BRN Discussion Ongoing

[FrederikSchack]

I remember a guy at HC that said he would drink a beer for every cent that Brainchip rose.

Anybody who knows if he survived the spike above 2 AUD?

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

 

[FrederikSchack]

He sure would be sober now

Well, another lesson for you not to make promises like that before the next rally

 

[Xray1]

Who approved ff’s leave

That's an easy answer .......... his wife of course !!!

 

[FrederikSchack]

That's an easy answer .......... his wife of course !!!

Smart wife!

I'm dragging my feet and scowling when I admit that he may do more good at Brainchip than in this forum.

 

[JDelekto]

It may not be the case that more iterations mean no one will buy it. The way I see it, when they said Akida 1000 was never meant to be a revenue generator but a demo chip, what happened was that they invented a ground breaking, earth shattering chip but there was no application for it. They have EAP's with the tech and money to try it out and when they said "this does not work" or "it would be btter if this would happen instead" type of things and Brainchip put all the bug fixes and enhancements in AK1500 and the more fundamental changes into AK2000.

I believe that cash is not coming in for AK1000 but with AK1500 for the more run-of-the-mill stuff and AK2000 for the more advanced stuff like deep space, star wars and medical applications, revenue can be explosive. The question now is when? Hopefully before some tech giants come up with a better alternative.

I am just a bit frustrated with the moving of the goal post. We saw no big revenue in 2022 when we were told to watch the financials and now it looks like nothing worth mentioning in 2023 as well.

I guess that is the risk of investing in something so new, it may take much longer time than originally expected to identify and build the applications.

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.

 

[FrederikSchack]

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.

Yes, exactly, Department of Homeland Security tested Akida 1.0 and saw it favorably against nVidia a100. They then described that they use a 3D model, which I believe Akida 2.0 TENN could handle (as I understand it can either handle 3D or 2D temporal data?). They also had to make a work around to make it run on 4 bit, now Akida 2.0 has 8 bit which may improve the situation. Maybe the direct sensor input of Akida 2.0 would prove to be the solution? Plus Akida 2.0 has more NPU's, so can handle a larger model and is faster.

From my point of view, nVidia should even start to get slightly concerned about their datacenter market.

 

[DK6161]

And I don't see some of them here now.
Looks like the LDA deal is finished after all. Funny how the timing of all that works.
All these podcasts and talk of trillions, all these talks about explosive revenue, imminent contracts and interesting times....
What's interesting is a commercial product such as akida is selling lesser than a research piece such as loihi.
Forget trillions, hopefully BRN makes more than 5 million revenue this year. I know a 20 million market cap company on ASX which made nearly 5 million revenue last year.
Hopefully by 2025... and then when 2025 comes we can move the post to 2030.

Don't forget "10 x Microsoft", "ubiquitous".

 

[FrederikSchack]

Don't forget "10 x Microsoft", "ubiquitous".

This is Microsofts Market cap since the start, took some time didn't it?

 

[Boab]

I hadn't seen this before but it may be old for some?
Vision Transformers (ViTs) – Their Popularity And Unique Architecture

In today’s world, computer vision has become essential for solving various problems. For instance, we use it to:

Vision Transformers (ViTs) - Their Popularity And Unique Architecture

Learn how this powerful fusion empowers AI applications with unprecedented performance and efficiency, taking innovation to the next level.

brainchip.com

 

[Xray1]

Smart wife!

I'm dragging my feet and scowling when I admit that he may do more good at Brainchip than in this forum.

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

 

[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