BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Tezza]

This is a perfect example of how the brainchip management attitude views its entitlement to be rewarded the same as successful companies producing revenue and signing commercial agreements.

They need to Stop trying to feed shareholders nonsense. I don’t think shareholders will have an issue with issuing free shares and bonuses if you simply perform your role, which is signing commercial agreements and creating revenue.

In the real world, you’re paid based on your performance. At the moment, you haven’t achieved acceptable results from the last AGM.

Is this really the Podcast shareholders are looking for leading into the AGM? I would have thought a podcast on products and sales may be more appropriate.
I found the comment regarding non exec's holding their bonuses over to 2026 interesting. Does this mean they are not expecting a favourable Agm this year but confident the 2026 Agm will be more palatable. Hmmm

 

[7für7]

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!

 

[Frangipani]

The below LinkedIn post is another reminder that our friends at TCS Research - Sounak Dey, Arijit Mukherjee & Arpan Pal - are not exclusively friends with us, when it comes to neuromorphic computing, but also close friends with others developing their own technology in that field, eg. Manan Suri and his research group at IIT Delhi. In 2018, Manan Suri founded CYRAN AI Solutions as a spinoff from that uni lab and has been a Research Advisor to the TCS Innovation Team on Neuromorphic Computing and Edge AI since June 2021.

#indian #industry #deeptech #academia #intelligent #neuromorphic… | Manan Suri

Common discourse goes- "#Indian #Industry is often not investing in #deeptech R&D while #Academia stays away from ground requirements of the industry" There are increasing number of exceptions to this chatter 🙂! Here, I'll highlight one such close collaboration b/w our research group (at...

www.linkedin.com

Manan Suri - Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi | LinkedIn

| MIT - TR 35 | IEEE EDS Early Career | Young Scientist NASI | Young Engineer IEI |… · Experience: Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi · Education: Institut national polytechnique de Grenoble · Location: India · 500+ connections on LinkedIn. View Manan Suri’s profile on LinkedIn, a...

www.linkedin.com

This Engineer’s Hardware Is Inspired by the Brain

Manan Suri’s neuromorphic systems run AI on sensors, drones, and VR headsets

spectrum.ieee.org

This Engineer’s Hardware Is Inspired by the Brain​

Manan Suri’s neuromorphic systems run AI on sensors, drones, and VR headsets​

EDD GENT
23 JAN 2024
5 MIN READ

Manan Suri displays a wafer-level testing system for unpackaged chips and devices built by researchers at the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi.
MANAN SURI


In work and in life, it’s easy to get stuck in your ways. That’s why Manan Surihas always looked to expand his horizons both professionally and personally.
Growing up in India, he was used to transitions and new experiences because his family frequently moved around the country as his father relocated for his job as a chemical engineer. Traveling stuck with Suri in adulthood. He studied and worked in Dubai, the United States, France, and Belgium over the course of his twenties.

Manan Suri​

EMPLOYER:
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
OCCUPATION:
Associate professor and founder of Cyran AI Solutions, New Delhi
EDUCATION:
Bachelor’s and master’s degrees in electrical and computer engineering, both from Cornell; Ph.D. in nanoelectronics from the CEA-Leti research institute in Grenoble, France

Eventually, Suri moved back to India to become an assistant professor at the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi. There he set up a research group focused on developing brain-inspired (neuromorphic) computer hardware for low-power devices like sensors, drones, and virtual-reality headsets. He is now an associate professor.

He also launched a startup to commercialize his lab’s expertise: Cyran AI Solutions, based in New Delhi, works with companies and government agencies on a variety of projects. These include automating the inspection process for identifying defects in semiconductors and developing computer-vision systems to improve crop yields and analyze geospatial Earth-observation data.
While balancing a career in academia and industry is challenging, Suri says, he relishes the opportunity to constantly learn.

“Once I’ve figured out how a system works, I start getting bored,” he says.
Suri, an IEEE member, believes that embracing change is a key ingredient for success. This is what has driven him to continually move on to new projects, push into new disciplines, and even move from country to country to experience a different way of life.

“It accelerates your ability to learn new things,” he says. “It puts you on a fast trajectory and helps shed some of your inhibitions or get over the inertia in what you’re doing or how you’re living.”

Inspired by Cornell’s semiconductor lab​

Growing up, Suri’s passion was physics, but he quickly realized he was drawn more to the practical applications than theory. This led to a fascination with electronics.

