BRN Discussion Ongoing

[TheUnfairAdvantage]

I largely agree with you Tech…BUT !!!

As I believe you will recall, my issues with remuneration go back to the 2018 AGM, when I robustly challenged then CEO Lou and Chairman Manny about the crazy high levels of reward they were granting themselves.

My first job upon leaving high school in 1966 was a cadet journo for the then privately owned Adelaide Advertiser, a morning broadsheet similar to the then AGE and SMH. Over the next decade, I gained experience at various levels in radio, television and print media. I observed popular radio and television personalities receiving far bigger remuneration than all the senior executives and directors…because they were the ones actually generating the ratings and readership, which allowed advertising rates to be set higher and thus generate more revenue for the company.

I left what was an exciting, rewarding career to start my own business...one that was going to offer a new way to distribute products from maker to retail outlets. My observance described above, of rewarding key people vital to the success and revenue generation of Advertiser Newspapers Limited, stayed with me, and throughout my working life, I always rewarded these people more than myself.

I see no difference with a company like our little battler. We have to create the right environment and pay level, for people who are capable of and critical to the development of world beating technology, and for people who have the ability to sell it.

We have to create a workplace and pay these people whatever is necessary, so that they are happy to stay.

As I pointed out at the 2022 AGM, our directors and CEO receive remuneration very similar to those at CBA and BHP… companies that generate billions of profit and pay attractive dividends to shareholders. They are overpaid, and should not continue to be rewarded as they are, until the company becomes profitable and pays dividends.

Happy Easter 2025…and be kind to each other.

I agree 100% with you Realinfo.

I have worked as a CEO of a company, being “directed” by a board of Directors. All had different qualifications and personal qualities that added diverse thinking and decision making abilities in their process of “directing” me. However, they weren’t “people facing” or working “on the shop floor” so to speak. They were simply observers of the business. They required input from myself and on occasion others level management for information about the day to day operations, specialised skill consultation and direct business community happenings. They were a “third party” to ensure there was no oversight or wrong doing by Management and to “set direction” of the company, after taking into consideration input from all levels of the company. Without that input they were blind. Needless to say the majority thought they were experts in everything and thought they were worth more than anyone involved in the company, despite the worth of their input.

At the end of the day, it is the people from below with the talent that input and carry out the strategic course set by Directors. Directors are worth something, but not mega bucks in the start up phase. They should wait their turn until their strategy is a win win for the company, their employees, their shareholders and lastly themselves.

Anyone who has not had direct involvement in a company management will look from the outside. Some will say Directors are worth every $ they are paid. Other will ask, what are they doing for those mega $. At this stage of a start up phase, I am asking exactly the later. What are they doing to justify this huge fee. Surely they could implement a remuneration structure that benefits them “if” they set the “right direction” that benefits ALL involved with the company! It’s just common sense to preserve capital for more important aspects of the business, like technical talent, like R&D, like compromise is sales situations to kick start engagements.

I’m all in on Brainchip. Have been for many years. In the process of transferring industry super shares to a SMSF holding to ensure “I” have a vote on important matters such as remuneration and US listing. I have learned Industry Fund direct investment does not give certainty in holding shares and certainly no ability to vote.

Open your eyes all 40,000 of you. Keep them honest with your shareholder vote!

 

[Getupthere]

You are right…he hasn’t publicly disclosed a formal 5-year plan.
However, there’s a clear direction visible if you follow the monthly investor podcasts, AGMs, and official statements. He’s mentioned his vision and goals multiple times across those formats… all of which are freely available online.
Honestly, I don’t have the time to list everything here, but I highly recommend subscribing to their newsletter, checking their webmail updates, and following their official social media channels for the latest info.

I subscribe to BRN’s newsletter and follow their social media channels, even though I shouldn’t have to.

If the company is progressing well, they should be listing real announcements, such as ASX price-sensitive ones.

Price sensitive announcements listed on the asx show real progress not social media channels that people have to trip over to find.

 

[TECH]

I largely agree with you Tech…BUT !!!

