BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Shadow59]

I'm not understanding why anyone would vote on any of the resolutions prior to the 4C. Surely it would make sense to have as much information as possible beforehand?

 

[Humble Genius]

Interesting GREEK NAME for microsofts new AI CHIP...........

WHO ELSE named their ai chip after a GREEK WORD I wonder

Microsoft Building Its Own AI Chip on TSMC's 5nm Process

Code-named Athena, Microsoft has reportedly been working on the chip since 2019.

www.tomshardware.com

Athena was the daughter of Zeus, however she didn't have a mother. She was plucked out of his forehead, so perhaps the implied though is that she has evolved from the brain, therefore its link with AI.

 

[TECH]

Hi All,

Thought I'd do some numbers, my view is that we will see something like this:

Account Balance of approximately $28.6 Million USD as of 31 April 2023 with zero cash receipts for the period 1 January to 31 April 2023.

Meaning 14.3 quarters of funding, equaling approximately 3.5 years of nicely tarred runway, with no visible potholes.

So the big question remains, will the cash receipts reveal a few million to place us in an even more stable position, in knowing that we
are on the cusp of our first IP signing about to release product/s into the marketplace with AKIDA embedded within.

My opinions, simply just that.

Tech

 

[toasty]

Hi All,

Thought I'd do some numbers, my view is that we will see something like this:

Account Balance of approximately $28.6 Million USD as of 31 April 2023 with zero cash receipts for the period 1 January to 31 April 2023.

Meaning 14.3 quarters of funding, equaling approximately 3.5 years of nicely tarred runway, with no visible potholes.

So the big question remains, will the cash receipts reveal a few million to place us in an even more stable position, in knowing that we
are on the cusp of our first IP signing about to release product/s into the marketplace with AKIDA embedded within.

My opinions, simply just that.

Tech

@TECH I can't see how $0 income at this stage of the company's journey could be considered stable? If we are to judge our CEO as he wishes to be (on results rather than effort) then the 4C numbers need to reflect that. In my view it would be disingenuous of him to claim the technical advances as a signal of his success - these were well underway before he arrived. Sean was hired to head up the commercial growth of the company and if the 4C doesn't show some good progress he will, in my opinion, be guilty of making statements that were, lets say, enthusiastic rather than realistic. I hope that doesn't prove to be the case for all our sakes...............

 

[Deleted member 1269]

Well I just completed the on-line voting for the AGM, and surprised myself. I am a huge fan of PVdM and AM and what they have done to bring their vision to reality. So I voted for PVdM's performance rights. What he has achieved is tangible and visible.

As for the other performance rights and restricted stock units, I voted against them all. Why I hear you ask? Don't we need to issue these to preserve cash and still attract top quality people? My answer is a definite yes, with the BIG qualification that I need to have visibility of what the KPI's are so I can understand the value that the recipients have brought and are being rewarded for.

I was a senior exec in the IT industry for many years (Asia Pac MD of a Silicon Valley based software company) and am very conversant with, and a big supporter of, incentive schemes. However, the lack of information and transparency on display here means that I cannot, in all good conscience, vote for something I don't understand. NDA's and so forth notwithstanding, the directors will need to do much better at allowing me to understand the proposals before they get my vote.

My opinion only and DYOR before making up your mind.

It's cunning how they have lumped executive directors together so that a vote for Peter means a vote for Sean (2.2 million shares). I'd personally prefer to see these separated , but since they are lumped together, it will be a no vote from me.

 

[toasty]

I'm not understanding why anyone would vote on any of the resolutions prior to the 4C. Surely it would make sense to have as much information as possible beforehand?

See my previoius post re 4C numbers.........

 

[Boab]

Today I think I'll focus on the upcoming ARM tech talk.
They want to tell the industry how good a fit Brainchip is to its Cortex M85.
As they put it on their website.
A New Milestone for High-Performance Microcontrollers
Arm Cortex-M85 is the highest performing Cortex-M processor with Arm Helium technology and provides the natural upgrade path for Cortex-M based applications that require significantly higher performance and increased security. In addition to Arm TrustZone technology, Cortex-M85 brings new security and safety capabilities, providing the highest level of protection for Cortex-M to date. This makes it ideal for connected and safety critical applications.

Now that's something to get excited about

 

[TECH]

@TECH I can't see how $0 income at this stage of the company's journey could be considered stable? If we are to judge our CEO as he wishes to be (on results rather than effort) then the 4C numbers need to reflect that. In my view it would be disingenuous of him to claim the technical advances as a signal of his success - these were well underway before he arrived. Sean was hired to head up the commercial growth of the company and if the 4C doesn't show some good progress he will, in my opinion, be guilty of making statements that were, lets say, enthusiastic rather than realistic. I hope that doesn't prove to be the case for all our sakes...............

toasty, thanks for your views, you haven't understood the message I am attempting to send.

The figures I have suggested will be very close to our current position, which, if read carefully as the big picture, currently I believe that is a
very stable financial position to be holding.

