Hi Boab,
Yes, I believe it is. Other shareholders have clarified this before I remember back when we were all on that other forum.
Someone wrote to Ken Scarince and he confirmed that companies do not need to disclose their IP agreements with Brainchip because it will also give their competitors an idea of what their 'secret sauce' is so to speak.
But it must be reported as revenue of course once it comes in, but the source of that revenue doesn't have to be revealed.
I don't understand the constant narrative that other shareholders write about 'only two IP agreements signed'. These are merely only two that have been disclosed.
I do believe there is a Japanese connection why Renesas and then Megachips were not bothered to disclose their IP contracts. I suppose they are so confident in their postiion in their future markets that they didn't mind competitors knowing about it. There may also be some clauses that the devil in the detail is all in Japanese in their reporting (although they report in English, there is always a clause that Japanese is correct version). Hence a barrier to the rest of the world.
Here is a quote from our former CEO LDN Louis Di Nardo in October 2020.
'So as I mentioned, I'm just going to cover here very quickly... I get a lot of questions, we get a lot of questions about how many non-disclosure agreements. I can tell you it's well north of 100 nondisclosure agreements. In many respects, that is to our benefit, and we insist on those non-disclosure agreements because we're going to disclose, as we have technical dialogue, we're going to disclose things that maybe aren't covered by patent protection. They’re trade secrets that otherwise would not be in the public domain.'
From:
21 Oct 2020 - BrainChip Holdings Limited (ASX:BRN) President and CEO Louis DiNardo discusses Akida development, AI Edge markets, the Akida early access program, and provides an update on finances.
www.finnewsnetwork.com.au
Alll in my opinion only. Cheers all,