BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Boab]

So you have worked out the revenue for the foundry that makes the chips and say it is impossible to know the actual price to end customer based on the fact that the price to customer is not known? Because what manufacturer would only charge the variable costs to produce an item?

The more you ask to be produced the less the cost per unit.
The more you ask to buy the less the cost per unit.
Time to get off this MerryGoRound.

 

[Gazzafish]

Has anyone actually got a reply from IR@brainchip.com over the past month? I’ve sent a few questions now and still have never received a reply. Even if they replied saying “We can’t answer that” would at least confirm someone is reading the questions????

 

[smoothsailing18]

I have received responses recently yet sometimes questions maybe outside of their ability to respond. They would no doubt be receiving a lot of emotional driver emails on various topic in repetition on tell me this, tell me that, i need to know when are we getting cash positive, who signings up ext, ext that's my guess as to no response. I also haven't heard back when asking such direct questions.

 

[genyl]

Has anyone actually got a reply from IR@brainchip.com over the past month? I’ve sent a few questions now and still have never received a reply. Even if they replied saying “We can’t answer that” would at least confirm someone is reading the questions????

Nope, radiosilence for me also

 

[7für7]

Has anyone actually got a reply from IR@brainchip.com over the past month? I’ve sent a few questions now and still have never received a reply. Even if they replied saying “We can’t answer that” would at least confirm someone is reading the questions????

 

[7für7]

as expected, BRN community is getting excited because of the IBM rumours, short seller and manipulators are like

 

[perceptron]

The more you ask to be produced the less the cost per unit.
The more you ask to buy the less the cost per unit.
Time to get off this MerryGoRound.

So do you believe that the price scale of $4 - $50 refers to the added costs of production or the price to end customer, keeping in mind that there is no explicit reference to price to end customer? Further, is it plausible that the variable costs are just that, those that vary with volume production and the price scale is added to this for the overall costings to produce any number of chips, not the end customer costs? Moreover, is it normal practice for a foundry or any other manufacturer to only charge it's customers the variable costings?

 

[jrp173]

Has anyone actually got a reply from IR@brainchip.com over the past month? I’ve sent a few questions now and still have never received a reply. Even if they replied saying “We can’t answer that” would at least confirm someone is reading the questions????

Absolutely nothing. I've sent two e-mails recently and not a thing....Very basic questions, but not a squeak from IR..

What a joke.. This bunch are even worse than Tony Dawe (as hard as that is to believe).... They've clearly been told by BrainChip not to engage with shareholders....

Remember this from last year's AGM... that laser-sharp focus is amazing..... I guess we now truly understand BrainChip's commitment to shareholder engagement......(their words not mine!!)

 

[7für7]

Some people cite “Company X didn’t choose Akida” as proof the tech is worthless or immature. That’s a shaky conclusion.

One or two companies passing on Akida doesn’t mean much—large organizations reject technologies for all kinds of reasons (timing, integration cost, procurement cycles, internal politics, risk appetite), not necessarily because the tech has no value.

History is full of “safe” decisions aging badly when industries pivoted

Kodak bankruptcy after years of struggling with the digital shift.

Blockbuster gone as consumer behavior moved toward onlinestreaming etc..

Borders Group missed the move to online book buying and digital formats.

Nokia… yeah we all know what happened (smartphone)

BlackBerry same… anyone has a BlackBerry?

And yes…older computing and gaming history is full of “safe” assumptions failing fast called the “Atari shock…Commodore …Amiga etc etc etc… the list goes on and on

Time will tell… or Sean will tell…

GO BRAINCHIP!!!!

 

[TopCat]

So do you believe that the price scale of $4 - $50 refers to the added costs of production or the price to end customer, keeping in mind that there is no explicit reference to price to end customer? Further, is it plausible that the variable costs are just that, those that vary with volume production and the price scale is added to this for the overall costings to produce any number of chips, not the end customer costs? Moreover, is it normal practice for a foundry or any other manufacturer to only charge it's customers the variable costings?