In 2005 he initially enrolled at the Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, in India, and studied electronics and instrumentation at the institute’s campus in Dubai. After his second year, he transferred to Cornell, in Ithaca, N.Y. His first six months living in the United States, acclimating to a new culture and a different academic environment, were overwhelming, Suri says. What hooked him were Cornell’s high-end facilities available to students studying semiconductor engineering and nanofabrication—in particular, the industry-grade semiconductor clean rooms.

He earned a bachelor’s degree in electrical and computer engineering in 2009 and a master’s degree in the same subject the following year.

New skills in computational neuroscience​

After graduating, Suri received offers for Ph.D. positions in the United States and Europe to work on conventional electronics projects. But he didn’t want to get pigeonholed as a traditional semiconductor engineer. He was intrigued by an offer to study neuromorphic systems at the CEA-Leti research institute in Grenoble, France. He was also eager to broaden his life experience and get a taste of the European way of doing things.

The work would push Suri to develop new skills in computational neuroscience and computer science. In 2010 he started a Ph.D. program in the institute’s Advanced Memory Technology Group. There he worked on low-power AI hardware that uses new kinds of nonvolatile memory to emulate how biological synapses process data. This involved using phase-change memory and conductive-bridging RAM to create neural networks for visual pattern extraction and auditory pattern sensitivity.

Suri discovered that his experience with electronics allowed him to approach neuromorphic engineering problems from an entirely different angle than his colleagues had considered. Experts can develop fairly rigid and conventional ways of thinking about their own field, he says, but when those with different skill sets apply them to the same problems, it can often lead to more innovative thinking. “You bring a completely different perspective,” he says. “It leads to a lot of creativity.”

Setting up his own research lab​

After finishing his doctorate in nanoelectronics, Suri got a job working on high-voltage transistors for automotive applications at the semiconductor designer NXP Semiconductors, in Brussels. Since his role was to take a project all the way from concept to fabrication, it was as close to pure research as he could get in industry. But as interesting as the work was, Suri says, he missed the intellectual freedom of academia.

When the opportunity of setting up his own lab at IIT Delhi came along, he jumped at it. He had also been away from his home country for almost a decade and wanted to be closer to family and contribute to the Indian science and technology ecosystem, he says.
“Moving abroad was more a matter of collecting experiences and seeing how different places work,” he says.

Suri’s group at IIT Delhi has made contributions to AI hardware, neuromorphic hardware, and hardware security. The group collaborates with industry research teams around the world, including Meta Reality Labs, Tata Consultancy Services, and GlobalFoundries.

​

Launching a startup​

Despite returning to academia, Suri says he has always been interested in developing practical solutions to real-world challenges, and this goal has guided his research. Whatever project he works on, he always asks himself two questions: Will it solve a real problem? And will someone buy it?

Suri launched his startup in 2018 to turn some of his lab’s work in AI and neuromorphic hardware into commercial products. Cyran AI Solutions’ customers hire the company to solve a range of problems. These have included computer-vision systems for detecting defects in computer chips; hyperspectral data-analysis algorithms designed to run in real time on chips for crop-inspection drones; and AI systems for small, low-power devices and challenging environments like satellites.

Manan Suri and researchers at the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi’s lab designed this custom electrical test setup for the characterization of memory-computing chips. MANAN SURI

While Cyran makes use of its neuromorphic expertise for some problems, it often uses more mature and simpler-to-deploy machine-learning approaches.

“Most users don’t really care about what technology we are using,” Suri says. “They just want functional performance at the most cost-effective price.”

One of the biggest lessons Suri learned from running a startup is to consider the market being served. For earlier projects, he says, the company often devised a solution that was specific to just one customer’s needs and couldn’t be repurposed for other uses. To create a sustainable business, he realized he needed to develop generic solutions that could be deployed more broadly.

“Running Cyran has been like [pursuing a] mini-MBA,” he says. “You need to really pay attention to the market aspects and not just the technology.”

In 2018, MIT Technology Review named Suri one of its 35 Innovators Under 35for his work on neuromorphic computing.

The need to be hands-on​

Keeping a foot in both academia and industry can be challenging, Suri says. Facing resource crunches, whether in time, staffing, or funding, is common. The only way he’s able to manage things is to plan extensively and remain nimble, building in contingencies.

