BRN Discussion Ongoing

[HopalongPetrovski]

From the response I got 110% and @TECH confirmed it was his email

Thanks for your response.
But as someone pointed out, that email address and a number of other corroborations were previously disclosed publicly.
I applaud your honouring his confidentiality but it leaves me not much the wiser.
Anyway, as you say, and I have also pointed out, Lou is just a shareholder like the rest of us and certainly entitled to an opinion.
It seems whoever "Loudin" is has stopped posting now and that thread has just turned into another typical crapper crapfest

 

[Bravo]

Another post, another cue,
And once again, it's signed by Lou.

Now the forum's split in two,
Some say “fake,” some swear “true,”

Threads begin without a clue,
Pom declares" I don't give a screw".

But seriously - was that really Lou?
Or was it me? Or maybe you?

The tale unfolded, the madness grew,
'Till no-one knew who was who.

 

[Pom down under]

Thanks for your response.
But as someone pointed out, that email address and a number of other corroborations were previously disclosed publicly.
I applaud your honouring his confidentiality but it leaves me not much the wiser.
Anyway, as you say, and I have also pointed out, Lou is just a shareholder like the rest of us and certainly entitled to an opinion.
It seems whoever "Loudin" is has stopped posting now and that thread has just turned into another typical crapper crapfest

I apologized for me email to him thinking it was someone else and he responded

 

[jrp173]

why does a share consolidation hurt shareholders. pie is still the same size.

The pie may still be the same in terms of $value at listing, however you need to consider the price movement (both up and down) after listing.

Just as an example, but using today share price of 25c, moving to Nasdaq where a share price of $4USD is required, it would be a 25:1 consolidation.

Following the proposed 25:1 share consolidation as part of the transition from the ASX to the Nasdaq, every 25 shares you currently hold will be consolidated into 1 new share. This means the Nasdaq share price will be higher to reflect the smaller number of shares on issue. However, one key risk to consider is that after the consolidation, a 1 cent AUD movement in the original ASX share price would equate to approximately a 16 cent USD movement in the Nasdaq share price (based on an exchange rate of 65 cents AUD to USD).

As a result, the share price on Nasdaq will need to move in much larger increments to deliver the same relative gains you may be used to on the ASX. This reduced price granularity may impact liquidity and increase volatility, making it harder to achieve small, incremental gains — and potentially amplifying both upside and downside price movements.

So being fair, the price movement in the above example will have a much "sharper" affect on your shareholding value (both in terms of share price increase and decrease...

A move to Nasdaq does not guarantee a re-rating as BRN talked about in their price sensitive announcement to shareholders.

 

[MDhere]

Can we move on from this please. Im trump email me at idontgiveafuck@me.com

Now back to brainchip chippers

 

[Doz]

Antonio has already been down this road :

Not good ……

 

[Okeydokey01]

PLEASEEEEEE .... PLEASEEEEE ..... PLEASEEEEEE ....stay away from raising any issues concerning the Company's Re-Domiciling to the USA during this AGM .... IMO, It's not an issue for this AGM ..... let's use our constructive time at this AGM to discuss the real issues of there being no new IP agreements and No meaningful revenues streams ............ leave the Re-Domicile issue until another time or until such time as we are all served with a formal Co ASX notice of the Co's intention to do so ........... once again, I think this is all a diversionary tactic by the Co to bypass the real issues at present and waste s/holders time at the AGM on unrelated side issues.
We all need the Co and BOD's as part of their Fiduciary Duty to give all of us Co S/Holders full and frank disclosure's ... so, please ask them all the questions that may concern you and that need answering by the Co hopfully in a meaningful way and not by way of a so called "Fluff" response.

I 100% agree Xray. It will be important to keep the board on task in responding to the current state of affairs. The time for fluff and bluff is gone. A lot of statements have been made and things implied in past AGM's and podcasts. Sure progress has been made, but very few, if any of these statements delivered with enthusiastic optimism around soon to be realised signings/earnings have materialised. It is time for fact and material information on where the company is at now.

