights for all those shares currently registered under Citicorps name?
Citicorp or the individuals/entitys that have relevant accounts with Citicorp?
Will be owner of shares I think, but they may be part of a fund, in which case a fund manager..
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users

Diogenese

Top 20
Thanks for posting this info for us all to see and consider FMF.

I would strongly suggest everyone take note of the 50%>ability to pass ordinary resolution.
CONSIDER what could be done in this situation.

Also take note please that not all T/O are "hostile" and some are "friendly" with blessings from management.

Currently (as of Jan 2022) Management controlled about 27% of SOI. Add CITICORPS 10%+ and you have aprox 40% SOI

I will divulge to you that I control over 700,000 shares of BRN in various accounts. My average buy in is aprox 0.53c so i have some
SERIOUS MONEY tied up in Brainchip. Not 3000 shares or 20,000 shares but over 700K. And it was not @ 0.05c either!


THE SHARE PRICE MATTERS GREATLY TO ME. I do not just drive down the road and hand over my money to some stranger and "TRUST HIM" then just sit back with a casual attitude of don't worry be happy. That is irresponsible childish drivel anyone saying/suggesting that on an Investment forum.
I also do not do the above with any COMPANY I invest in either! And comments that " The stock price will be what the stock price is" shows a total lack of respect and responsibility towards stakeholders/shareholders and their Investments.

My past "Mentors" taught me to never ,ever trust anyone in Management, Banking or Corporations with your money and do very strong DUE DILIGENCE on any business. These "mentors" were both CPA's and had been heads of Treasury depts within Government managing Billions. Later in life they were doing private trading involving sums greater that $500 Mil trades.

I take their advice and the experience gained with them far beyond any person posting here or on any other forum! CEOs who are friends will state the same never ever "Trust" anyone in the business world and be mature and sensible with your decisions regarding Investments. Contracts are used for a reason.

I have also seen the "Dealings" that go in during T/O with HNW holders, Management and these deals are NOT what the Retail shareholders get by any margin! Board positions, Management positions, freebie share options and "special" share buyouts are normal and ALL NEGOTIATED without disclosure to the public.

So moral of this rant and rave is .......don't go into this "blinded" by unfounded devotion to management. A decent CEO worth his salt will tell you this himself and only respect you if you act sensibly with your money and holdings.

Lastly I will say I do not care about comments or opinions anyone makes about the above post. I follow my own experience, knowledge and opinions as should you yours.

GLTAH.

Yak52
Is a closed mind really compatible with the Socratic dialogue to which we have become accustomed on this thread?
 
  • Like
  • Fire
  • Love
Reactions: 13 users

MDhere

Regular
ok.. i called my agent to call the buyers and they have 24hrs to take my offer of acceptance of there crazy reduction 15 day settlement no clauses. if they accept will take my 50k i have in my offset and buy brn. then put money back in my offset in 15 days. so for today and tomorrow stay at .80 c please lol
If i pull this off drinks on my at next agm (limit 1 house wine or beer each) lol
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Fire
Reactions: 31 users

Yak52

Regular
It’s not the companies responsibity to keep us informed, the responsibility lies with Citicorp informing asx.
MT09..............exactly where do you get such an idea please? The truth could not be farther from that statement.
and the Company has a responsibility to keep us shareholders informed also. This CITICORP accumulation should have been brought up at the AGM at least.

Tony Dawes reply has not surprised me at all but it is TOTALLY unacceptable. The "sheep" here may be willing to sit back in dream land but I take
responsibility for my money & Investments and expect as a shareholder to be kept informed about the Company I have invested in.

I expect a moral & business code from Management that encompasses TRANSPARENCY, RESPONSIBILITY especially towards stakeholders/shareholders.
Tony Dawe just shrugged off any responsibility and TRANSPARENCY is a foreign concept apparently to Management when considering shareholders.
His reply is as offending as the quote "Stock price is what it is" made recently. unbelievable.
Seeing red flags wont make me SELL but it WILL encourage me to spread around what they are trying to HIDE.

For ALL of us , even those who just simply cannot help being fence sitters, .........I truly hope that knowledge of CITICORP NOMINEE growing holdings ENCOURAGES other entities to decide to take a stand and COUNTER this attempt at a controlling stake in Brainchip.
AND I hope we see some unexpected REVENUE of significance in the next 4C soon.
-------------------------------------
ps. 2.6 million NEW shorts taken out yesterday (Tuesday) which may explain that 8% drop in SP.
shame its been as low as 600k lately each day.

pps. T/O commonly have a 15%/30%-50% PREMIUM added to the CURRENT stock price at Offer date. Does THAT send a shiver down your back hmm?