I purposely wrote zero cash receipts for the 4 month period mentioned, because one, you me or any other shareholder has any idea of what the cash receipts will reveal, I could have suggested 3 million USD of the 4 months, which would put us in a much stronger position, then I added how Renesas shortly, if sales go well, will open up the door for our first royalty stream to start flowing, doesn't that elude to being stable as we have
only really just touched on the commercial highway ?

As you know, we achieve revenue from IP Licenses, out of Renesas and Megachips, how much is outstanding for the period 1 January to 31 March 2023 for example ?

We have no royalty fees due, the only revenue in real terms that I could have suggested would've been engineering service fees and sales of
our SDK and boards etc, which will again add to our overall stability in my view.

I have written very recently to 2 company executives suggesting that Chris Stevens is interviewed on our home podcast, to discuss how the
sales worldwide engagements are tracking, what, if any headwinds the company is or has been facing, timelines and his overall take on the edge AI market.

Chris is at the coalface, and I'd like to hear from him directly in a podcast.

My own views...regards Tech (Perth)

 

[Makeme 2020]

Another Announcement.......I wonder what it could be???

 

[DingoBorat]

Just for clarity - this means that a panel of your peers and the AI all concluded it was a breach of rules. Not just AI, not just one person. On the balance of probability, regardless of what an individual (especially the author) thinks... it is more likely the majority would agree - especially since the AI can also see the rationale.

"especially since the AI can also see the rationale"

From the limited examples of what I've seen, of ChatGPT's "work" it has a "Please the author" slant, to its programming, not a "find the error in the argument" one.

I had a post reported (which I queried you about privately and was not seen or ignored) that asked why my post was moderated.

Dreddbot's reasoning, was that it was a personal attack and yet it was not a reply to someone, nor was any particular person mentioned, or even alluded to in the post.

How did Dreadbot come to that conclusion, without being "persuaded"?

Using A.I. that has been programmed as a "Please the human" language model, may not be an accurate squeeze into, what should be completely impartial.

That said, even the straightest cops, will turn a blind eye to something, if a response isn't warranted, based on knowledge or a perception of the individual's "real" character.

A World where there is complete impartiality and there is no feeling or compassion at all, from authority, is probably the most sad and coldest.

Maybe we are already there ..

 

[JDelekto]

I have noticed that several other people have mentioned voting before the AGM. As an investor in the US, I hold shares of the BCHPY ADR (a very insignificant amount) and OTC-traded BRCHF in my Fidelity Investment accounts. I assume that for my holding of BRCHF, I should be allowed to vote.

While I get the occasional marketing e-mails from BrainChip and Rob Telson, I have not received anything about the information I need to be able to log in and vote online. Additionally, there are no proxy materials provided from my Fidelity account.

While I have sent an e-mail to Tony Dawe to inquire about this, can anyone think of a reason that would exclude me from voting? Is it because I am an overseas retail investor? Could it be that the number of shares I hold is not enough to reach a certain threshold? Maybe there is information that BrainChip needs to provide to Fidelity?

I understand that I have no voting rights for the BCHPY ADRs because the actual shares are owned by the bank that issues them, but I believe that with BRCHF, I own the share.

You'll have to excuse my ignorance on this one. I've never voted for any of my investments in the past, mainly because I've never really owned a single stock, only mutual funds.

 

[manny100]

“He says that the Renasas chip will be ready for release in the coming months. It's easy for holders to assume these will sell like hotcakes.”
While I hope this is the case, they may not sell.

Fairly certain that Renesas would have back orders for these chips, particularly if they are for the automobile industry. Renesas sell a lot into auto industry. If this is the case then when they are mass produced Renesas would be paying BrainChip the associated royalties.

Agree, Renesas run a serious businesses and would not produce chips without certainty of sale. Very likely we will see Royalties later this year appear in the financials.

 

[FlipDollar]

Im

I have noticed that several other people have mentioned voting before the AGM. As an investor in the US, I hold shares of the BCHPY ADR (a very insignificant amount) and OTC-traded BRCHF in my Fidelity Investment accounts. I assume that for my holding of BRCHF, I should be allowed to vote.

While I get the occasional marketing e-mails from BrainChip and Rob Telson, I have not received anything about the information I need to be able to log in and vote online. Additionally, there are no proxy materials provided from my Fidelity account.

While I have sent an e-mail to Tony Dawe to inquire about this, can anyone think of a reason that would exclude me from voting? Is it because I am an overseas retail investor? Could it be that the number of shares I hold is not enough to reach a certain threshold? Maybe there is information that BrainChip needs to provide to Fidelity?

I understand that I have no voting rights for the BCHPY ADRs because the actual shares are owned by the bank that issues them, but I believe that with BRCHF, I own the share.

You'll have to excuse my ignorance on this one. I've never voted for any of my investments in the past, mainly because I've never really owned a single stock, only mutual funds.

I’m in this exact position - no contact re voting

 

[zeeb0t]

"especially since the AI can also see the rationale"

From the limited examples of what I've seen, of ChatGPT's "work" it has a "Please the author" slant, to its programming, not a "find the error in the argument" one.

I had a post reported (which I queried you about privately and was not seen or ignored) that asked why my post was moderated.

