This link should answer questions for interested parties. www.listingcenter.nasdaq.com
It seems that way.They must be confident we can meet the requirements before the timeframe announced.......
I was going to apply as a volunteer. I guess that's out now.They closed the perth research office and moved people to the US
I think you might have hit the nail on the head. The US military is obviously very interested in what we've got and our product will be MUCH easier for them to procure if BRN is a US company. Remember who's in the Whitehouse now. Im sure Trump would "convince" the SEC to allow BRN into the market so that Defence can source our unique technology from a US company..............They always said we don't need china.... you may be right here... whells could have been greased in the name of national security????
I agree with your thoughts Yoda. A bit worried about the whole process, but I am sure that will be taken care of. Haven't had experience with that myself.Regarding the announcement about relocation, I'm uncomfortable about them de-listing on the ASX and re-listing in the US (Nasdaq?) mainly because its inconvenient for me (e.g can't manage position through Commsec etc) and I am also a little concerned about getting equal/fair value in the new US shares. It's just out of my experience and comfort zone but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
However, on the positive side, and this is reflected in the announcement, US markets do have a different approach to valuing tech stocks and are more interested in potential rather than current revenue and that could be good for us in terms of share price.
Thoughts?
Not sure what the shorters will do, but I'm not happy with the news and wanted a Dual Listing, with the same share structure as well.I would have preferred a dual listing in the first place........yes there are more fees etc to be on two exchanges but it would have been more palatable. Better than a delisting and redomicile to US and we get nothing which I have noticed with a few companies recently. Shorters look like they will have a field day AGAIN tomorrow.....unless something else drops
View attachment 78271
Agree @DingoBorat ....the only thing between now and redomicile will be a massive boost in the SP to lessen dilution before that happens. I will give the BOD credit......they have announced it 12 months out. I am starting to get over the shock and think that before then there will be some significant announcements to boost the SP to get us close the $1 requirement. There will be a lot of short term pain though IMO.......unless something drops out of the blue. It certainly is a lot to take in ATMNot sure what the shorters will do, but I'm not happy with the news and wanted a Dual Listing, with the same share structure as well.
Tony Dawe, said to me (over the phone or in email) 2 or 3 years ago, that the Company knew shareholders would see anything other than a Dual Listing, as a betrayal.
Current shareholders, likely get their holdings consolidated (by 4 to 5 times at best, assuming $1 share price) and then become a fraction of a new pool of shares, is "my" experience in these kind of things.
The Company gets hugely funded and share price and Company progress will likely go much higher, but you lose all the leverage of having "more" shares.
Yes! Like the name of thje AFRL deal subcontractor.If I were to speculate, perhaps they have secured a deal involving the U.S. military, or big corporate and remaining listed on the ASX would require disclosures that they’d prefer to avoid under its rules..? Lol...
Otherwise such a random timing....
Complicated for tax, IP, and super I reckon.I wonder if the move was always in Sean 5 year plan. Can this happen without shareholders approval?
I've never has a holding that has delisted and relisted elsewhere, I'd better read up on what happens before I make a decision on whether it's good or bad. Maybe the company will update sh on the process and what it means for sh.
So not a great move for the average sh. I also assume that when converted to new listing the conversion will mean alot less sharesComplicated for tax, IP, and super I reckon.
I wonder if the move was always in Sean 5 year plan. Can this happen without shareholders approval?
I've never has a holding that has delisted and relisted elsewhere, I'd better read up on what happens before I make a decision on whether it's good or bad. Maybe the company will update sh on the process and what it means for sh.
Off the bat, I don't approve
Looks like we're going to need to set up a GoFundMe site for the shorters.From ChatGPT
The re-domiciling of BrainChip to the U.S. and the transition from the ASX to a U.S. stock exchange could have significant implications for short sellers. Here’s how it might play out:
1. What Happens to Existing Short Positions?
Short sellers profit by borrowing shares, selling them at a higher price, and then buying them back later at a lower price. However, when a company delists and moves to a new exchange:
- Short positions need to be closed out before delisting – If BrainChip shares are removed from the ASX, short sellers will likely be forced to cover (buy back) their positions before the delisting date. This can cause a short squeeze if many need to buy shares at once, driving the price up.
- New U.S. shares may not be borrowable immediately – Even if the company relists on a U.S. exchange, the ability to short the stock depends on brokers having available shares to lend. If these are not readily available, shorting could become more difficult, at least temporarily.
2. Could Short Sellers Get Caught Out?
Yes, here’s how:
- Forced Buybacks (Short Squeeze) – If short sellers are unable to roll over their positions due to the ASX delisting, they will be forced to buy shares before the transition, potentially pushing prices up.
- Change in Market Dynamics – The U.S. market generally has more institutional investors who may have a different valuation perspective, reducing speculative shorting pressure.
- Different Regulatory Environment – The U.S. has different short-selling regulations, including tighter enforcement of naked short selling (selling shares without actually borrowing them). If BrainChip moves to an exchange like the NASDAQ or NYSE, this could limit some of the aggressive shorting seen on the ASX.
3. Possible Risks for Short Sellers
- Unexpected Buy Orders – If BrainChip announces a buyout, new partnerships, or U.S. institutional interest, short sellers may find themselves covering at much higher prices.
- Regulatory Hurdles – The SEC has been more aggressive in cracking down on market manipulation. Any hedge funds using illegal tactics might face investigations.
- Retail and Institutional Buying Pressure – The stock's exposure to U.S. technology investors (who may value AI companies differently) could make it harder for short sellers to justify their positions.
4. Will They Be Forced to Cover?
Most likely, yes—at least on the ASX. Short sellers holding positions on ASX-listed BRN will need to close their trades before the stock delists. Some may try to reopen short positions on the U.S. exchange, but if the stock gains buying momentum (from retail or institutional investors), it could become riskier for them.
5. Could This Create a Short Squeeze?
- If a large number of shorts rush to close their positions before the ASX delisting, the share price could spike sharply in the short term.
- If there’s a scarcity of available shares to short on the U.S. exchange, shorting could become less aggressive post-move.
Bottom Line
The re-domiciling could put short sellers in a tight spot, especially if they are forced to close their positions before the ASX delisting. While some may re-establish positions on the U.S. exchange, changes in market participants, regulation, and potential new investor interest could alter the stock’s dynamics significantly. If BrainChip executes this transition well, shorters could lose their grip on the stock, at least temporarily.