If you can manage it, Suri says, having your fingers in many pies can have major benefits. In particular, working on problems that bridge several disciplines can help you break out of rigid thinking and come up with novel solutions.

It’s not possible to dedicate equal amounts of time to learning every area, he says, so he advises up-and-coming engineers to carefully pick the topics that are most likely to advance their progress. It’s also crucial to dive in and get your hands dirty, rather than focusing on theory, initially.

“Take the plunge and try and figure it out,” he recommends. “As the problem unravels, then you can start getting into the theory or the more formal aspects of the project. You also start to appreciate learning more about the theory as it gets more hands-on.”

https://www.cyran.in/

 

[Smoothsailing]

Tech employees don’t generally stay long due to gaining knowledge and moving on to share in the industry , it’s a win win situation.

 

[Diogenese]

At last my talents have been recognized:

"The boy stood on the burning deck ..."

 

[Bravo]

I suppose this means we could be working with Elon Musk at some point in time.

Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield​

SpaceX-led group is pitching the Pentagon on a ‘subscription model’ for missile defense

Reuters in Washington
Fri 18 Apr 2025 02.33 AEST
Share


Elon Musk’s SpaceX and two partners have emerged as frontrunners to win a crucial part of Donald Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, six people familiar with the matter said.
Musk’s rocket and satellite company is partnering with the software maker Palantir and the drone builder Anduril on a bid to build key parts of Golden Dome, the sources said, which has drawn significant interest from the technology sector’s burgeoning base of defense startups.

In his 27 January executive order, Trump cited a missile attack as “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States”.
All three companies were founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. Musk has donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump, and now serves as a special adviser to the president working to cut government spending through his so-called “department of government efficiency”.

Despite the Pentagon’s positive signals to the SpaceX group, some sources stressed the decision process for Trump’s Golden Dome was in its early stages. Its ultimate structure and who is selected to work on it could change dramatically in the coming months.
The three companies met with top officials in the Trump administration and the Pentagon in recent weeks to pitch their plan, which would build and launch 400 to more than 1,000 satellites circling the globe to sense missiles and track their movement, sources said.
A separate fleet of 200 attack satellites armed with missiles or lasers would then bring enemy missiles down, three of the sources said. The SpaceX group is not expected to be involved in the weaponization of satellites, these sources said.
One of the sources familiar with the talks described them as “a departure from the usual acquisition process. There’s an attitude that the national security and defense community has to be sensitive and deferential to Elon Musk because of his role in the government.”
SpaceX and Musk have declined to comment on whether Musk is involved in any of the discussions or negotiations involving federal contracts with his businesses.
The Pentagon did not respond to detailed questions from Reuters, only saying it will deliver “options to the president for his decision in line with the executive order and in alignment with White House guidance and timelines”.

The White House, SpaceX, Palantir and Anduril also did not respond to questions.
In an unusual twist, SpaceX has proposed setting up its role in Golden Dome as a “subscription service” in which the government would pay for access to the technology, rather than own the system outright.
The subscription model, which has not been previously reported, could skirt some Pentagon procurement protocols allowing the system to be rolled out faster, the two sources said. While the approach would not violate any rules, the government may then be locked into a subscription and lose control over its ongoing development and pricing, they added.
Some Pentagon officials have expressed concerns internally about relying on the subscription-based model for any part of the Golden Dome, two sources told Reuters. Such an arrangement would be unusual for such a large and critical defense program.
The US space force general Michael Guetlein has been in talks on whether SpaceX should be the owner and operator of its part of the system, the two sources said. Other options include having the US own and operate the system, or having the US own it while contractors handle operations. Guetlein did not respond to a request for comment.
The retired air force general Terrence O’Shaughnessy, a top SpaceX adviser to Musk, has been involved in the company’s recent discussions with senior defense and intelligence leaders, the two sources said. O’Shaughnessy did not respond to requests for comment.
Should the group led by SpaceX win a Golden Dome contract, it would be the biggest win for Silicon Valley in the lucrative defense contracting industry and a blow to the traditional contractors.
However, those long-standing contractors, such as Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX are expected to be big players in the process as well, people familiar with the companies said. Lockheed Martin put up a webpage as a part of its marketing efforts.

