Hi Dave,
These facts are generally known on this site.
Every quarter there is a great kerfuffle about the financials and 2 recent AGMs have seen attempts to unseat the board, yet you purport to be guided by the financials while asserting that you have not seen any comments on TSEx on the financial performance of the company, and then propose to educate the chippies and techies at the TSEx BRN blog about the financial performance of the company.
If someone has not seen comments here on the financial performance they have not been paying attention.
In assessing a pre-revenue tech company, it is important to take account of the technical and marketing progress of the company as well as its financials. Buying into a pre-revenue tech startup cannot be based on the financials. It can only be based on the perceived market potential. That can be problematic where there is no established market for the tech. Basically all you have to go on is the company press releases, potential customer reactions, and the assessment of commentators experienced in the field. The comments of ananymous blog posters should be taken heavily salted. By the same token, using financials as the primary assessment tool for pre-revenue startups will always yield the same result, but consistency does not equate to accuracy.
The annual "losses" are investments in the company's future. Most of the money goes on R&D and marketing and the necessary management and support.
Yes, we all expected and/or hoped that the company would be in the black a while ago, but this has been a learning process for us all, including management. The business of IP licensing has a very small customer base, requiring both technical knowhow and deep pockets. Most of the customer base were already committed to 5 year plans or similar for product development, so I was critical of throwing out the Akida 1 SoC baby with the bathwater. But, at that time, I was not aware of the Akida 2/TENNs development, which among other things stymied at least one commercial deal for Akida 1, while at the same time demanding a great deal of development work. This in turn made IP licensing more difficult because we were now, to some extent, selling a pig in a poke as there was no SoC to demonstrate the new technology. [Edit: More recently the company announced a cloud based FPGA in an attempt to overcome this.]
More recently, BRN announced a new software product line. This has a much shorter time to market with a much larger potential customer base and lower barriers to entry, while being flexibly updatable to take account of the rapidly evolving technology. It also dovetailes with the near term development plans for some of our major EAPs, such as those working in the SDV field.
Our tech can be applied to interpret the output of any type of sensor, such as cameras, video, microphones, etc, and it is compatible with all types of processors, including MPU, CPU and GPU. There are several potential customers including UAF, DoE, ESA actively assessing the tech, as well as several commercial partnerships developing products including our tech.
It's always difficult to assess the motivation of a holder who criticizes their own stock holding, especially when the price is rising after an extended price depression.
'Substantial announcement' 
.