As I believe you will recall, my issues with remuneration go back to the 2018 AGM, when I robustly challenged then CEO Lou and Chairman Manny about the crazy high levels of reward they were granting themselves.

My first job upon leaving high school in 1966 was a cadet journo for the then privately owned Adelaide Advertiser, a morning broadsheet similar to the then AGE and SMH. Over the next decade, I gained experience at various levels in radio, television and print media. I observed popular radio and television personalities receiving far bigger remuneration than all the senior executives and directors…because they were the ones actually generating the ratings and readership, which allowed advertising rates to be set higher and thus generate more revenue for the company.

I left what was an exciting, rewarding career to start my own business...one that was going to offer a new way to distribute products from maker to retail outlets. My observance described above, of rewarding key people vital to the success and revenue generation of Advertiser Newspapers Limited, stayed with me, and throughout my working life, I always rewarded these people more than myself.

I see no difference with a company like our little battler. We have to create the right environment and pay level, for people who are capable of and critical to the development of world beating technology, and for people who have the ability to sell it.

We have to create a workplace and pay these people whatever is necessary, so that they are happy to stay.

As I pointed out at the 2022 AGM, our directors and CEO receive remuneration very similar to those at CBA and BHP… companies that generate billions of profit and pay attractive dividends to shareholders. They are overpaid, and should not continue to be rewarded as they are, until the company becomes profitable and pays dividends.

Happy Easter 2025…and be kind to each other.

Nice to see you post.
It's such a balancing act, not paying too much but securing top shelve staff whom are specialised in SNN's and trained prior to being hired.

That has always been a major issue, especially the first 5 years, we as a company have improved in a number of areas, namely, tightening up on accountability, rather than possibly saying the staff are overpaid because they just don't seem able to close a deal, I personally feel that the company's we are engaged with will tell us when to sign, they hold all the cards and money in my view.

As mentioned in my post, incentives must be offered and Antonio did explain the procedure at last year's AGM in rewarding or cancelling staff bonuses, it seemed an open, honest appraisal of the company's policy in my view.

In the end we all basically want to see the same thing...revenue flowing in and the company growing like a hockey stick

All the best....Tech.

 

[7für7]

I subscribe to BRN’s newsletter and follow their social media channels, even though I shouldn’t have to.

If the company is progressing well, they should be listing real announcements, such as ASX price-sensitive ones.

Price sensitive announcements listed on the asx show real progress not social media channels that people have to trip over to find.

I get your point, but I don’t fully agree.
Relying only on ASX price-sensitive announcements doesn’t always reflect the full picture.
Podcasts, newsletters, and social media give context, strategy, and insights that don’t always qualify as “price-sensitive” …but are still important for understanding the company’s direction.
Not everything that matters shows up in an ASX notice.

And as I said before .. I don’t agree with everything either, but I’m still feeling positive overall.
What matters most is that they lay all their cards on the table and speak plainly by the time of the AGM.
Otherwise, my sentiment might shift too.
I also want to know what’s happening with my shares and exactly where we stand.
But in the end, it’s a democratic process… the majority decides during the vote, and individual complaints won’t change that.

 

[FiveBucks]

I find it really exhausting to constantly see the same people always looking for a hair in the soup…and thinking they’ve found one. Then they try to remove it with full effort, only to realize it was just a bit of oil on the surface. And after that, they quietly go back to eating… until the next chance comes to complain again, maybe this time about the ice cream being too cold.

Everyone sees what they want to see in the information we’re given… it’s always filtered through their own mindset. Personally, I see it as a positive that the BrainChip team is at least sharing monthly updates through podcasts. That’s not something every company does.

I also don’t agree with making a big drama out of every single personnel change. This kind of ‘personality cult’… something we’ve seen from companies like Microsoft or Apple… really gets on my nerves. People come and go. It’s normal. Sometimes they just want a change in their personal life or career. Linking every departure directly to the company’s internal health is often misleading.

Instead of constantly seeing things in a negative light, maybe it’s time to zoom out and look at the bigger picture.

Sure, I don’t agree with everything, but I accept it, because it was my decision to invest. And yes, knowing that it might not work out. But my mindset is still optimistic.