Well, the fiscal reality of the chip is essentially a fluid mosaic of unit-elasticity and overhead entropy.
To determine the price, you first have to acknowledge that the $5 base is less of a "cost" and more of a conceptual floor that exists only when the sales volume reaches a state of critical mass—at which point the price paradoxically expands toward $50 to account for the scarcity of the abundance.
The Calculus of Confusion
The Inverse Volume Variable: As you buy more, the price fluctuates within a quantum superposition between $5 and $50. You’re essentially paying for the privilege of the discount, which is added back into the variable cost as a "liquidity premium."
The Variable Surcharge: We take the variable costs and multiply them by the square root of the remaining inventory. If the costs vary upward, the price stays down; if the costs stabilize, the price fluctuates wildly to maintain a sense of market mystery.
The Volume-Price Singularity: At exactly 1,000 units, the $5 price and the $50 price exist simultaneously. We call this "Schrödinger’s Invoice."
Note: If you find the math straightforward, you’ve likely forgotten to carry the 1 from the "unforeseen logistics" column, which automatically triggers a re-baselining of the $50 ceiling into a basement.
In short: the more you buy, the more the price is definitely one of those two numbers, plus whatever it costs to actually make it, divided by how much we feel like charging that day.

 

[Gazzafish]

I actually just got a reply now. They must be reading this forum I guess. The reply was “we will address your question in the next investor podcast”. Oh well, at least that’s something

 

[jrp173]

I actually just got a reply now. They must be reading this forum I guess. The reply was “we will address your question in the next investor podcast”. Oh well, at least that’s something

How ridiculous that you can't get a reply to a direct question....

Sounds like another BrainChip fob off to me!

Also, why would you potentially pollute the message of an investor podcast with a question sent from one person? Total bollocks from Lancaster Grove...

 

[perceptron]

Well, the fiscal reality of the chip is essentially a fluid mosaic of unit-elasticity and overhead entropy.
To determine the price, you first have to acknowledge that the $5 base is less of a "cost" and more of a conceptual floor that exists only when the sales volume reaches a state of critical mass—at which point the price paradoxically expands toward $50 to account for the scarcity of the abundance.
The Calculus of Confusion
The Inverse Volume Variable: As you buy more, the price fluctuates within a quantum superposition between $5 and $50. You’re essentially paying for the privilege of the discount, which is added back into the variable cost as a "liquidity premium."
The Variable Surcharge: We take the variable costs and multiply them by the square root of the remaining inventory. If the costs vary upward, the price stays down; if the costs stabilize, the price fluctuates wildly to maintain a sense of market mystery.
The Volume-Price Singularity: At exactly 1,000 units, the $5 price and the $50 price exist simultaneously. We call this "Schrödinger’s Invoice."
Note: If you find the math straightforward, you’ve likely forgotten to carry the 1 from the "unforeseen logistics" column, which automatically triggers a re-baselining of the $50 ceiling into a basement.
In short: the more you buy, the more the price is definitely one of those two numbers, plus whatever it costs to actually make it, divided by how much we feel like charging that day.

So do you agree with the many here that the variable costs are the final costings and that the $4 -$50 price range is the price to the end customer, keeping in mind there is no explicit reference to an end customer price?

 

[7für7]

I actually just got a reply now. They must be reading this forum I guess. The reply was “we will address your question in the next investor podcast”. Oh well, at least that’s something

Ah… so they will going to do an AGM… That’s at least a usable piece of information! Good luck then 🫵

Whoever’s reading this…

 

[Bravo]