Dreddbot's reasoning, was that it was a personal attack and yet it was not a reply to someone, nor was any particular person mentioned, or even alluded to in the post.

How did Dreadbot come to that conclusion, without being "persuaded"?

Using A.I. that has been programmed as a "Please the human" language model, may not be an accurate squeeze into, what should be completely impartial.

That said, even the straightest cops, will turn a blind eye to something, if a response isn't warranted, based on knowledge or a perception of the individual's "real" character.

A World where there is complete impartiality and there is no feeling or compassion at all, from authority, is probably the most sad and coldest.

Maybe we are already there ..

Two things…. First, I rely on numerous folks here to report, before it acts, to enact a “turn the blind eye” protocol you describe. The AI does not need to do this, because the community decided for it. Second, your “please the author” statement is not entirely true. It does want to please the author, and so it is up to the author to ensure the AI knows what it is going to take to please it.

Simply, I prompted the AI to judge the rules in strict adherence only because the human element has prevailed.

If you feel like the AI should have let it go, your question is really one for the numerous people who reported it first.

 

[Andi85]

I didnt receive anything so i logined on Boardroom and i can vote from there. If you haven't registered with them then they will send an activation mail to your address.

 

[Townyj]

It's cunning how they have lumped executive directors together so that a vote for Peter means a vote for Sean (2.2 million shares). I'd personally prefer to see these separated , but since they are lumped together, it will be a no vote from me.

View attachment 34735

If you log in online to vote. Both Sean and Peter are separate.

Ive cast my vote and had my say.. i recommend everyone do the same.

 

[zeeb0t]

Two things…. First, I rely on numerous folks here to report, before it acts, to enact a “turn the blind eye” protocol you describe. The AI does not need to do this, because the community decided for it. Second, your “please the author” statement is not entirely true. It does want to please the author, and so it is up to the author to ensure the AI knows what it is going to take to please it.

Simply, I prompted the AI to judge the rules in strict adherence only because the human element has prevailed.

If you feel like the AI should have let it go, your question is really one for the numerous people who reported it first.

And for what it’s worth - approximately one third of all reports has resolved in the AI deciding the post was in fact in accordance with rules, despite the reports.

 

[Bravo]

"especially since the AI can also see the rationale"

From the limited examples of what I've seen, of ChatGPT's "work" it has a "Please the author" slant, to its programming, not a "find the error in the argument" one.

I had a post reported (which I queried you about privately and was not seen or ignored) that asked why my post was moderated.

Dreddbot's reasoning, was that it was a personal attack and yet it was not a reply to someone, nor was any particular person mentioned, or even alluded to in the post.

How did Dreadbot come to that conclusion, without being "persuaded"?

Using A.I. that has been programmed as a "Please the human" language model, may not be an accurate squeeze into, what should be completely impartial.

That said, even the straightest cops, will turn a blind eye to something, if a response isn't warranted, based on knowledge or a perception of the individual's "real" character.

A World where there is complete impartiality and there is no feeling or compassion at all, from authority, is probably the most sad and coldest.

Maybe we are already there ..

If I may be permitted to chime in here, I don't know if Dreddbott is ever going to make into the Comedy Festival line-up because he doesn't appear to have a very good sense of humour.

It said that I was flaming and baiting when I said "Whoops, forgive me, I must have missed the memo that told us this forum is actually the BrainChip complaints department".

And in another example, it reasoned that "carrying on like a pork chop" was a personal insult and the use of "whinge" could be considered a profanity.

If we can't use sarcasm as an expression of humour then I am definitely going to wind up a permanent fixture in the naughty corner.

And yes, I agree with your sentiment @Borat. I think that it has the potential to lead to a cold and clinical "vibe" which would be a shame. We should be allowed to have a bit of fun because that's part of this forum's charm IMO.

 

[zeeb0t]

Two things…. First, I rely on numerous folks here to report, before it acts, to enact a “turn the blind eye” protocol you describe. The AI does not need to do this, because the community decided for it. Second, your “please the author” statement is not entirely true. It does want to please the author, and so it is up to the author to ensure the AI knows what it is going to take to please it.

Simply, I prompted the AI to judge the rules in strict adherence only because the human element has prevailed.

If you feel like the AI should have let it go, your question is really one for the numerous people who reported it first.

Maybe I should phrase it like this: the community is the “cop” and the AI is the “judge”.

 

[zeeb0t]

If I may be permitted to chime in here, I don't know if Dreddbott is ever going to make into the Comedy Festival line-up because he doesn't appear to have a very good sense of humour.

It said that I was flaming and baiting when I said "Whoops, forgive me, I must have missed the memo that told us this forum is actually the BrainChip complaints department".

And in another example, it reasoned that "carrying on like a pork chop" was a personal insult and the use of "whinge" could be considered a profanity.

If we can't use sarcasm as an expression of humour then I am definitely going to wind up a permanent fixture in the naughty corner.

And yes, I agree with your sentiment @Borat. I think that it has the potential to lead to a cold and clinical "vibe" which would be a shame because we should be allowed to have a bit of fun because that's part of this forum's charm IMO.

Your complaint then is with the numerous community members who felt otherwise.