SpaceX is pitching for the part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer”, a constellation of satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, according to two sources familiar with SpaceX’s goals.
SpaceX has estimated the preliminary engineering and design work for the custody layer of satellites would cost between $6bn and $10bn, two of the sources said. In the last five years, SpaceX has launched hundreds of operational spy satellites and more recently several prototypes, which could be retrofitted to be used for the project, the sources said.
Reuters reviewed an internal Pentagon memo from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, issued shortly before a 28 February deadline to senior Pentagon leadership asking them for initial Golden Dome proposals and calling for the “acceleration of the deployment” of constellations of satellites.
The time frame could give SpaceX an advantage because of its fleet of rockets, including the Falcon 9, and existing satellites that could be repurposed for the missile defense shield, the people familiar with the plan said.

Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield

SpaceX-led group is pitching the Pentagon on a ‘subscription model’ for missile defense

www.theguardian.com

 

[Guzzi62]

Episode 9: BrainChip Talks Corporate Remuneration

Episode 9: BrainChip Talks Corporate Remuneration In this ninth episode of BrainChip’s Investor Podcast Series, Dawe presents questions to Pia Turcinov. Non-Executive Director Chair of the Remuneration Nomination Committee, and Jelena Tasker, Client Partner, Executive Pay Governance at Korn...

brainchip.com

Thanks.

The most boring podcast EVER from the company, WTF!

I spend 5 minutes on it, 4 too many.

Off course, these persons needs to be paid well, or we are not getting the good ones.

 

[7für7]

I suppose this means we could be working with Elon Musk at some point in time.

Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield​

SpaceX-led group is pitching the Pentagon on a ‘subscription model’ for missile defense

Reuters in Washington
Fri 18 Apr 2025 02.33 AEST
Share


Elon Musk’s SpaceX and two partners have emerged as frontrunners to win a crucial part of Donald Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, six people familiar with the matter said.
Musk’s rocket and satellite company is partnering with the software maker Palantir and the drone builder Anduril on a bid to build key parts of Golden Dome, the sources said, which has drawn significant interest from the technology sector’s burgeoning base of defense startups.

In his 27 January executive order, Trump cited a missile attack as “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States”.
All three companies were founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. Musk has donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump, and now serves as a special adviser to the president working to cut government spending through his so-called “department of government efficiency”.

Despite the Pentagon’s positive signals to the SpaceX group, some sources stressed the decision process for Trump’s Golden Dome was in its early stages. Its ultimate structure and who is selected to work on it could change dramatically in the coming months.
The three companies met with top officials in the Trump administration and the Pentagon in recent weeks to pitch their plan, which would build and launch 400 to more than 1,000 satellites circling the globe to sense missiles and track their movement, sources said.
A separate fleet of 200 attack satellites armed with missiles or lasers would then bring enemy missiles down, three of the sources said. The SpaceX group is not expected to be involved in the weaponization of satellites, these sources said.
One of the sources familiar with the talks described them as “a departure from the usual acquisition process. There’s an attitude that the national security and defense community has to be sensitive and deferential to Elon Musk because of his role in the government.”
SpaceX and Musk have declined to comment on whether Musk is involved in any of the discussions or negotiations involving federal contracts with his businesses.
The Pentagon did not respond to detailed questions from Reuters, only saying it will deliver “options to the president for his decision in line with the executive order and in alignment with White House guidance and timelines”.

The White House, SpaceX, Palantir and Anduril also did not respond to questions.
In an unusual twist, SpaceX has proposed setting up its role in Golden Dome as a “subscription service” in which the government would pay for access to the technology, rather than own the system outright.
The subscription model, which has not been previously reported, could skirt some Pentagon procurement protocols allowing the system to be rolled out faster, the two sources said. While the approach would not violate any rules, the government may then be locked into a subscription and lose control over its ongoing development and pricing, they added.
Some Pentagon officials have expressed concerns internally about relying on the subscription-based model for any part of the Golden Dome, two sources told Reuters. Such an arrangement would be unusual for such a large and critical defense program.
The US space force general Michael Guetlein has been in talks on whether SpaceX should be the owner and operator of its part of the system, the two sources said. Other options include having the US own and operate the system, or having the US own it while contractors handle operations. Guetlein did not respond to a request for comment.
The retired air force general Terrence O’Shaughnessy, a top SpaceX adviser to Musk, has been involved in the company’s recent discussions with senior defense and intelligence leaders, the two sources said. O’Shaughnessy did not respond to requests for comment.
Should the group led by SpaceX win a Golden Dome contract, it would be the biggest win for Silicon Valley in the lucrative defense contracting industry and a blow to the traditional contractors.
However, those long-standing contractors, such as Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX are expected to be big players in the process as well, people familiar with the companies said. Lockheed Martin put up a webpage as a part of its marketing efforts.

