BRN Discussion Ongoing

[jrp173]

When I was a senior exec in the software industry, you got 2, maybe 3, quarters to prove your plan by $$ in the order book. After that you were shown the door. In my view 3 1/2 years with no notable commercial success is WAY too long and indicates that either the plan was deficient from the start or the person reponsible for implementing it (CEO) is not up to the task. Either way the board needs to take some remedial action.

And speaking of not being up to the task, if management doesn't know enough about the disclosure rules of the exchange they are listed on to placate potential customers, then they have no place in a listed company. Or maybe they were lying to hide the real agenda????

Well said. 10 years on the ASX and now they've got a problem with disclosure rules.. really..

Quite unbelievable....

They role out excuse after excuse...

 

[Guzzi62]

When I was a senior exec in the software industry, you got 2, maybe 3, quarters to prove your plan by $$ in the order book. After that you were shown the door. In my view 3 1/2 years with no notable commercial success is WAY too long and indicates that either the plan was deficient from the start or the person reponsible for implementing it (CEO) is not up to the task. Either way the board needs to take some remedial action.

And speaking of not being up to the task, if management doesn't know enough about the disclosure rules of the exchange they are listed on to placate potential customers, then they have no place in a listed company. Or maybe they were lying to hide the real agenda????

I disagree,

The company are trying to enter market technology adoption with world-changing tech which can't be compared to what you are talking about IMO.

The tech world is currently on an AI wave, with GPU's ever more powerful, burning energy in an alarming rate.

They will hopefully soon realize that it is not the way forward, and we have to move as much processing as possible to the edge.

This doesn't happen overnight, try reading this: Understanding the Technology Adoption Lifecycle.

Understanding the Technology Adoption Lifecycle

Discover how the Technology Adoption Lifecycle helps businesses navigate the challenges of bringing new products to market. Learn about the five stages of adoption, from Innovators to Laggards, and how each segment impacts product strategy. By understanding these stages, companies can tailor...

www.starthawk.io

We are in the early stages of adoption, space and military are slowly "seeing the Akida technology" which is very encouraging.

White papers are being written using Akida by universities and by companies' development departments, sometimes even in cooperation, another good sign that they find it intriguing and checking it out, impressed by the low power consumption with fewer parts in a circuit board.

I don't think you can blame management for this but okay their expectations isn't well-timed, it's a year or even maybe 2 too early.

I think we will eventually see a break though later this year and the next. Yes, a bitter pill to shallow, but it is what it is, take it or leave it.

I got some inspiration from poster Observerr on HC, he is really well-informed about the technology and the market, your posts are awesome, thank you sir.

​

​

​

 

[rgupta]

When I was a senior exec in the software industry, you got 2, maybe 3, quarters to prove your plan by $$ in the order book. After that you were shown the door. In my view 3 1/2 years with no notable commercial success is WAY too long and indicates that either the plan was deficient from the start or the person reponsible for implementing it (CEO) is not up to the task. Either way the board needs to take some remedial action.

And speaking of not being up to the task, if management doesn't know enough about the disclosure rules of the exchange they are listed on to placate potential customers, then they have no place in a listed company. Or maybe they were lying to hide the real agenda????

Hi Toasty judging a new technology and that too sale as an ip is expected to take much more time than writing a code for existing technology. So yes we have to give benefit of doubt to brainchip management.
Regarding ten years listed on brainchip and still does not know inns and out of brainchip I think brainchip management is very poor here.

 

[rgupta]

I disagree,

The company are trying to enter market technology adoption with world-changing tech which can't be compared to what you are talking about IMO.

The tech world is currently on an AI wave, with GPU's ever more powerful, burning energy in an alarming rate.

They will hopefully soon realize that it is not the way forward, and we have to move as much processing as possible to the edge.

This doesn't happen overnight, try reading this: Understanding the Technology Adoption Lifecycle.

Understanding the Technology Adoption Lifecycle

Discover how the Technology Adoption Lifecycle helps businesses navigate the challenges of bringing new products to market. Learn about the five stages of adoption, from Innovators to Laggards, and how each segment impacts product strategy. By understanding these stages, companies can tailor...

www.starthawk.io

We are in the early stages of adoption, space and military are slowly "seeing the Akida technology" which is very encouraging.

White papers are being written using Akida by universities and by companies' development departments, sometimes even in cooperation, another good sign that they find it intriguing and checking it out, impressed by the low power consumption with fewer parts in a circuit board.