Yak52
 
  • Like
  • Fire
  • Love
Reactions: 37 users

wilzy123

Founding Member
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: 21 users

Moonshot

Regular
MT09..............exactly where do you get such an idea please? The truth could not be farther from that statement.
and the Company has a responsibility to keep us shareholders informed also. This CITICORP accumulation should have been brought up at the AGM at least.

Tony Dawes reply has not surprised me at all but it is TOTALLY unacceptable. The "sheep" here may be willing to sit back in dream land but I take
responsibility for my money & Investments and expect as a shareholder to be kept informed about the Company I have invested in.

I expect a moral & business code from Management that encompasses TRANSPARENCY, RESPONSIBILITY especially towards stakeholders/shareholders.
Tony Dawe just shrugged off any responsibility and TRANSPARENCY is a foreign concept apparently to Management when considering shareholders.
His reply is as offending as the quote "Stock price is what it is" made recently. unbelievable.
Seeing red flags wont make me SELL but it WILL encourage me to spread around what they are trying to HIDE.

For ALL of us , even those who just simply cannot help being fence sitters, .........I truly hope that knowledge of CITICORP NOMINEE growing holdings ENCOURAGES other entities to decide to take a stand and COUNTER this attempt at a controlling stake in Brainchip.
AND I hope we see some unexpected REVENUE of significance in the next 4C soon.
-------------------------------------
ps. 2.6 million NEW shorts taken out yesterday (Tuesday) which may explain that 8% drop in SP.
shame its been as low as 600k lately each day.

pps. T/O commonly have a 15%/30%-50% PREMIUM added to the CURRENT stock price at Offer date. Does THAT send a shiver down your back hmm?

Yak52
Again, there is nothing sinister going on here…its most likely a whole bunch of managed and super funds taking stakes since entering asx200..



Nb. I’m a director at a big4 and work closely with leading funds tax practice that deals a lot with these custodians
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
  • Fire
Reactions: 45 users
Just found this as well which is worth keeping in mind.

IG platform holds the shares under Citicorp Nominees.

Seeing this I also wonder what other platforms are doing the same and if so, the added interest in BRN over the past few months could also see an increase in buyers via these platforms thus increasing the overall Citicorp Nom #'s being discussed.

So that would also indicate retail buyers out there using IG will all be lumped in that basket which would add up a portion as well.




1657689068259.png
 
  • Like
  • Fire
  • Wow
Reactions: 17 users

TECH

Regular
Hi All,

I was made aware of an entity whom had accumulated around 72 million shares and building about 2 months ago, it's not a secret that Robert Mitro attended the AGM in Sydney, said nothing and left, my personal belief is that he has an axe to grind, with the company in general.

It is alleged that his holding of 120 million shares (as of 2 months or so ago) were given to him, as in, he never paid a cent, presumably for services rendered in the early years when Peter first went to the US (Silicon Valley) with his red FPGA card SNAP64 I think it was.

Allegedly Robert Mitro opened up doors through all his Corporate contacts, and appears to want everyone to know how important he was/is in the development of Brainchip Holdings Ltd....the word "genius" doesn't come to mind.

We all know the individual who carries that title proudly, and it's certainly not Robert Mitro, it's our real Founder, Mr Peter van der Made.

Yesterday I was advised by a source that 73.4% of BRN shares were still held by the top 1000 shareholders, and the only thing I can say is that, I believe everything that the company has said on the public record is still on track.

From a beautiful sunny day in Perth.....Tech x :geek:

(All of the above claims are a matter of opinion....mine).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
  • Fire
Reactions: 86 users

AusEire

Founding Member. It's ok to say No to Dot Joining
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users

HopalongPetrovski

I'm Spartacus!
Will be owner of shares I think, but they may be part of a fund, in which case a fund manager..
Yes, think this was raised in regard to who held voting rights when we had shares in our individual industry super funds, (Not SMSF's), where the handling of those rights were dependent on the individual funds charter.
So, in some circumstances, I, as an individual could instruct my fund, who holds and owns those shares on my behalf, to vote on a particular matter in a particular way. But it just depends on the way each fund is set up. In some circumstances, the fund can just ignore my instructions and theoretically vote my indirectly owned shares directly against my wishes. Even though in most cases the voting rights are not actually exercised in which case those shares are voted by and for in the Company's interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
Just for some fun here is an article discussing custodians etc in particular to our Big 4.