SpaceX is pitching for the part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer”, a constellation of satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, according to two sources familiar with SpaceX’s goals.
SpaceX has estimated the preliminary engineering and design work for the custody layer of satellites would cost between $6bn and $10bn, two of the sources said. In the last five years, SpaceX has launched hundreds of operational spy satellites and more recently several prototypes, which could be retrofitted to be used for the project, the sources said.
Reuters reviewed an internal Pentagon memo from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, issued shortly before a 28 February deadline to senior Pentagon leadership asking them for initial Golden Dome proposals and calling for the “acceleration of the deployment” of constellations of satellites.
The time frame could give SpaceX an advantage because of its fleet of rockets, including the Falcon 9, and existing satellites that could be repurposed for the missile defense shield, the people familiar with the plan said.

Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield

SpaceX-led group is pitching the Pentagon on a ‘subscription model’ for missile defense

www.theguardian.com

So basically you say….. 20 dollars after eastern?

 

[Realinfo]

Gidday Yogi,

I thought it was a very good podcast, both guests spoke plain English, any educated person can see what the company is
trying to do, to me it just reflects the integrity starting from the founders down.

The demand for talent in the AI sector is huge, you can then lift that to another level when you enter the SNN space, as the
pool of talent would have to be considered way smaller, the next wave (the future) is going to be coming from all the Universities
who are promoting Neuromorphic Computing courses for the next generation of engineers and Neuroscientists etc.

It's important to remember that, not all staff are going to be driven by the almighty dollar, a lot of our staff over the years have been
approaching the last part of their careers, so money may not have been the driving force, but I think that incentives for the younger
staff is extremely important, the instant pay rise would always attract some, but being acknowledged for great work, achieving valid
milestones and earning the respect of both Peter and Anil (for example) would be the incentive from my point of view.

Kris Carlson would be a prime candidate in my opinion...he's been a loyal staff member and super talented!

Regards..........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.

 

[Space Cadet]

OMG! NASA is planning to grow wacky tobaccy in space!

So now, if you smoke a joint, you'll be able to say "Wow! I feel really "spaced-out" and you'll be 100% accurate!

The cannabis grower, NASA and the International Space Station: how an AI project is set to monitor plant health on earth and in space

Queensland grower Medicinal Harvest is trialling AI-driven technology at its indoor facility in a project involving a mission to space.

www.cannabiz.com.au

Doesn't matter. I can say it anyway!

Space Cadet

 

[7für7]

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.

Just for a nice conversation with different opinions.. not offensive! I see it differently. I think , You can’t compare a private company to a publicly listed firm like BrainChip. There are clear structures in place, supervisory boards, and shareholder interests that must be taken into account..nothing just happens on a whim.

As for the remuneration: sure, it’s not a small salary, but we’re talking about a high-tech company with massive potential. If you want to retain top talent, even in management, you have to stay competitive. The CEO carries huge responsibility, especially during this critical development phase.

I believe the people who are leaving now simply couldn’t handle the pressure, are looking for new experiences, or maybe just didn’t fit into the company’s long-term vision. Or perhaps they didn’t contribute as much as some make it seem from the outside. Things are often portrayed differently than they actually are…we all know that from experience.

In the end, all of this was disclosed and discussed at the AGM. As long as there are clear and transparent goals, I think the remuneration is justified. If you want to cut costs, don’t start with the people who are actually driving the company forward.

Peace

 

[Getupthere]

Thanks.

The most boring podcast EVER from the company, WTF!

I spend 5 minutes on it, 4 too many.

Off course, these persons needs to be paid well, or we are not getting the good ones.

Just for a nice conversation with different opinions.. not offensive! I see it differently. I think , You can’t compare a private company to a publicly listed firm like BrainChip. There are clear structures in place, supervisory boards, and shareholder interests that must be taken into account..nothing just happens on a whim.

As for the remuneration: sure, it’s not a small salary, but we’re talking about a high-tech company with massive potential. If you want to retain top talent, even in management, you have to stay competitive. The CEO carries huge responsibility, especially during this critical development phase.