I also agree that the proposition of moving to a foreign exchange is an important one to discuss. However, there are more pressing points that should be first given air time. I have not been able to make sense of the timing of this announcement. It flies in the face of all prior correspondence on the matter. There must be a catalyst which has changed the timeframe, it is the boards responsibility to disclose this voluntarily. I would hope that at very least we are provided a broad stroke update on this in Sean's address. I truly hope it is not simply to defer shareholders attention. However some real transparency next week is critical. An AGM should be an event that provides us with updates and information rather than one that sees us leaving scratching our heads more questions than answers. We have great tech and some wonderful talented individuals on the team, I would hate to think that the efforts of many are being stifled by the actions of a few.

All in my opinion of course

 

[Smoothsailing]

When are the next financial due ?

 

[jrp173]

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 move forward.

Ramble finished...goodnight from Tech.

Telling shareholders to toughen up and sell if they’re not happy is a load of absolute rubbish. This is a public company. Every shareholder has the right to hold management accountable for failed promises, vague announcements, and years of under-delivery. That’s the deal when you list on a stock exchange — you answer to your owners. Some of us want answers and are demanding better from BrainChip.

Don’t confuse frustration with moaning. What you’re seeing isn’t “moaning” — it’s years of patience wearing thin, because the board keeps missing the mark. Commercialisation was “imminent” in 2021. “Revenue is just around the corner” has been the line for ages. And now we’re down 80%+ and still getting spin instead of substance. That’s not bad luck — it’s bad management.

The fact is the company is being held to account — as it should be. And if that upsets your blind loyalty, I can’t help that. That’s how listed markets work. If BrainChip wants investor trust, it needs to earn it.

So maybe next time, instead of insulting people who’ve backed this company with real money for more than 10 years, you take a look at who’s actually trying to push for the standards that might one day make this investment worthwhile.

As for your innuendo about Lou’s departure, that 99% of us don’t know about (which would clearly be covered by a NDA) — if you’re not legally authorised to speak on it, then don’t. You’re doing neither the company nor shareholders any favours by peddling vague suggestions regarding his departure.

 

[Frangipani]

Our Chairman of the Board of Directors, Antonio J. Viana, is joining yet another company as Non-Executive Director: PQShield (https://pqshield.com/).
According to their self-description, PQShield are “leading experts in post-quantum cryptography” and “were the first cybersecurity company to develop quantum-safe cryptography on chips, in applications, and in the cloud.”

Since I don’t have a clue what that actually means, I have no idea whether there is any cross-pollination possible, but highly likely someone else here on TSE will be able to tell us…
(Unsurprisingly in the semiconductor world, they do share some ecosystem partners with BrainChip.)

We are very pleased to announce that Antonio J. Viana (BrainChip, Arteris,… | PQShield

We are very pleased to announce that Antonio J. Viana (BrainChip, Arteris, Parsley360, former Arm executive) is joining us as Non-Executive Director, alongside Mike Muller (co-founder and former CTO, Arm), RoseMary Schooler (former CVP, Intel Corporation, and current Arm board member), and Ian...

www.linkedin.com

View attachment 74148

View attachment 74150

View attachment 74149
View attachment 74151

In December, a company called PQShield welcomed Antonio J. Viana as a Non-Executive Director:

https://thestockexchange.com.au/threads/brn-discussion-ongoing.1/post-443567

This week’s announcement of our collaboration with Chelpis happens to confirm the potential interest of companies in the business of post-quantum cryptography in our technology…

 

[Pom down under]

The pie may still be the same in terms of $value at listing, however you need to consider the price movement (both up and down) after listing.

Just as an example, but using today share price of 25c, moving to Nasdaq where a share price of $4USD is required, it would be a 25:1 consolidation.

