Haha loo.53 cents was my highest using my super, but I did miss out on just under $2but been picking them up and average nearly 0.25
![]()
Haha loo.53 cents was my highest using my super, but I did miss out on just under $2but been picking them up and average nearly 0.25
![]()
I should add, that there's also a yearly government charge of around $280, which you need to make a double payment of in the first year.I have a SMSF and it was "reasonably" easy to set up.
My process was audited..
Basic yearly cost for me, is $1100 and with contributions, the government will contribute $500 (for incomes $45400 to 60400).
There are also one off fees from time to time.
Government contributions | Australian Taxation Office
You may be eligible for the government's super co-contribution.www.ato.gov.au
Interestingly, they've been "reducing" the entitlement, from a maximum of $1500 for the years 2004 to 2009, to the present $500..
Yeah. Let's hope so and that they will be at liberty to lay it out for us.My opinion for what it is worth...
The BOD needs to convince us, the shareholders, that domiciling in the US is the right move.
If they fail to do so, we will NOT approve.
Does the BOD really believe weāll trust them based on empty promises alone, ahead of the approval timeframe?
Once bitten, twice shy.
I think we need more than vague assurances.
I strongly suspect the BOD has something up their sleeve. Why else would they be recommending such a manoeuvre?
No one would attempt a move like this without some level of confidence in future deals or strategic advantages, as doing otherwise would be sheer recklessness IMO.
Calling a spade a spade mate. If you say you have been invested since 2015, it falsely implies that you are fully committed to the company and will never sell.You are being an ass DK161
The only way it will convince us to vote yes is to reveal a substantive contract with a top tier company / organisation.My opinion for what it is worth...
The BOD needs to convince us, the shareholders, that domiciling in the US is the right move.
If they fail to do so, we will NOT approve.
Does the BOD really believe weāll trust them based on empty promises alone, ahead of the approval timeframe?
Once bitten, twice shy.
I think we need more than vague assurances.
I strongly suspect the BOD has something up their sleeve. Why else would they be recommending such a manoeuvre?
No one would attempt a move like this without some level of confidence in future deals or strategic advantages, as doing otherwise would be sheer recklessness IMO.
That would be an absolute disaster if the whole board left.Yeah. Let's hope so and that they will be at liberty to lay it out for us.
Problem is, if the board recommends this course of action as the way forward, and it gets voted down by retail holders, where does that leave us? These are the people we have in place to both steer and run the company.
If we voted this down, it is in effect a huge vote of no confidence in them, either leaving them disheartened and probably just going through the motions or requiring a board spill and replacement, probably including Sean which would effectively leave us rudderless for some period and potentially crashing the Company for good.
Not trying to be Captain Doom here but the idea of starting again with a replacement leadership team gives me the willies.
Did someone say "Staunch cult-affiliate"?Even the staunchest cult-affiliate would be starting to worry now...
I must concede my faith has dwindled away over the last few years.
It feels like we are failing. I hope I am wrong though or my wife will kill me lol.
For me, the issue is that the domiciling announcement came off the back of another terrible report with very little positive commentary from the company.Yeah. Let's hope so and that they will be at liberty to lay it out for us.
Problem is, if the board recommends this course of action as the way forward, and it gets voted down by retail holders, where does that leave us? These are the people we have in place to both steer and run the company.
If we voted this down, it is in effect a huge vote of no confidence in them, either leaving them disheartened and probably just going through the motions or requiring a board spill and replacement, probably including Sean which would effectively leave us rudderless for some period and potentially crashing the Company for good.
Not trying to be Captain Doom here but the idea of starting again with a replacement leadership team gives me the willies.
Dingo! Going private means you get bought out at todayās priceI'm going to throw a few potentially crazy, not well thought out ideas, here..
The MegaChips IP Licence, affords "protection" and anonymity, from companies both using our IP directly through them and buying licences from them (which we know from at least one or two secured that way, through a quarterly report).
Hence Sean's now infamous..
"Watch the Financials"
Which to be fair, was before Russia invaded the Ukraine and the Worldwide economic downturn, which ensued.
Why can't a full licence be sold, or "arranged" with a similar "Umbrella" Company as MegaChips, in the US?
This would afford the same protections, of not having to report sensitive dealings, with the ASX, wouldn't it?..
Also, what about forming a fully owned subsidiary, in the US, for the same purpose?
I'm not sure of the ins and outs of that, but I know there would obviously be additional running costs involved (but it could be basically a skeleton company?)
This could also take advantage of any US based incentive schemes.
Thirdly and probably what may be my least popular idea..
What about just delisting from the ASX and running privately, until such time as the Company was "strong enough" to list on the NASDAQ?
A share trading platform can still be setup (we could get @zeeb0t to do it) and this would eliminate shorters and ASX trading algorithms altogether.
Any additional cash needed, would also have to be raised privately.
As long as there was still a "market" for the shares, they would still have increasing/decreasing value, as assigned by supply and demand, dictated by the Company's progress and performance.
Shorting and manipulation of the stock of private companies is still possible, but not as easy or fluid, as cesspits like the ASX.
Also, very large valuations, can also be propelled by shorters and having the stock less available to trade, could deter investment.
Just ideas okay![]()
Bought out by who exactly?Dingo! Going private means you get bought out at todayās priceI know you wouldnāt want that.
It means an entity has to purchase ALL outstanding shares. You get paid for the shares you own now, and you are out of the game.Bought out by who exactly?
The Company is still worth 425 million AUD at yesterday's close.
Going private doesn't mean the Company gets bought out, as far as I know.
I've had a company go private before (9SP) and was not bought out.
I don't have a clue what they're doing now, but haven't checked to be honest.
There was a huge consolidation and refunding there, from memory though..
No, that's not what it means.It means an entity has to purchase ALL outstanding shares. You get paid for the shares you own now, and you are out of the game.
It can happen as you state, but it doesn't "have" to be done that way, is my understanding..No, that's not what it means.
"If a company's stock is delisted from an exchange, shareholders still own their shares in the company, but the stock may trade over-the-counter, which could lead to decreased liquidity and less transparency for investors
Google about it..
If the Company "has" to purchase all shares, then how do I still have shares, albeit heavily consolidated, in 9Spokes, formerly 9SP on the ASX?..It means an entity has to purchase ALL outstanding shares. You get paid for the shares you own now, and you are out of the game.
I sure hope not because I am now dark red, -39% after the last days' disaster.Bought out by who exactly?
The Company is still worth 425 million AUD at yesterday's close.
Going private doesn't mean the Company gets bought out, as far as I know.
I've had a company go private before (9SP) and was not bought out.
I don't have a clue what they're doing now, but haven't checked to be honest.
There was a huge consolidation and refunding there, from memory though..
Dingo. Letās not dwell on this too long. I was originally replying to your comment āgoing privateā.If the Company "has" to purchase all shares, then how do I still have shares, albeit heavily consolidated, in 9Spokes, formerly 9SP on the ASX?..
It's a great path forward if the Company is performing strongly and is profitable.Dingo. Letās not dwell on this too long. I was originally replying to your comment āgoing privateā.
Iām a yankee and want the best for my BRN shares, and just know listing in the US is a great path forward!