Maybe best case scenario is a u.s. buyer is lurking in the background, offers the Company 15 billion of dollars (made up figure of course) and they say, right now Brainchip you need to buy back all the australian shares at ($6.27 AUD, the price that you quoted @jrp173 ) and then float it all on the u.s. market under our subsidiary name.
Every year around this time all the snide, negative comments really ramp up, I wonder why...not!
So many moaners, yet they just won't crystallize their loss and admit they wished they had offloaded all their shares at north of $2.00...well tough luck princesses.
Toughen the F up...Brainchip isn't your personal ATM..this is a journey, yes it's damn slow, but is the technology useless ?
Are we hiring imbociles? Are we engaging with incompetent tier 1 companies?..Is Sean a snake oil salesmen?..on and on.
From memory, Lou received two tranches of 7.5 million shares as "Chief 3 Hats" giving or some would say, gifting him with 15 million shares, of which he still holds just under 5 million shares, some seem to forget about the approximate 17 + million AUD that was wasted (blown) under his watch on the Studio sales team etc, the email address that was posted by some idiots on the HC site was actually Lou's private account, I can confirm that myself.
What 99% of you don't know is why he abruptly left as our CEO and Peter took over as interim CEO, and by the way, he did a great job in changing the accountability and tightened up on internal procedures with the help of the BOD..I liked Lou, but there was an issue and the company moved on.
The jury is still out on Sean, maybe he has clashed with some key staff who have since moved on, I simply can't comment because I'm not privy to the internal office day to day issues, which I'm sure there are like most.
Personality clashes happen all the time, ego's, power struggles etc are all part and parcel of life, but we all keep growing and moving forward.
Ramble finished...goodnight from
Well it could of been a correct old email adddress
Hey
I have received a response from Lou regarding my 2 questions, but I’m requesting permission to post them here and he responded with
I am in a similar boat except my buy price is .49c (still up the creek without a paddle) if this redomicile eventuates. I can’t see any positives in our current financial position anyway ? My plan is to set up a SMSF and transfer them into that, this way I shouldn’t be forced to sell at a loss and because they are currently under water there should be no CGT payable just a transfer fee I assume ? Have you considered this option, thoughts ?I do, (hold BRN in my retail super) and paid 62 cents each for them, at the time.
I also hold many more outside of super for which I now feel grateful.
It will be a blow to me if I have to sell them at anything less than purchase price because of a redomicile, but at the moment, that is the situation with my particular fund.
Other funds will have varying arrangements, but this is my situation.
Not looking for violins or sympathy, just stating a part of the way my reality will be affected.
And think many other's will likely be in the same boat.
This is just a side show to the main event, but I hope that the BOD are aware of these implications for some of us holder's and will factor us into their decision making.
This means: Dont give T&J any more attention.
Doing the same - Retail self manage to personal SMSF. However, you may discover that you can’t transfer because the trustee owns shares on your behalf. You simply have an interest in the shares. You will be required to place a sell order on your retail holding. Take a loss and for go the loss (as in you can’t carry it over to your SMSF). Roll your retail self managed into your personal SMSF then buy the shares at the lower cost base. Negative is- lower cost base could equate to more tax on any gain and no loss to offset. Positive is - you have skin back in the game and total control including ability to vote.
Oh really, I hadn’t fully explored the technicalities as yet to be honest. So either way we have to solidify the actual loss and no share transfer is possible, that’s a proper kick in the guts if it eventuates…
Yep. Not happy. Should have done personal SMSF years ago. Could have done some trades without the 20% limitation. That limitation really held me back over the years.
IMO .... purely a diversionary tactic to distract shareholders who will be attending at the AGM from asking questions about the actual current and relevant issues concerning the BOD and CEO ongoing lack of IP Agreements and Revenue Streams from being generated.
Yeah, but, but, they have so many more bookings though. Bookings, as in meetings with external people.