Wishing everyone a happy Easter!

Opinions are like assholes.

 

[7für7]

Opinions are like assholes.

Interesting take … yet you seem quite passionate about sharing your own opinion regularly. Guess we all have one, right?

 

[White Horse]

Opinions are like assholes.

Except some seem to have verbal diarrhea.

 

[Flenton]

For starters, I'm not going back to look at the value of how much the executive team get paid but going to use fictional numbers.

I know this would never happen but how cool would it be for people like our CEO to say I know I am entitled to $4mil worth of shares but I'll only take 4 million shares instead of the 16mil I could be entitled to at 25c a share. This is because with all the things that are lined up I am confident those 4 Mil shares will be worth way more than $4 mil within the next year.

Something like that would give me faith that we are in the path to success. Right now all I hear when they talk is we're full of sht and will say anything to try and make you happy.

Last year's AGM Sean made a speech which I bought into 100% which now looks like a big ball of fluff.

 

[Getupthere]

A CALL TO SHAREHOLDERS

Some of you may be aware that I have not posted here for awhile, July’23 to be precise, preferring to sit quietly in the background.
The reason I’m posting now is because more than anybody else, I’ve been the biggest critic of Brainchip’s remuneration plans going back to the 2018 AGM.
At the AGM last year, I stood and called out Antonio, Sean, and the other attending directors for what I described as having a SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT, for which I copped a fair share of flak.
I said this because they were paying themselves similarly to directors at CBA and BHP, even though our little battler was generating little or no revenue. I also said that up until that time, Brainchip could only be described as having potential, albeit that it was edging (excuse the pun) closer to realisation of its potential.
At this year’s AGM, and for the first time, the entire holding my family and I have in BRN will be voting YES.
We are doing so, because whilst it’s taken longer than we expected, we are now totally satisfied that the company is on the right path, placing itself in a position of strength from where it will quite quickly develop into a technology behemoth.
I believe shareholders who vote no will only be shooting themselves in the foot, because a second strike at this time, will only damage the company when it is finally on the cusp of great success.
Still awaiting the Great Tractor Challenge Fact !!

Appreciate your honesty and the long-term perspective you’ve shared with last year post .

It’s clear you’ve done the hard yards and haven’t held back when it counted—especially in calling out issues at the 2018 and 2023 AGMs. Your shift in support this year speaks volumes.

That said, I’m curious—what are your thoughts now, 12 months on from the last AGM.

Still feel the same way about the company’s direction and management? Would be great to hear your take.

 

[jrp173]

I can't even bring myself to listen to the latest podcast. It's just so typical of BRN to bring out a podcast before the AGM, basically trying to convince shareholders why they should be paid these huge salaries and rewards.

I have no issue with BRN staff being rewarded generously (even at significantly higher then current levels) providing we can see real uptake from the behemoth companies they always elude to at AGMs, and we also see that reflected in the share price.

They are truly taking the proverbial!

 

[Slade]

For starters, I'm not going back to look at the value of how much the executive team get paid but going to use fictional numbers.

I know this would never happen but how cool would it be for people like our CEO to say I know I am entitled to $4mil worth of shares but I'll only take 4 million shares instead of the 16mil I could be entitled to at 25c a share. This is because with all the things that are lined up I am confident those 4 Mil shares will be worth way more than $4 mil within the next year.

Something like that would give me faith that we are in the path to success. Right now all I hear when they talk is we're full of sht and will say anything to try and make you happy.

Last year's AGM Sean made a speech which I bought into 100% which now looks like a big ball of fluff.

Don’t worry, Sean will have a fresh new speech at this year’s AGM.

 

[Guzzi62]

Interesting take … yet you seem quite passionate about sharing your own opinion regularly. Guess we all have one, right?

Yes, but yours are the biggest one by far.

 

[Pom down under]

Don’t worry, Sean will have a fresh new speech at this year’s AGM.

 

[SERA2g]

Wow.

A please pay us podcast.

How about a material revenue podcast.

The nerve of them.

I'm not changing my vote.