Well, the fiscal reality of the chip is essentially a fluid mosaic of unit-elasticity and overhead entropy.
To determine the price, you first have to acknowledge that the $5 base is less of a "cost" and more of a conceptual floor that exists only when the sales volume reaches a state of critical mass—at which point the price paradoxically expands toward $50 to account for the scarcity of the abundance.
The Calculus of Confusion
The Inverse Volume Variable: As you buy more, the price fluctuates within a quantum superposition between $5 and $50. You’re essentially paying for the privilege of the discount, which is added back into the variable cost as a "liquidity premium."
The Variable Surcharge: We take the variable costs and multiply them by the square root of the remaining inventory. If the costs vary upward, the price stays down; if the costs stabilize, the price fluctuates wildly to maintain a sense of market mystery.
The Volume-Price Singularity: At exactly 1,000 units, the $5 price and the $50 price exist simultaneously. We call this "Schrödinger’s Invoice."
Note: If you find the math straightforward, you’ve likely forgotten to carry the 1 from the "unforeseen logistics" column, which automatically triggers a re-baselining of the $50 ceiling into a basement.
In short: the more you buy, the more the price is definitely one of those two numbers, plus whatever it costs to actually make it, divided by how much we feel like charging that day.

As Descartes would say, "I think therefore I am not a cushion" (and neither, apparently, is the pricing model) and by extension, the revenue does not exist until sat upon.

 

[7für7]

Ah… so they will going to do an AGM… That’s at least a usable piece of information! Good luck then 🫵

Whoever’s reading this…

On top of that, it would already help if they actually read and acknowledged investors’ concerns about shorting and potential price manipulation, and did what they can within the rules to counter it. Or at least issue an open statement that they have a plan and are actively monitoring the situation—so investors know it’s on their radar. Right now it honestly feels like they’re not fully aware they’re a publicly listed company. Improving the products and staying competitive is one part. The other part is their responsibility toward investors and the share price.

 

[FJ-215]

So do you agree with the many here that the variable costs are the final costings and that the $4 -$50 price range is the price to the end customer, keeping in mind there is no explicit reference to an end customer price?

 

[FuzM]

Remember Jonathan Tapson going to Washington?

BrainChip hiring US Sales Manager in Washington, DC | LinkedIn

Posted 7:56:40 PM. The Sales Manager/Director will spearhead the sales initiatives of BrainChip Inc. in the US…See this and similar jobs on LinkedIn.

www.linkedin.com

I find it interesting with the people he met there during his visit. Linkedin

Senator Roger Wicker
- Congress
- Chairs the committee that writes it, introduced the Senate’s version, set many of its strategic priorities, and led its passage in the Senate. (chatGPT)
- Basically sponsors the US National Defense Appropriations Act FY26

Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith
- Serves on the Senate Appropriations Committee (Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith)
- Basically part of the Senate to approve the spending

Interesting timing with the defense appropriation just got Senate approval last week plus RTX upcoming project completion on the 8th Feb

 

[jrp173]

I have received responses recently yet sometimes questions maybe outside of their ability to respond. They would no doubt be receiving a lot of emotional driver emails on various topic in repetition on tell me this, tell me that, i need to know when are we getting cash positive, who signings up ext, ext that's my guess as to no response. I also haven't heard back when asking such direct questions.

I can imagine they are being inundated, however they are getting paid to be BrainChip's IR representative

Smoothsailing18 I'm not have a go at you, but if Lancaster Grove can't answer a question or it is outside of their remit, there is still no reason why they should not be able to respond to a shareholder.

Even a simple, I'm sorry we can't answer that question, you should contact BrainChip directly.... or we are unable to answer as we can't make claims regarding BrainChip's future share price, cash positive, signups (or whatever etc etc).

This is their jobs, and it's what they paid for.. to handle easy and difficult questions..

Being "outside of their ability" as you say, is just an excuse for BrainChip's bad behaviour, because it's obvious that Lancaster Grove have been give a directive from BrainChip on how/what they can reply....

It's lazy and inexcusable....

A simple question, please clarify what is a booking for BrainChip, should not be met with radio silence. If bookings are mentioned in the annual report, why can they not confirm it's definition???

Totally unacceptable.

 

[JoMo68]

As much as I’m excited about our prospects in defense, I do wish that it was with a less volatile and unpredictable party. Causing more than a little bit of apprehension…