BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Mugen74]

Did The Simpsons get it right again?


Ps Not taking sides,I just got caught up in the rhythm

 

[SERA2g]

That was a great post @Kiwikangaroo, a very good, on balance summary of where we are.

Myself, I do not take anything as a given here, and yes we were forewarned of lumpy income, but what we just got was in fact a very deep valley. I am not an accountant, but perhaps some creative accountacy (as long as it was conducted within what might be accepted as "proper" practice) might have helped smooth this very deep fall-off in qtrly income.

Perhaps BRN might consider the notion of creative accounting or back-ending the some of the relatively small amount of income they have had so far, so that events as severe as last Friday can possibly be mitigated to some extent. BRN is in ASX200, there are a lot of eyes watching, and our company is now worth 21% less than it was Thurs closing.

So while from the point of view that nothing has changed with regard to the contracts and numerous other partnerships, NDA's, EAP's, which Rob, Sean, Jerome et al have been developing; the market on the other hand, now values BRN very differently.

The headwinds Sean spoke are not likely to diminish, we know there has been progress made, and while I am really appreciative of the excellent research which is shared here, we really don't know what is happening behind the scenes or to what extent any number of partnerships have developed. I believe BRN could be more forthcoming with information, without breaching any contractual matters.

I am not impatient, I have been holding for 7 years, I have seen timelines changed (more than once), I have not ever sold a single share, basically have accumulated what to me is a reasonable holding. This would certainly be life changing if BRN can actually land contracts or real sales with some of the companies BRN has relationships with.

However my bottom line here is that we don't have forever, the global economy is a far worse shambles than most realize, and the headwinds mentioned earlier, most certainly will NOT diminish. I am not at all comfortable with that view of things, and I am also, most certainly not a pessimist, however I do spend a lot of time researching macro economics, and the pictures that I see are un-settling and the economy as we have known it - has a looming horizon (not the end of the world - but not pretty). In my strong opinion time is very much of the essence, and of more than a little concern to me. Hence my disappointment Friday

Regardless of all the above, I have a wonderful life and spend a lot of time laughing, and will always remain grateful for that, and count myself as truly blessed, I also remain a true holder of the BRN faith, even though my view of things is at quite some variance with some of the views posted here; and one of my deep wishes, is for all of us to share a manifest outcome to our mutual investment in what I hope are the magnificent iterations of BRN's Akida.

I’m not sure if anyone has responded to this yet but thought I would given you have over 40 likes.

Im an accountant for what that’s worth before you read on.

You can’t use “creative accountancy” in a quarterly.

The quarterly report is a cash flow report. It’s cash movements only.

It does not show revenue at all.

It does, however, shows cash receipts for income that was accrued in prior and the current period, but, we don’t know how much of the cash receipted came from which periods.

We also don’t know how much revenue was accrued this quarter for which the cash was not receipted.

Excluding continuous disclosures obligations for a moment (simply because I’m not sure if this example would require an announcement), We could invoice a customer $5 million on the 30th of September and if the cash wasn’t received it would not show in the quarterly.

“Creative accountancy” isn’t easy when it comes to asx listed companies.

Their obligation from a compliance perspective is to prepare general purpose financial statements which have specific requirements from an accounting standards perspective. These standards determine how all sorts parameters within the financial statements are recognised, including but not limited to revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities and equity.

The entire purpose of having these standards is to ensure that third parties whom rely on the financial statements (banks, investors, shareholders) can in fact rely on those financial statements when making financial decisions.

I appreciate your want for improvement but suggesting the accountant move his pen in another direction is not the answer.

Cheers

 

[Salad1]

Sorry my turn. I disagree, the word usually is a tricky word used in yr argument unless its backed up. I from personal experience was paid bonuses in form of shares for projected future view of the company as an incentice to performance at the time to deliver, a sweetmer or a carrot as one may say, unable to sell the shares for a number of years. To me it was a fantastic incentive to loyalty and the thrill of the virtual bonus at the time. very clever move for a growing company. hope that make sense.

 

[Fact Finder]

I’m not sure if anyone has responded to this yet but thought I would given you have over 40 likes.

Im an accountant for what that’s worth before you read on.

You can’t use “creative accountancy” in a quarterly.

The quarterly report is a cash flow report. It’s cash movements only.

It does not show revenue at all.

It does, however, shows cash receipts for income that was accrued in prior and the current period, but, we don’t know how much of the cash receipted came from which periods.

We also don’t know how much revenue was accrued this quarter for which the cash was not receipted.

Excluding continuous disclosures obligations for a moment (simply because I’m not sure if this example would require an announcement), We could invoice a customer $5 million on the 30th of September and if the cash wasn’t received it would not show in the quarterly.