Following the proposed 25:1 share consolidation as part of the transition from the ASX to the Nasdaq, every 25 shares you currently hold will be consolidated into 1 new share. This means the Nasdaq share price will be higher to reflect the smaller number of shares on issue. However, one key risk to consider is that after the consolidation, a 1 cent AUD movement in the original ASX share price would equate to approximately a 16 cent USD movement in the Nasdaq share price (based on an exchange rate of 65 cents AUD to USD).

As a result, the share price on Nasdaq will need to move in much larger increments to deliver the same relative gains you may be used to on the ASX. This reduced price granularity may impact liquidity and increase volatility, making it harder to achieve small, incremental gains — and potentially amplifying both upside and downside price movements.

So being fair, the price movement in the above example will have a much "sharper" affect on your shareholding value (both in terms of share price increase and decrease...

A move to Nasdaq does not guarantee a re-rating as BRN talked about in their price sensitive announcement to shareholders.

Actually I asked Lou the question about reconciling to the America and he stated if we were join as a 3rd tier listing on nasdaq we would require a share price of $1usd and said it was very expensive and risky for shareholders and that the company would have more than a wish and a promise to survive the transition.

I also spoke about Steve and he said that he had the company at heart and would provide expertise and balance to the BoD plus he knows the technology and the markets, so unless the company can persuade me otherwise I’ll be voting against listing in America and a big fat yes to Steve joins the BoD

 

[ndefries]

In December, a company called PQShield welcomed Antonio J. Viana as a Non-Executive Director:

https://thestockexchange.com.au/threads/brn-discussion-ongoing.1/post-443567

View attachment 83570


This week’s announcement of our collaboration with Chelpis happens to confirm the potential interest of companies in the business of post-quantum cryptography in our technology…

View attachment 83568

If Akida becomes part of the gold standard in this new area it will be a very valuable resource to own by up and coming orgs going big in this area.

Imagine if Akida sells its product to be exclusive in a particular area for a larger royalty.

There are many areas to make money. We need to lock in one to goes the share price and prevent more dilution of the shares.

Waiting for that big deal to land.

 

[7für7]

Knock knock folks… why the long faces, huh?? Come on, be positive!! You’re acting like this company is partnering with major players and planning to jump over to the US stock market without actually making financial progress… that would be just—oh wait a minute…

 

[Slade]

Another company wants Antonio. They can have him.

 

[Cardpro]

---

Unfortunately, I won’t be able to attend the AGM, but I’m hopeful that someone will raise a few important points with the Board—particularly around how the company communicates its customer pipeline to shareholders.

The key point is this: even when companies are bound by NDAs, they can still provide meaningful, non-sensitive insights. By sharing aggregated, anonymized, and non-identifiable data, it’s entirely possible to report on operational metrics, pipeline progression, and market traction without breaching confidentiality or exposing client identities.

If the Board insists otherwise, I’d respectfully suggest that’s simply not true.

And if they need a real-world example of how it can be done? Voilà—they only need to look at the framework I pulled together in under two seconds with the help of ChatGPT. No $68,000 consulting fee required (though I wouldn’t mind a cheque to offset my losses at this point in time!).

Confidentiality-Conscious Shareholder Reporting Framework​

1. Sales & Engagement Funnel Metrics​

Without naming clients, report:

• Total active commercial discussions: e.g., 26 companies currently in the pipeline
• Breakdown by stage:
  • Enquiry / Early discussion: 14
  • Proof of Concept (PoC): 6
  • Pilot deployment: 3
  • Commercial negotiations: 2
  • Signed but not publicly disclosed: 1
• Sales cycle timelines (avg. duration from enquiry to PoC, PoC to deal, etc.)