Who really owns Australia's Big Four banks?​

By Andrew Boyd | Updated 4th August 2020

In response to concerns over how our financial institutions operate, we commissioned a piece of research on the issue of bank ownership in Australia.

Often consumers who choose to bank with smaller, more independent banks may, in fact, be banking with one of the 'Big Four'. The following examination of who owns the big four (ANZ, Commonwealth Bank, NAB and Westpac) is the logical follow-on from that initial investigation.


Correct as at May 2014.
Correct as at May 2014.
Australia’s big four are not merely big, they’re massive. Humongous.
Their combined assets in 2013 stood at $2.86 trillion—or roughly twice the size of Australia’s national income.

They are four of the five largest Australian companies by market capitalisation, together representing more than a quarter of the market. According to a 2012 report by the International Monetary Fund, the big four controlled 88% of residential mortgages and 80% of deposits. By contrast, the biggest six American banks held 30% of total deposits in 2013.

It’s not just banking: the big four own 53% of life insurance premiums, and account for 57.3% of retail investment funds through bank-owned platforms. It begs the question: if they own so much of Australia’s economy, who owns the big four?

Connections​

According to a 2012 report by the International Monetary fund, 'major banks are highly interconnected, as they are among each other’s largest counterparties.’ However, that connection is far from direct. Part of it has to do with banks borrowing from each other, rather than owning large parts of each other.

A study of the Australian bank network by the Reserve Bank of Australia found that more than half of outstanding authorised deposit-taking institutions 'exposure’ in this sense is to the big four. Because they have so much of the money of the entire system already, when they need to temporarily borrow, there’s few other banks they can go to, so they have to go to each other. That’s a very cosy relationship.

Custodians​

It is in fact the same four names as the top four shareholders in each of the four banks—but it’s not each other. According to the big four’s annual reports for 2013, here’s who owns ordinary shares:

  • HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited: 16.91% of Westpac; 16.83% of NAB; 18.48% of ANZ; 14.80% of CBA
  • JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd: 12.75% of Westpac; 12.03% of NAB; 14.40% of ANZ; 11.57% of CBA
  • National Nominees Limited: 9.93% of Westpac, 10.14% of NAB; 11.76% of ANZ; 8.5% of CBA
  • Citicorp Nominees Pty Limited: 4.94% of Westpac; 4% of NAB; 4.15% of ANZ; 4.47% of CBA
'Custodians’, by definition, hold customers’ securities for safekeeping, in addition to offering other services such as account administration and collection of dividends and interest payments, for a fee. They are not active participants in decision-making. It would be wrong to imply that by having a 17% stake in Westpac, for example, HSBC also has 17% of the vote: as a custodian, HSBC only processes the proxy votes of the customers for whom it holds the shares—and these customers could be large sovereign wealth funds, or a board member of Westpac, or a family-owned business in Sydney. Discrepancies in proxy voting do occur, and many uneducated investors aren’t even aware they can cast votes. But in principle, HSBC, in a custodian role, acts only as the messenger, not the decision-maker.

As a wholly owned subsidiary of HSBC Bank Australia Limited, the custody nominees business held more than $700 billion in assets. It is not only in the big four. The sheer size of its investment capital means that it frequently shows up among the top 5 shareholders for a large number of Australian companies. In fact, HSBC, JP Morgan, National Nominees and Citicorp all frequently show up together among the top 5 or top 10 shareholders. They simply represent a very large pile of money, all of which has to be parked somewhere.

HSBC, JP Morgan, National Nominees and Citicorp all frequently show up together among the top 5 or top 10 shareholders in many Australian publicly-traded companies.

Unknown owners?​

On a different note, however, that 17% stake HSBC’s custodian arm has in Westpac could, in theory, represent just one person—or four big investors—buying through a variety of mutual funds, each of which has HSBC as their custodian. It’s a stretch, and it would have to be a very rich group of individuals, but it is possible. Unfortunately, it is practically impossible to track down the identities of those underlying shareholders through the various financial structures that hold shares for each other and on behalf of each other.

Can these hidden shareholders control what Westpac does?

The company points out that as of October 3, 2013, there were no shareholders who had a 'substantial holding’, i.e., in which “they or their associates” have control of 5% or more of the vote. NAB states the same. Westpac explains that shareholders such as HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited (16.91% of total shares) 'may hold shares for the benefit of third parties’—the definition of their role as custodians. Furthermore, Westpac states it is 'not directly or indirectly owned or controlled by any other corporation(s) or by any foreign government.’