“Creative accountancy” isn’t easy when it comes to asx listed companies.

Their obligation from a compliance perspective is to prepare general purpose financial statements which have specific requirements from an accounting standards perspective. These standards determine how all sorts parameters within the financial statements are recognised, including but not limited to revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities and equity.

The entire purpose of having these standards is to ensure that third parties whom rely on the financial statements (banks, investors, shareholders) can in fact rely on those financial statements when making financial decisions.

I appreciate your want for improvement but suggesting the accountant move his pen in another direction is not the answer.

Cheers

And that is why we love accountants and hate bean counters. As the Monty Python would sing and did:

 

[Deadpool]

Maybe you should you got as much class as shareman and the Dean...........

Ok, enough said, please move on.
Have a good day, I mean that.

 

[Iseki]

I’m not sure if anyone has responded to this yet but thought I would given you have over 40 likes.

Im an accountant for what that’s worth before you read on.

You can’t use “creative accountancy” in a quarterly.

The quarterly report is a cash flow report. It’s cash movements only.

It does not show revenue at all.

It does, however, shows cash receipts for income that was accrued in prior and the current period, but, we don’t know how much of the cash receipted came from which periods.

We also don’t know how much revenue was accrued this quarter for which the cash was not receipted.

Excluding continuous disclosures obligations for a moment (simply because I’m not sure if this example would require an announcement), We could invoice a customer $5 million on the 30th of September and if the cash wasn’t received it would not show in the quarterly.

“Creative accountancy” isn’t easy when it comes to asx listed companies.

Their obligation from a compliance perspective is to prepare general purpose financial statements which have specific requirements from an accounting standards perspective. These standards determine how all sorts parameters within the financial statements are recognised, including but not limited to revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities and equity.

The entire purpose of having these standards is to ensure that third parties whom rely on the financial statements (banks, investors, shareholders) can in fact rely on those financial statements when making financial decisions.

I appreciate your want for improvement but suggesting the accountant move his pen in another direction is not the answer.

Cheers

Thanks!
Can you help us out with 4C vs 5B?

 

[toasty]

That was a great post @Kiwikangaroo, a very good, on balance summary of where we are.

Myself, I do not take anything as a given here, and yes we were forewarned of lumpy income, but what we just got was in fact a very deep valley. I am not an accountant, but perhaps some creative accountacy (as long as it was conducted within what might be accepted as "proper" practice) might have helped smooth this very deep fall-off in qtrly income.

Perhaps BRN might consider the notion of creative accounting or back-ending the some of the relatively small amount of income they have had so far, so that events as severe as last Friday can possibly be mitigated to some extent. BRN is in ASX200, there are a lot of eyes watching, and our company is now worth 21% less than it was Thurs closing.

So while from the point of view that nothing has changed with regard to the contracts and numerous other partnerships, NDA's, EAP's, which Rob, Sean, Jerome et al have been developing; the market on the other hand, now values BRN very differently.

The headwinds Sean spoke are not likely to diminish, we know there has been progress made, and while I am really appreciative of the excellent research which is shared here, we really don't know what is happening behind the scenes or to what extent any number of partnerships have developed. I believe BRN could be more forthcoming with information, without breaching any contractual matters.

I am not impatient, I have been holding for 7 years, I have seen timelines changed (more than once), I have not ever sold a single share, basically have accumulated what to me is a reasonable holding. This would certainly be life changing if BRN can actually land contracts or real sales with some of the companies BRN has relationships with.

However my bottom line here is that we don't have forever, the global economy is a far worse shambles than most realize, and the headwinds mentioned earlier, most certainly will NOT diminish. I am not at all comfortable with that view of things, and I am also, most certainly not a pessimist, however I do spend a lot of time researching macro economics, and the pictures that I see are un-settling and the economy as we have known it - has a looming horizon (not the end of the world - but not pretty). In my strong opinion time is very much of the essence, and of more than a little concern to me. Hence my disappointment Friday

Regardless of all the above, I have a wonderful life and spend a lot of time laughing, and will always remain grateful for that, and count myself as truly blessed, I also remain a true holder of the BRN faith, even though my view of things is at quite some variance with some of the views posted here; and one of my deep wishes, is for all of us to share a manifest outcome to our mutual investment in what I hope are the magnificent iterations of BRN's Akida.

Why are so many people saying we suffered a dive in income. The 4C does not show revenue/income, it shows CASH FLOW. For all we know there may have been many sales made in the qtr - depending on payment terms of the sales it wouldn't necessarily show up in the 4C as that report is about cash received, not sales made.