I don't think you can blame management for this but okay their expectations isn't well-timed, it's a year or even maybe 2 too early.

I think we will eventually see a break though later this year and the next. Yes, a bitter pill to shallow, but it is what it is, take it or leave it.

I got some inspiration from poster Observerr on HC, he is really well-informed about the technology and the market, your posts are awesome, thank you sir.

​

​

​

Guzzi you may be right, but we only know as much as management is letting us know. So based on the available information it looks more like excuse than a reason here.
Dyor

 

[Deadpool]

My thoughts right now Get are ones of concern.

For mine, the announcement that Brainchip was considering moving to a US listing was a genuine shock. I contacted the company about my concerns, which centred around the following premise…that unless there was at least one major revenue generating deal announced, that would increase the share price significantly, then it would be grossly premature to move to a US listing. I added that existing shareholders value would be destroyed if the company moved without at least one major revenue producing deal in the kit bag.

The response from the company shocked me even more than their original announcement to consider moving. I was told, that because of the ASX disclosure rules, a major deal may never happen. I was told that the entities Brainchip was dealing with might never do business with us whilst we were listed on the ASX, because they were not prepared to risk being forced to reveal financial details, and information about how they were going to use our IP.

This prompted my discussions with the ASX about their interpretation of their very own disclosure rules, particularly rule 3.1A. They told me very clearly, that if Brainchip and a customer wanted to maintain confidentiality about a deal they were contemplating, then the onus was on both parties to remain silent about it. As long as confidentiality remained, there was no requirement to disclose the deal…it could remain confidential under ASX disclosure rule 3.1A.

When I told the company this, I used both the unnecessary Ford ASX announcement back in May 2020, that most likely caused Ford to end their collaboration with us, and Mercedes self outing themselves with press releases in January 2022, which has caused complete silence from them about us ever since.

Love them or hate them…after my discussions with the ASX, I cannot believe that the company would consider a premature, highly damaging for existing shareholders move to a US listing, because of the ASX disclosure rules.

Call me a conspiracy theorist…but I believe there is another agenda .

So these are my thoughts right now Get.

Hi mate, I seem to recall a little wager you put forward back in the day.
"If our share price is not at least $5.00 by this time next year, I’ll shout everyone here lunch at The Briars"

LOL Nah its all good mate, just pissing about

 

[Cardpro]

When I was a senior exec in the software industry, you got 2, maybe 3, quarters to prove your plan by $$ in the order book. After that you were shown the door. In my view 3 1/2 years with no notable commercial success is WAY too long and indicates that either the plan was deficient from the start or the person reponsible for implementing it (CEO) is not up to the task. Either way the board needs to take some remedial action.

And speaking of not being up to the task, if management doesn't know enough about the disclosure rules of the exchange they are listed on to placate potential customers, then they have no place in a listed company. Or maybe they were lying to hide the real agenda????

Lol, just imagine... if they had made all these partnership announcements on the ASX, only to find out after years & years, our revenue still doesn't line up...

Sadly, now I have more faith on ASX Listing Rules than the management...

Also... the Ford announcement... it never lead us to anywhere, but the odd thing is, there were no further updates at all. If it has ended, I would assume it should be disclosed on ASX...but nothing...

Dyor imo only

 

[manny100]

There is a 5 year plan in place approved by the BOD. The content has not been made public.
No doubt the plan included timelines for ecosystem developments, tech advancements, deals and revenue.
It may be the case that revenue was not forecast until year5?
As far as the Key Management Personnel Remuneration goes it was covered in detail in the 2024 Annual Report from page 14 - page 37. The report was audited and it's a huge read.
It's interesting reading and i recommend that all holders should read it.
As a result of the 2nd strike at the AGM on 21/5/24 the BOD retained an independent consultant to review the compensation plan and provide advice (page 17).
Page 18 plus contain recommendations adopted
The committee intends to ensure executive share ownership progressively to align them with shareholders interests in the long term outcome of the company.
See 2024 Annual report link attached.

https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02918857-2A1581370&v=7bc42bd11d853ed5e8c28f2ffcd6a069ee5cd6b4

 

[Cardpro]

There is a 5 year plan in place approved by the BOD. The content has not been made public.
No doubt the plan included timelines for ecosystem developments, tech advancements, deals and revenue.
It may be the case that revenue was not forecast until year5?
As far as the Key Management Personnel Remuneration goes it was covered in detail in the 2024 Annual Report from page 14 - page 37. The report was audited and it's a huge read.
It's interesting reading and i recommend that all holders should read it.
As a result of the 2nd strike at the AGM on 21/5/24 the BOD retained an independent consultant to review the compensation plan and provide advice (page 17).
Page 18 plus contain recommendations adopted
The committee intends to ensure executive share ownership progressively to align them with shareholders interests in the long term outcome of the company.
See 2024 Annual report link attached.

https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02918857-2A1581370&v=7bc42bd11d853ed5e8c28f2ffcd6a069ee5cd6b4

Lol, independent... hired by themselves...