Haven't listened yet but this feels like they've finally heard the complaints around visibility of the non execs who get shares for what looks like fuck all and their response is to wheel them out for a podcast episode a month before the AGM. Seems desperate.
Perhaps my mood will change after listening lol.

 

[Zedjack33]

View attachment 82707

Make Brainchip Great Again.

MBGA

 

[Food4 thought]

I think most agree that good management deserves good rewards.
The share price is poor for sure.
The future looks bright for sure
But the big concern is the company revenue
For me personally Sean should be addressing this issue with his shareholders not how much people need to be paid.
I believe this shows no or very little respect for us.
I feel like pulling out of this investment to be honest
I have 300+ k tied up in the company and feel like I am being spat on at present
Thanks Sean

 

[Getupthere]

Haven't listened yet but this feels like they've finally heard the complaints around visibility of the non execs who get shares for what looks like fuck all and their response is to wheel them out for a podcast episode a month before the AGM. Seems desperate.
Perhaps my mood will change after listening lol.

Management is accountable to shareholders because shareholders are the owners of the company. Here’s the breakdown of why that relationship exists:


1. Ownership and Capital

Shareholders invest their money by buying shares, which gives them ownership in the company.

In return, they expect the company to be run in a way that increases the value of their investment (i.e., growing profits, increasing stock price, etc.).


2. Delegated Authority

Shareholders don’t run the company themselves—they delegate that power to the board of directors, who then hire and oversee management.

This means management operates on behalf of the shareholders and is expected to act in their best interests.


3. Fiduciary Duty

Executives and directors have a legal and ethical obligation (called fiduciary duty) to act in the best interest of the shareholders.

If they misuse company resources or act in self-interest, they can be held accountable or even sued.


4. Performance and Incentives

Shareholders measure management’s success by looking at financial performance, stock price, dividends, etc.

If management fails to perform, shareholders can vote to change the board, who can fire executives.

In short.. shareholders own the company, management runs it, and that relationship comes with responsibility, accountability, and consequences.

 

[TECH]

Haven't listened yet but this feels like they've finally heard the complaints around visibility of the non execs who get shares for what looks like fuck all and their response is to wheel them out for a podcast episode a month before the AGM. Seems desperate.
Perhaps my mood will change after listening lol.

Hi N...
Peter chose Pia, he has a lot of respect and belief in her, she's not only very well connected in business circles, she was part of the Brainchip team in the early days in Perth.

What goes on behind closed doors is very unfair to criticise unless you're privy to the other side of the door listening and watching what individuals are actually doing, having Pia on the Board from an Australian point of view is critical, unless you know of another Australian female to replace her with...just saying mate.

Ease up a touch, the fact that you still hold really says it all..hope you're enjoying being a Dad.

Best regards....Chris

 

[jrp173]

Hi N...
Peter chose Pia, he has a lot of respect and belief in her, she's not only very well connected in business circles, she was part of the Brainchip team in the early days in Perth.

What goes on behind closed doors is very unfair to criticise unless you're privy to the other side of the door listening and watching what individuals are actually doing, having Pia on the Board from an Australian point of view is critical, unless you know of another Australian female to replace her with...just saying mate.

Ease up a touch, the fact that you still hold really says it all..hope you're enjoying being a Dad.

Best regards....Chris

Tech, the company is under no obligation to have a "female" executive, they just need to have at least two Australian directors (eg reside in Australia).

We need NEDs who actually understand the ASX and the Australian market, because in my opinion, neither of our NEDs do. I'm hoping we see Steve Liebeskind back on the board after the AGM. I'm not holding my breath, but we need new blood!

 

[TECH]

Tech, the company is under no obligation to have a "female" executive, they just need to have at least two Australian directors (eg reside in Australia).

We need NEDs who actually understand the ASX and the Australian market, because in my opinion, neither of our NEDs do. I'm hoping we see Steve Liebeskind back on the board after the AGM. I'm not holding my breath, but we need new blood!

Fair enough...I personally have no problem with Steve being re-elected as an NED, but regarding female appointments, I do believe that 2 are required for a Nasdaq listing...just saying.

Cheers..Tech