2. Industry & Use Case Segmentation​

• Present data grouped by verticals:
  • Automotive (ADAS, predictive maintenance)
  • Industrial (robotics, machine vision)
  • Consumer electronics (smart devices)
  • Defense/security (anomaly detection)
  • Healthcare (diagnostic assistance)
• Describe generalized use cases:
  • Event-based visual processing for motion tracking
  • Low-latency AI inference at the edge
  • On-device incremental learning

3. Geographic Distribution​

• Show global reach without naming countries if needed:
  • North America: 10 active discussions
  • Europe: 7
  • Asia-Pacific: 5
  • Middle East: 2

4. Partnerships and Ecosystem Activity​

• Highlight non-client relationships that can be disclosed:
  • Hardware integrations (e.g., RISC-V platforms, sensor vendors)
  • Ecosystem development (SDK downloads, dev kits shipped)
  • Joint marketing initiatives

5. Product Maturity and Demand Signals​

• Requests for evaluation kits or SDK activations: trending over time
• Inbound interest volume: e.g., +35% YoY increase in inbound enterprise queries
• Repeat interest: number of returning potential customers requesting re-engagement

6. Financial Pipeline Indicators (without revenue disclosure)​

• % growth in qualified pipeline value over past quarters
• Conversion ratios between pipeline stages (e.g., 30% of PoCs move to pilot stage)
• Customer acquisition cost (CAC) trends if trackable

7. Forward-Looking Statements (with caution)​

• Express the number of PoCs expected to conclude within the next quarter
• Outline projected growth in industry verticals without asserting certainty

---

Example Statement for Shareholders:​

Even if they do, as there's no revenue to support such a claim, I don't think it will be much helpful. That being said, if we are generating meaningful revenue, above will be self explained. What I don't really understand is how low our revenue is when we are meant to charge customers for providing tech/engineering/development support... if we are indeed actively engaged with 100s of EAPs who were apparently interested in our tech since development stages, there should be some sort of payment... but nothing.......... even the deals with Renesas & MegaChips, no sign of royalties... MegaChip's deal was for 4 years and this is the 4th year but there's still no sign of royalties...

Disappointing...

I wish one day, I can just rely on financials...

Imo only dyor

 

[7für7]

Is… is that your new line now? Huh? I mean… is that—is that your new motto or something? ‘Back to BrainChip, chippers?’ What… what, what is that? Why—why don’t you let people talk? Is… is questioning things just, like, foreign to you? Do you get a rash when people think for themselves? What… why you dont let people make questions?

Can we move on from this please. Im trump email me at idontgiveafuck@me.com

Now back to brainchip chippers

 

[jrp173]

Actually I asked Lou the question about reconciling to the America and he stated if we were join as a 3rd tier listing on nasdaq we would require a share price of $1usd and said it was very expensive and risky for shareholders and that the company would have more than a wish and a promise to survive the transition.

I also spoke about Steve and he said that he had the company at heart and would provide expertise and balance to the BoD plus he knows the technology and the markets, so unless the company can persuade me otherwise I’ll be voting against listing in America and a big fat yes to Steve joins the BoD

Thanks for letting people know.

As for Mr Liebeskind, I can only hope that people vote for him, and not just based on what Lou has said.

The fact is we currently have four non executive directors, and none of them seem to be pulling up the company, and asking them the hard questions. I personally don't think any of them are putting shareholders first (or quite frankly even considering shareholders). I mean take the price sensitive announcement regarding redomicile (and our 2 Australian NEDs Carrick and Turcinov). Carrick worked for Shaw and Partners, and he didn't say, BRN, this is going to go down like a lead balloon and hurt share price.. don't do it. Let's telephone our top 20 or 50 shareholders to see what they think. And Turcinov is a corporate lawyer, and she didn't think to add her expertise (or supposed expertise here). She didn't think to say, this is crazy.. we can't put this out with no detail. How can we use this to gauge shareholders interests when there is no detail or substance here!. But no, they just let it go through to the keeper.. great NEDs!!!! And look what happened to our share price.

Even if someone doesn't know Steve (or care to email him to ask questions), I mean seriously it can't be any worse than it is now. Why not give him a chance. He has been a NED there previously, he knows the technology and he does care about shareholders.