For goodness sake people, if you're going to invest your hard earned money in publicly listed companies at least educate yourself about some of the basics of business and accounting. To not do so is akin to walking around a minefield in a blindfold...........

 

[Fact Finder]

Thanks!
Can you help us out with 4C vs 5B?

I can help 5B is the class they put you up to if you worked hard all year in 4C and got good marks in spelling and maths and did your homework when I was in Primary School.

Hope that helps.

 

[toasty]

Thanks for your explanation which I understand but from my experience performance/ bonuses are usually related to contracts/profits hence my question in the first place

I think by that statement you may have limited experience and therefore a narrow frame of reference. Many employment contracts contain bonuses that are not linked to contracts/profits as you insist. On a number of occassions over my career I have received bonuses linked to my performance of the terms of my contract that are in no way financially based. This is entirely appropriate as incentives linked only to financial results tend to create a situation where other essential elements of an enterprise are ignored. If you need proof of that, you need only look as far as the recent investigations into the financial services industry for confirmation...........

 

[Okeydokey01]

Why are so many people saying we suffered a dive in income. The 4C does not show revenue/income, it shows CASH FLOW. For all we know there may have been many sales made in the qtr - depending on payment terms of the sales it wouldn't necessarily show up in the 4C as that report is about cash received, not sales made.

For goodness sake people, if you're going to invest your hard earned money in publicly listed companies at least educate yourself about some of the basics of business and accounting. To not do so is akin to walking around a minefield in a blindfold...........

I agree. I think it is also important to (in part) separate the 4C results from the scale of share price decline we saw last week. The 4C was disappointing no doubt, but looking back over recent past quarterly's our results have been up and down, this is the nature of dealing with disruptive technology in its early commercialisation phase. The markets reaction to last weeks 4C was extraordinary. Under normal circumstance a quarterly like that would typically see a reduction of a few cents. Market conditions, market grubs, and general global economies all played into the share price falling away so drastically. The price the share price took was disproportionate to the results published.

My experience in bringing a new technology or product that shifts conventional thinking to market is that while the initial period of uptake can be a long, slow burn, once the technology is proven and begins to be adopted the trickle fast becomes a flood. Brainchip remains solid, with loads of cash and are powering forward with our technology and our plan. It is for this reason that my confidence has not waivered and why I bought more shares last week. I hold the belief that a bounce back is imminent and still feel that big things are just around the corner.

 

[Xray1]

I agree. I think it is also important to (in part) separate the 4C results from the scale of share price decline we saw last week. The 4C was disappointing no doubt, but looking back over recent past quarterly's our results have been up and down, this is the nature of dealing with disruptive technology in its early commercialisation phase. The markets reaction to last weeks 4C was extraordinary. Under normal circumstance a quarterly like that would typically see a reduction of a few cents. Market conditions, market grubs, and general global economies all played into the share price falling away so drastically. The price the share price took was disproportionate to the results published.

My experience in bringing a new technology or product that shifts conventional thinking to market is that while the initial period of uptake can be a long, slow burn, once the technology is proven and begins to be adopted the trickle fast becomes a flood. Brainchip remains solid, with loads of cash and are powering forward with our technology and our plan. It is for this reason that my confidence has not waivered and why I bought more shares last week. I hold the belief that a bounce back is imminent and still feel that big things are just around the corner.

Good post Okeydokey ........... I beleive there will be a " Bounce Back " during the course of todays trading from those clever enough to top up their current holdings.

 

[Euks]

Is there a connection between Prophesee and Megachip? Just thinking about all the partnerships we have and after you listen to the podcast it’s clear that prophesee need to use Akida.

I’m wondering what the hold up would be on an IP deal or prophesee have gone through a side door (megachip) to use and pay for the IP.

You would think Prophesee and Nvisio would be extremely close to announcing a deal involving cash considering how vocal they have been in there validation of Akida!

Hopefully be a nice rebound today after everybody’s calmed there tits..

 

[Izzzzzzzzzzy]

70 cents party woooo

 

[FrederikSchack]

70 cents party woooo

Yes, indeed, bought back every share that I sold at 1.59

 

[FrederikSchack]

Thanks to all of you doing deep research, I´m blown away by the amount of Brainchippers that are diving to the bottom of it, in different ways and collaborating here.

