BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Stabinski]

This link should answer questions for interested parties. www.listingcenter.nasdaq.com

 

[perceptron]

They must be confident we can meet the requirements before the timeframe announced.......

It seems that way.

 

[Iseki]

They closed the perth research office and moved people to the US

I was going to apply as a volunteer. I guess that's out now.

 

[toasty]

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 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..............

 

[davidfitz]

I feel sorry for the people with the BRN licence plates . On a more serious note I am concerned that my early retirement plans may no longer be achievable .

Let's hope for a miracle between now and the inevitable!

 

[toasty]

And if the future is very defence related, I wonder if that had any impact of Anil's decision to sell??

 

[TheDrooben]

Well for all those who complained about a lack of announcements........can't complain now.....

 

[Cardpro]

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....

 

[GazDix]

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?

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.

Agree with the positive point. The ASX is corrupt and shit too. Also, the SEC in the US is more friendly towards technology companies right now.

But with every ANN, I feel like they raise more questions than answer them. Will we be listed on the NASDAQ? It doesn't mention in the ANN. Or the new stock exchange in Texas that will be opening in 2026 - https://www.txse.com/? It certainly says we are delisting on the OTC, so it surely must be one of the big ones. But right now, there is no way we meet the requirements....
So? Are we merging too? Again, I don't feel like all the info is being mentioned. Our top 20 shareholders may have a newcomer (hence the secrecy), so is a takeover on the cards?

Just for transparency I have been minimising my position in BRN for a year or so now but still hold a large bag. I can't deal with the lack of transparency. I like to invest with alpha knowledge and not blind. I know our tech is first rate and appreciate the great research done by contributors on this forum, unfortunately our management is lacking.

After our massive spikes after the Merc news to $2 or whatever it was, that should be a catalyst to keep shorters away, but somehow they can confidentally short a company that can potentially release news that can blow them away. It doesn't and didn't feel right. Maybe the US can solve these problems too. I don't know.
The change in strategy from chips to wholly IP was the wrong one. This isn't 'crying over spilt milk' but it allows the cash burn to increase faster with little revenue therefore creating higher risk. This maybe answers the hidden reason why the US too as it can help us raise more capital as technology VCs are abundant there.

I feel like this move was in the works for a while (remembering an old ANN about expanding headquarters in California), and not releasing non price sensitive anns on the ASX was possibly the beginning of the ASX being painted as a strawman for the company to do so. Maybe they wanted to move sooner of course if more deals were signed.

Overall, I think a move to the US makes sense. But I can't see how we can in our current state.

Best wishes to us long suffering SHs

 

[DingoBorat]

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

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.

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 6 to 7 times at best, assuming AUD1 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.

 

[Tezza]

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.

 

[TheDrooben]

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.

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.

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 ATM

 

[Iseki]

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....

Yes! Like the name of thje AFRL deal subcontractor.

 

[Iseki]

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.

Complicated for tax, IP, and super I reckon.

 

[Tezza]

Complicated for tax, IP, and super I reckon.

So not a great move for the average sh. I also assume that when converted to new listing the conversion will mean alot less shares

 

[HopalongPetrovski]

Well, that's one way to get everybody off talking about the lack of revenue.
Guess it was inevitable that we'd be shifting to USA.
Probably where we belong.
I guess I'd just hoped it would have been through acquisition after a healthy bidding war made us all rich.
Not crazy about a consolidation in the meantime to jack our price up to a marketable level though.
Sure hope we get some share price appreciation in the interim so as to make selling off my holdings in retail super worthwhile.
Anyway, glad they are giving us all some warning, although probably only a couple of months to consider as assume this will need to be voted for at the AGM?

 

[Luppo71]

Do Australian super companies let you invest in overseas companies or is everyone fxcked on that front.
I like the idea but tricky.
Thinking they have something up their sleeve before we go.

 

[jrp173]

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.

Subject to shareholder and Australian court approval.

 

[DingoBorat]

Subject to shareholder and Australian court approval.

View attachment 78277

Off the bat, I don't approve

 

[Diogenese]

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.

Looks like we're going to need to set up a GoFundMe site for the shorters.