But the top 20 registered shareholders held 52.42% of Westpac’s ordinary shares—and that’s a controlling stake. The word 'nominee’ or 'custodian’ pops up in 11 of them. There’s an independent wealth management group, a closed-end fund, an investment management firm, and so on. Who is behind the actual shares would be, again, practically impossible to determine.

The same names show up among the top 20 for each of the big four banks, with some variation.

The interconnection between the four banks may be even more pervasive, if even less direct. ANZ’s CEO from 2007-2016 was Mr. M R P Smith—who had been with HSBC for most of his 30-year career prior to joining ANZ. Since 1978, Mr Smith had held 'a wide variety of roles in Commercial, Institutional and Investment Banking, Planning and Strategy, Operations and General Management’, according to ANZ’s annual report, including as director of HSBC Australia Limited from 2004-2007, immediately before he became CEO of ANZ. In 2008 ANZ also hired its group managing director of human resources and chief risk officer from HSBC, and in 2011 plucked its new global natural resources head from HSBC.

The top 20 registered shareholders hold 52.42% of Westpac’s ordinary shares—and that’s a controlling stake.

Too big to fail?​

Whoever it is that owns the big four banks, one thing is clear: if the same four custodian companies own similar chunks of each of the big four, there’s indication that the shareholders behind them do not want one bank to succeed at the expense of another. The optimal scenario is if all of them win together. And maintain their dominant position, of course.

This post was originally published in May 2014 and has been updated for freshness, accuracy, and comprehensiveness.
 
  • Like
  • Fire
  • Love
Reactions: 24 users

Lex555

Regular
Just noticed that Audi's Q6 e-tron 2023 Sportback model has been spied. Article says it will use an electric platform jointly developed with Porche. Am trying to find out more about the "Hey, Audi" diologue system in the Q6 to see whether it is the same as the Audi Q4 e-tron in which they teamed up with Cerence.

See below the Audi Q4 e-tron has "A hybrid system with both cloud-based and integrated elements means drivers are never left without key capabilities, even in areas of low or no connectivity." I feel like the "integrated elements" referred to could include Akida.

In which case, you would think the system used in the Q4 would likely be used in the Q6...

Typing time: half an hour



View attachment 11205


I like it a lot, The force is strong in you

0416CF31-2660-4FB2-BA94-95387D31B885.gif
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 8 users

MrRomper

Regular
A fart in this place will turn into a tornado.
At the end of the day it is still a fart.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: 17 users

wilzy123

Founding Member
Hi All,

I was made aware of an entity whom had accumulated around 72 million shares and building about 2 months ago, it's not a secret that Robert Mitro attended the AGM in Sydney, said nothing and left, my personal belief is that he has an axe to grind, with the company in general.

It is alleged that his holding of 120 million shares (as of 2 months or so ago) were given to him, as in, he never paid a cent, presumably for services rendered in the early years when Peter first went to the US (Silicon Valley) with his red FPGA card SNAP64 I think it was.

Allegedly Robert Mitro opened up doors through all his Corporate contacts, and appears to want everyone to know how important is was/is in the development of Brainchip Holdings Ltd....the word "genius" doesn't come to mind.

We all know the individual who carries that title proudly, and it's certainly not Robert Mitro, it's our real Founder, Mr Peter van der Made.

Yesterday I was advised by a source that 73.4% of BRN shares were still held by the top 1000 shareholders, and the only thing I can say is that, I believe everything that the company has said on the public record is still on track.

From a beautiful sunny day in Perth.....Tech x :geek:

(All of the above claims are a matter of opinion....mine).
interesting.jpg
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 18 users

Slade

Top 20
Hi All,

I was made aware of an entity whom had accumulated around 72 million shares and building about 2 months ago, it's not a secret that Robert Mitro attended the AGM in Sydney, said nothing and left, my personal belief is that he has an axe to grind, with the company in general.

It is alleged that his holding of 120 million shares (as of 2 months or so ago) were given to him, as in, he never paid a cent, presumably for services rendered in the early years when Peter first went to the US (Silicon Valley) with his red FPGA card SNAP64 I think it was.

Allegedly Robert Mitro opened up doors through all his Corporate contacts, and appears to want everyone to know how important is was/is in the development of Brainchip Holdings Ltd....the word "genius" doesn't come to mind.