Yesterday I came across this incredible work by @Neuromorphia :

Brainchip Akida Ecosystem

Brainchip Akida Ecosystem Technology Partners, IP Licensees, Enablement Partners, Implementation, Collaborating, Using Brainchip, Engagements and Speculation Technology Partners 1 Arm BrainChip Joins Arm AI Partner Program 2 Intel Foundry Services BrainChip Joins Intel Foundry...

thestockexchange.com.au

I did a lot of research just before the first test chips were taped out and I think there was only Ford as a partner, there were hardly an article or Youtube video about Brainchip. Now looking at the work of @Neuromorphia I realize that I´ve been there all along the way, but didn´t realize what a tremendous leap forward we have made, the amount of partners/licensees that we know about and the amount of references to document each.

We sometimes get blinded by our own impatience.

 

[Slade]

I think by that statement you may have limited experience and therefore a narrow frame of reference. Many employment contracts contain bonuses that are not linked to contracts/profits as you insist. On a number of occassions over my career I have received bonuses linked to my performance of the terms of my contract that are in no way financially based. This is entirely appropriate as incentives linked only to financial results tend to create a situation where other essential elements of an enterprise are ignored. If you need proof of that, you need only look as far as the recent investigations into the financial services industry for confirmation...........

I have probably missed a lot of the discussions related to this so please forgive me. I would however like to say that I think if shareholders are asked to vote on any performance type shares or bonuses at the next AGM it would be an easier decision for them to make if the company could show some decent sales and revenue.

 

[FrederikSchack]

I´m going to go a bit off topic for a moment, but I think the hard working Brainchippers would be interested in this, as it´s related to the foundry business.

To me it´s been obvious for a couple of years, China is going to try to invade Taiwan and I think we all know that this can have huge implications on chip manufacturing. There are many possible scenarios, but almost no matter the scenario, it´s going to have huge implications on the chip supply and not least how companies manages the risks.

For me, it´s been obvious that companies are going to move their chip production to other foundries and only Samsung can take the most advanced and most profitable process nodes. This is already Samsung´s most profitable segment and they are the only ones who are investing in expanding capacity, while others shrink capacity.

No matter the scenario, war or not, companies will move/diversify because of the risks that are increasing by the day.

I simply don´t understand why nobody seems to see this?? Am I failing in my logic somehow?

 

[Diogenese]

I´m going to go a bit off topic for a moment, but I think the hard working Brainchippers would be interested in this, as it´s related to the foundry business.

To me it´s been obvious for a couple of years, China is going to try to invade Taiwan and I think we all know that this can have huge implications on chip manufacturing. There are many possible scenarios, but almost no matter the scenario, it´s going to have huge implications on the chip supply and not least how companies manages the risks.

For me, it´s been obvious that companies are going to move their chip production to other foundries and only Samsung can take the most advanced and most profitable process nodes. This is already Samsung´s most profitable segment and they are the only ones who are investing in expanding capacity, while others shrink capacity.

No matter the scenario, war or not, companies will move/diversify because of the risks that are increasing by the day.

I simply don´t understand why nobody seems to see this?? Am I failing in my logic somehow?

All is not lost:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/24/samsung-announces-17-billion-chip-plant-in-texas.html
TECH

Samsung plans to build a $17 billion chip plant in Texas​

PUBLISHED WED, NOV 24 20215:50 AM ESTUPDATED WED, NOV 24 20218:00 AM EST


https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...ject-develop-foundry-ecosystem.html#gs.gpyhmj
Intel recently announced plans to become a major provider of U.S.-based capacity for foundry customers, including an investment of approximately $20 billion to build two new factories in Arizona. These fabs will provide committed capacity for foundry customers and support expanding requirements for Intel products.

 

[FrederikSchack]

All is not lost:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/24/samsung-announces-17-billion-chip-plant-in-texas.html
TECH

Samsung plans to build a $17 billion chip plant in Texas​

PUBLISHED WED, NOV 24 20215:50 AM ESTUPDATED WED, NOV 24 20218:00 AM EST


https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...ject-develop-foundry-ecosystem.html#gs.gpyhmj
Intel recently announced plans to become a major provider of U.S.-based capacity for foundry customers, including an investment of approximately $20 billion to build two new factories in Arizona. These fabs will provide committed capacity for foundry customers and support expanding requirements for Intel products.

Hi Diogenese,

I didn´t really loose as a bought in August when Samsung was cheap and I saw the risk became significant I just don´t see why it´s not obvious to others?

Even reading Synopsys latest call transcript in the Q&A session, they reveal that they see companies moving. Also nVidia and Qualcomm is moving. nVidia can hardly move their newer chips to anywhere else but Samsung.

"So far, those customers include Qualcomm and Nvidia, who have recently stated that some chip production from TSMC's facilities would be shifted elsewhere."
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopoliti...hub-shield-supply-chains-event-china-invasion

 

[Milo]

I am a shareholder. Nothing more nothing less. I believe what the Chief Technology Officer of the company states publicly at an AGM in a presentation to shareholders as he has obligations at law to not mislead shareholders.