I believe the people who are leaving now simply couldn’t handle the pressure, are looking for new experiences, or maybe just didn’t fit into the company’s long-term vision. Or perhaps they didn’t contribute as much as some make it seem from the outside. Things are often portrayed differently than they actually are…we all know that from experience.

In the end, all of this was disclosed and discussed at the AGM. As long as there are clear and transparent goals, I think the remuneration is justified. If you want to cut costs, don’t start with the people who are actually driving the company forward.

Peace

Could you please clarify which clear and transparent goals you’re referring to?

For example, are you talking about the transparent 5-year plan that no one has seen?

 

[HopalongPetrovski]

Thanks.

The most boring podcast EVER from the company, WTF!

I spend 5 minutes on it, 4 too many.

Off course, these persons needs to be paid well, or we are not getting the good ones.

Agree.
The business must adequately compensate its management and talent in a competitive market.
But it also needs to adequately compensate its investors and other sources of capital.

Otherwise there is a constant grumbling from the mob about the fairness of the remuneration packages.
And their need to be explaining it in special podcasts and addendums comes across as Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns.

They need to be concentrating on their alignment with share holders concerns, particularly the dismal share price.
Not just in the long term.
For many of us, it's already long term time.

I want to hear from them an update about what's going wrong or right commercially!
They are, after all, a commercial operation which means eventually getting off the share holder's and for profit lender's teat and standing on their own feet.
It means, at some stage, becoming profitable enough to provide a return to those who invested in them and supported them into existence.

If they can do that, we'll all celebrate their huge pay packets with them.

If commercial viability is still unlikely in anything other than the long term please provide us some guidance as to just how much longer this is expected to be.
Is it another year? Two, five, ten?
Stringing us along on the never never is wearing thin.

I know they cannot accurately predict the future and are naturally loathe to publicly commit themselves to any rigid timelines.
But an honest review of to date success and failure and guidance regarding their expectations of the period ahead, towards viability, would go a long way towards regaining share holder confidence and support.

This is particularly important in regards a potential re domicile which needs to be timed correctly and made obviously desirable to the vast majority of share holders, if it is to be successful.

 

[7für7]

Could you please clarify which clear and transparent goals you’re referring to?

For example, are you talking about the transparent 5-year plan that no one has seen?

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.

 

[7für7]

Agree.
The business must adequately compensate its management and talent in a competitive market.
But it also needs to adequately compensate its investors and other sources of capital.

Otherwise there is a constant grumbling from the mob about the fairness of the remuneration packages.
And their need to be explaining it in special podcasts and addendums comes across as Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns.

They need to be concentrating on their alignment with share holders concerns, particularly the dismal share price.
Not just in the long term.
For many of us, it's already long term time.

I want to hear from them an update about what's going wrong or right commercially!
They are, after all, a commercial operation which means eventually getting off the share holder's and for profit lender's teat and standing on their own feet.
It means, at some stage, becoming profitable enough to provide a return to those who invested in them and supported them into existence.

If they can do that, we'll all celebrate their huge pay packets with them.

If commercial viability is still unlikely in anything other than the long term please provide us some guidance as to just how much longer this is expected to be.
Is it another year? Two, five, ten?
Stringing us along on the never never is wearing thin.

I know they cannot accurately predict the future and are naturally loathe to publicly commit themselves to any rigid timelines.
But an honest review of to date success and failure and guidance regarding their expectations of the period ahead, towards viability, would go a long way towards regaining share holder confidence and support.

This is particularly important in regards a potential re domicile which needs to be timed correctly and made obviously desirable to the vast majority of share holders, if it is to be successful.

Look what happens when you read too much of that crapper stuff… Guys, take care… he used to be neutral for a long time… and now?!

 

[ChipMan]

This is a perfect example of how the brainchip management attitude views its entitlement to be rewarded the same as successful companies producing revenue and signing commercial agreements.

They need to Stop trying to feed shareholders nonsense. I don’t think shareholders will have an issue with issuing free shares and bonuses if you simply perform your role, which is signing commercial agreements and creating revenue.

In the real world, you’re paid based on your performance. At the moment, you haven’t achieved acceptable results from the last AGM.

Really? I would think bringing a new architecture into the world and looking like we are in skunk works is very impressive

 

[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.