 

[HopalongPetrovski]

Lol, independent... hired by themselves...

Who else exactly were you expecting was going to hire and pay this independent consultant?
Were you going to pay for it?

 

[Easytiger]

Alright. Let’s imagine you personally employed Sean as the CEO of your company and were conducting his annual performance review. How would you rate his performance over the past 12 months, on a scale of 1 to 10?

Board must assess CEO against the achievement of the 5 year board-approved sales/revenue plan. The Board are saying CEO has achieved the current year plan and they think he has the potential to achieve future year’s sales/revenue plans and budgets.

As we don’t know the board approved sales/revenue plan, it’s impossible to rate the CEO. To answer that question, we need to press the Board at the AGM, what percentage of the sales / revenue budget has the CEO achieved - this is the tell!

 

[Pom down under]

I have some issues with the company and how things are going, but wow I’ve never read such negative shit ever in my life and it doesn’t take a brain scientist to work out who is posting all this crap

 

[White Horse]

Meanwhile back at the ranch.

BrainChip has 12 job openings - find the one for you. ​

 

[Pom down under]

Meanwhile back at the ranch.

BrainChip has 12 job openings - find the one for you. ​

So is it either a worrying or positive sign? Because atm I’m finding quite worrying.

 

[Space Cadet]

Some on here have suggested the company have been putting up a smokescreen with the podcast and US listing. If that is the case, it has obviously worked as that Is all I have read about on here for the last couple of hours. If true that would be mission accomplished. I don't think that is true but it has surely given some posters who constantly attack the company and try to sow doubt new ammunition. The sad thing is that quite a few are helping them feed it. Not much research being done to uncover collaborations or finding links to companies. Getting a little tiresome from my point of view but it's a free country. At least for now. Hope you are alll having a great Easter break.

SC

 

[Space Cadet]

So is it either a worrying or positive sign? Because atm I’m finding quite worrying.

I'll take a crack. If they are to replace staff leaving, then worrying. If they are new positions, then positive, IMO.

SC

 

[7für7]

So is it either a worrying or positive sign? Because atm I’m finding quite worrying.

No worries! Once the revenue starts rolling in, they’ll be able to afford a canteen…and then there’ll be a job as a professional potato cutter for you! There will be Something for everyone. Bravo gets voted onto the board, and I’ll stay the loyal shareholder, still hopelessly watching the share price dangle around 20 cents like it’s on vacation…

F…it

 

[Diogenese]

.

 

[Diogenese]

Who else exactly were you expecting was going to hire and pay this independent consultant?
Were you going to pay for it?

Pro Bono (anti-Cher?)

 

[manny100]

Lol, independent... hired by themselves...

LOL, you may not understand that every person or business that works for any company is hired and paid by the company.
Even the Independant auditors are hired and paid by the company.
No one expects you to believe anything or accept anything BRN - that call belongs to you. It would however be handy if you had done some research prior - it helps.

 

[manny100]

Board must assess CEO against the achievement of the 5 year board-approved sales/revenue plan. The Board are saying CEO has achieved the current year plan and they think he has the potential to achieve future year’s sales/revenue plans and budgets.

As we don’t know the board approved sales/revenue plan, it’s impossible to rate the CEO. To answer that question, we need to press the Board at the AGM, what percentage of the sales / revenue budget has the CEO achieved - this is the tell!

You need to read the annual report.
This outlines short- and long-term targets generally. It's as boring as hell but worth a read.
The BOD rate the CEO and we rate the BOD (company) via AGM voting.
If you do not like the way the company is being run vote against director reelection.
The anomaly is that despite a fair bit of CEO, BOD criticism and a strike vote concerning renumeration at the 2024 AGM directors up for election were overwhelmingly voted back in. Pia Turcinov got 81.05% FOR and PVM 93.03% FOR.
The 'buck' stops with the BOD and they are supported to the hilt.
For short targets despite success with individual goals, booking targets and Edge Box targets were not achieved. This effected their pay.
2025 goals have been set.