It is not my job to convince you of the truth of his statements they are true till proven otherwise.

This boils down to your statement:

“But I don't believe that and think GPUs are still required in cars in addition to Akida.”

I don’t believe you I prefer to believe the CTO. So prove you are right. That is not my job and using your own words I also have a life and unbelievable as it is to you I only post from memory so my posting is a very small part of my daily activities.

Finally if I made fun of you I apologise and if you point out where the offending comment is I will remove it.

As for your cherry picked portions of the Sandia article I posted the article.

I found it originally.

I posted it then and I reposted it for your reference. I am a technophobe so I am not going to debate a scientific paper with an electrical engineer. What is the point.

My point is that until this paper was published all the world including highly trained electrical engineers did not believe this was something SNN’s could manage. WRONG.

Peter van der Made the CTO way back in 2019 did and he said so to shareholders.

Before the paper on Quantum Annealing algorithms being shown to run on SNN’s even highly trained electrical engineers did not think it was possible.

Before Luca Verre CEO at Prophesee was introduced to AKIDA technology having tried Loihi and SynSense he believed he and his co inventor had built a house of straw.

So I have put up what I have heard and read and disclaimed constantly since day one at HC any technical expertise so as you are a highly trained electrical engineer do your own research and prove Peter van der Made and all the others wrong.

Proving me wrong takes no one anywhere as I am not asserting anything other than at the outset that a GPU costing hundreds to thousands of dollars has a fps processing rates that fall well short of a $25.00 AKIDA chip.

But I will give you this for free in the original notice from Brainchip announcing the agreement with MEGACHIPS it states:

https://***************.com.au/brainchip-holdings-asxbrn-partners-with-megachips-2021-11-22/amp/

• BrainChip Holdings (BRN) partners with MegaChips to develop the BrainChip Akida IP through a multi-year license agreement
• The agreement will give MegaChip an intellectual property license for designing and manufacturing BrainChip’s Akida tech into external customer’s system on chip designs
• In exchange, BrainChip will receive an upfront license fee and additional payments over the term of the agreement
• MegaChips says the agreement will enable it to supply the automotive, camera, gaming and industrial robotics markets
• BrainChip Holdings is up 9.26 per cent to 59 cents at 11:08 AEDT

I draw your attention to the word ‘gaming’ a use case which you suggest to be impossible.

Anyway as I said if you point out where exactly I made fun of you I will remove it as this was not my intent. After all why would I want to make fun of you or anyone else who is a genuine shareholder in Brainchip.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

“But I don't believe that and think GPUs are still required in cars in addition to Akida.” was my opinion to the question I asked you in my reply to you. In your reply you quoted Peter but what he had said was he needed 100 Akida1000 chips. Again this makes the original claim unbalanced and does that mean 100x AKIDA 1.0 out performs GPUs and CPUs? In any case these are big claims and if correct, should be somewhere in company presentations, yet I don't recall seeing this in any of the presentations.

I'm sure our development team is well aware of Akida's capabilities and probably thats why they are targeting the edge AI market. Now if a 25 dollar Akida1.0 could replace a 2000 dollar odd GPU then that would be one of our biggest use cases, and as alwaysgreen pointed out Akida would be flying off shelves. Also don't forget all the GPUs that Akida could replace in crypto mining and those are big polluters. So why is BRN not marketing these if Akida could do the same at very low power and outperform GPUs??

As for the Sandia article, I thank you for posting that and I enjoyed reading it. I quoted their concluding remarks to highlight that we can't generalise that "AKIDA 1.0 out performs GPUs and CPUs." without specifying in what way.

Also I never said that Akida has no use cases in gaming. "Gaming" is a very broad term and you are taking things out of context. There are lots of elements there like VR headsets, cameras, and all those different types of game controllers. This discussion was about Akida1.0 Vs GPUs/CPUs and here is what I said for clarity.
"If I'm not correct I would like to be pointed to at least one presentation slide or other company source that claims that Akida can replace GPUs in cars or other graphics-heavy applications like gaming."

About my comment on you making fun, this is what I was referring to.

This was my original post.

This is the first comment I was referring to: post #34,739

I was not aware there was some sort of a ranking system in TSEx similar to the army.

This is the second one in post #34,794

I don't really care about the second one but didn't appreciate the first one. Would have been better if you had come directly at me if you thought my post was an attempt to diminish the importance of your post without commenting elsewhere. Anyway please don't waste your time to go back and remove or edit these.