Surely Steve's return can only help shareholders, as he'll be able to put BRN on the spot, and hopefully make the other non executive think a bit more, and hopefully this causes some serious change.

In terms of his base salary, even if Carrick and Le (who are up for election) AND Liebeskind are all successful, there is no additional costs to the company. There is an aggregate maximum pool of funds that are shared amongst Non executive directors. Of course neither Carrick or Le need to be re-elected... it is up to us shareholders....

But even with five NEDs (including Mr Liebeskind), this pool stays at $700,000.. so the other NED's would all see a reduction in their remuneration.

Not a bad thing in my opinion.

 

[HopalongPetrovski]

Thanks for letting people know.

As for Mr Liebeskind, I can only hope that people vote for him, and not just based on what Lou has said.

The fact is we currently have four non executive directors, and none of them seem to be pulling up the company, and asking them the hard questions. I personally don't think any of them are putting shareholders first (or quite frankly even considering shareholders). I mean take the price sensitive announcement regarding redomicile (and our 2 Australian NEDs Carrick and Turcinov). Carrick worked for Shaw and Partners, and he didn't say, BRN, this is going to go down like a lead balloon and hurt share price.. don't do it. Let's telephone our top 20 or 50 shareholders to see what they think. And Turcinov is a corporate lawyer, and she didn't think to add her expertise (or supposed expertise here). She didn't think to say, this is crazy.. we can't put this out with no detail. How can we use this to gauge shareholders interests when there is no detail or substance here!. But no, they just let it go through to the keeper.. great NEDs!!!! And look what happened to our share price.

Even if someone doesn't know Steve (or care to email him to ask questions), I mean seriously it can't be any worse than it is now. Why not give him a chance. He has been a NED there previously, he knows the technology and he does care about shareholders.

Surely Steve's return can only help shareholders, as he'll be able to put BRN on the spot, and hopefully make the other non executive think a bit more, and hopefully this causes some serious change.

In terms of his base salary, even if Carrick and Le (who are up for election) AND Liebeskind are all successful, there is no additional costs to the company. There is an aggregate maximum pool of funds that are shared amongst Non executive directors. Of course neither Carrick or Le need to be re-elected... it is up to us shareholders....

But even with five NEDs (including Mr Liebeskind), this pool stays at $700,000.. so the other NED's would all see a reduction in their remuneration.

Not a bad thing in my opinion.


View attachment 83577

How exactly do you know just what input Carrick or Turcinov had regarding the proposed redomicile?
Or anything else they may have contributed for that matter?
And as we are calling people by their surnames, how come Liebeskind doesn't care to publicly give us his "pitch" for our votes?
How come Liebeskind relies on proxies like you to drum up support for him?
And your line "it can't be any worse than it is now." Really? Cant it?
Maybe you should ring Clive Palmer and enquire about his about to be dissolved Trump et of patsys.
They like snake oil.

 

[jrp173]

How exactly do you know just what input Carrick or Turcinov had regarding the proposed redomicile?
Or anything else they may have contributed for that matter?
And as we are calling people by their surnames, how come Liebeskind doesn't care to publicly give us his "pitch" for our votes?
How come Liebeskind relies on proxies like you to drum up support for him?
And your line "it can't be any worse than it is now." Really? Cant it?
Maybe you should ring Clive Palmer and enquire about his about to be dissolved Trump et of patsys.
They like snake oil.

In answer to your question (specifically how do I know their input).. well, on the price sensitive announcement is said the board voted for it unanimously....(to consider the redomicile)....

And I am not a proxy for Steve Liebeskind, I am simply a shareholder who desperately wants to see change, and I think he will be able to help with that.

Simple as that.....

 

[JoMo68]

I apologized for me email to him thinking it was someone else and he responded

View attachment 83567

Well he hasn’t responded to me I was very polite