We all know the individual who carries that title proudly, and it's certainly not Robert Mitro, it's our real Founder, Mr Peter van der Made.

Yesterday I was advised by a source that 73.4% of BRN shares were still held by the top 1000 shareholders, and the only thing I can say is that, I believe everything that the company has said on the public record is still on track.

From a beautiful sunny day in Perth.....Tech x :geek:

(All of the above claims are a matter of opinion....mine).
Hi Tech, good to hear from you. In that top 1000 shareholders we have Citicorp and Robert Mitro. Are there any others that might not want to vote the way we want them to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users

Yak52

Regular
1% is approximately 17-18 million shares right?

So, unless Citicorp Nominees has not followed the disclosure rules, they can purchase up to 17 million shares on behalf of a single entity without disclosing this to the ASX.

Unless they have a group of ten really wealthy friends who got together to buy 17 million shares each, or they sent all their brokers out to advise a large number of high wealth individuals to all pile into BRN, there is something happening.

@BaconLover good to see your getting into the right thinking mode. THESE are the RIGHT questions!

@Slade yes you are 100% right and I have covered that also in a post today somewhere.

Alwaysgreen.............correct with your post BUT highly unlikely thats what its about.

I used to get Black Rocks PDFs about 300-500 pages long with ALL the trades done and trawl through them learning how they buy/sell & accumulated with trading. You can learn methods by doing this.
One major standout was how when they {Black Rock) get an Analyst recommendation and decide to accumulate a companies stock ...............

it is NOT just the local (in country) Branch Office that does the trades but EVERY BRANCH OFFICE around the world seems to take part in it.
This means if you consider it that multiple holdings under multiple accounts in multiple COUNTRIES are accumulating the companies stock and none of this would be accounted for by the ASX as a single holding account or ENTITY.
Essentially no one except Black Rock would have an idea how much had been traded or accumulated until it was necessary to be used in a controlling move. Big Business has many ways to hide their plans/work.

Yak52
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow
Reactions: 32 users

TECH

Regular
Hi Tech, good to hear from you. In that top 1000 shareholders we have Citicorp and Robert Mitro. Are there any others that might not want to vote the way we want them to?

I'm not privy to anymore information Slade....cheers.....Brainchip will deliver :)
 
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: 24 users

Mt09

Regular
MT09..............exactly where do you get such an idea please? The truth could not be farther from that statement.
and the Company has a responsibility to keep us shareholders informed also. This CITICORP accumulation should have been brought up at the AGM at least.

Tony Dawes reply has not surprised me at all but it is TOTALLY unacceptable. The "sheep" here may be willing to sit back in dream land but I take
responsibility for my money & Investments and expect as a shareholder to be kept informed about the Company I have invested in.

I expect a moral & business code from Management that encompasses TRANSPARENCY, RESPONSIBILITY especially towards stakeholders/shareholders.
Tony Dawe just shrugged off any responsibility and TRANSPARENCY is a foreign concept apparently to Management when considering shareholders.
His reply is as offending as the quote "Stock price is what it is" made recently. unbelievable.
Seeing red flags wont make me SELL but it WILL encourage me to spread around what they are trying to HIDE.

For ALL of us , even those who just simply cannot help being fence sitters, .........I truly hope that knowledge of CITICORP NOMINEE growing holdings ENCOURAGES other entities to decide to take a stand and COUNTER this attempt at a controlling stake in Brainchip.
AND I hope we see some unexpected REVENUE of significance in the next 4C soon.
-------------------------------------
ps. 2.6 million NEW shorts taken out yesterday (Tuesday) which may explain that 8% drop in SP.
shame its been as low as 600k lately each day.

pps. T/O commonly have a 15%/30%-50% PREMIUM added to the CURRENT stock price at Offer date. Does THAT send a shiver down your back hmm?

Yak52
The company is not legally bound, responsibility lies with the purchaser.. I know you’re upset but that doesn’t make you correct.. maybe time for a bex and a lie down?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Fire
Reactions: 14 users

HopalongPetrovski

I'm Spartacus!
Again, there is nothing sinister going on here…its most likely a whole bunch of managed and super funds taking stakes since entering asx200..

Nb. I’m a director at a big4 and work closely with leading funds tax practice that deals a lot with these custodians
Thanks again for your calm clarification of this matter Moonshot.
Nice to get some information from someone in the know rather than having to rely on pure speculation.
Again the 1000 eyes proves it's worth.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 19 users
Top Bottom