rgupta
Regular
Can you show us vanguard with 50 million shares of brn.Doesn't Vanguard already own over 50 million shares in BRN and aren't they an institutional fund ?
Also doesn't point 2 somewhat address this View attachment 78278
Can you show us vanguard with 50 million shares of brn.Doesn't Vanguard already own over 50 million shares in BRN and aren't they an institutional fund ?
Also doesn't point 2 somewhat address this View attachment 78278
Happened to me with IHL (biotech) on Asx then moved to US over a year ago under IXHL- lost value and I still have no idea where my shares are. Be it May I have been slack in retrieving access to them, but contacting Computershare in the US has been a pain in the ass. Dual would have been my preference, even for this aspect. Also, will be pissed if my super here is affected. I was just leaving there for 20 more years of rainy days.Hi Dodgy.
Absolutely correct regarding consolidation in theory.
Perhaps I have just been unlucky, but in each case where I have experienced it in practice, the share price pretty quickly retreated leaving me in a worse position. And I have heard many similar reports from others, although I do not know the veracity of their claims.
In truth, given my relatively small sample of lived experience, perhaps others could inform us all of their experience of consolidation?
Particularly interested in these kind of artificial circumstances where it is done just to engineer a particular share price to accomodate a listing rule.
Great analysis entertec,From ChatGPT
The re-domiciling of BrainChip to the U.S. and the transition from the ASX to a U.S. stock exchange could have significant implications for short sellers. Here’s how it might play out:
1. What Happens to Existing Short Positions?
Short sellers profit by borrowing shares, selling them at a higher price, and then buying them back later at a lower price. However, when a company delists and moves to a new exchange:
- Short positions need to be closed out before delisting – If BrainChip shares are removed from the ASX, short sellers will likely be forced to cover (buy back) their positions before the delisting date. This can cause a short squeeze if many need to buy shares at once, driving the price up.
- New U.S. shares may not be borrowable immediately – Even if the company relists on a U.S. exchange, the ability to short the stock depends on brokers having available shares to lend. If these are not readily available, shorting could become more difficult, at least temporarily.
2. Could Short Sellers Get Caught Out?
Yes, here’s how:
- Forced Buybacks (Short Squeeze) – If short sellers are unable to roll over their positions due to the ASX delisting, they will be forced to buy shares before the transition, potentially pushing prices up.
- Change in Market Dynamics – The U.S. market generally has more institutional investors who may have a different valuation perspective, reducing speculative shorting pressure.
- Different Regulatory Environment – The U.S. has different short-selling regulations, including tighter enforcement of naked short selling (selling shares without actually borrowing them). If BrainChip moves to an exchange like the NASDAQ or NYSE, this could limit some of the aggressive shorting seen on the ASX.
3. Possible Risks for Short Sellers
- Unexpected Buy Orders – If BrainChip announces a buyout, new partnerships, or U.S. institutional interest, short sellers may find themselves covering at much higher prices.
- Regulatory Hurdles – The SEC has been more aggressive in cracking down on market manipulation. Any hedge funds using illegal tactics might face investigations.
- Retail and Institutional Buying Pressure – The stock's exposure to U.S. technology investors (who may value AI companies differently) could make it harder for short sellers to justify their positions.
4. Will They Be Forced to Cover?
Most likely, yes—at least on the ASX. Short sellers holding positions on ASX-listed BRN will need to close their trades before the stock delists. Some may try to reopen short positions on the U.S. exchange, but if the stock gains buying momentum (from retail or institutional investors), it could become riskier for them.
5. Could This Create a Short Squeeze?
- If a large number of shorts rush to close their positions before the ASX delisting, the share price could spike sharply in the short term.
- If there’s a scarcity of available shares to short on the U.S. exchange, shorting could become less aggressive post-move.
Bottom Line
The re-domiciling could put short sellers in a tight spot, especially if they are forced to close their positions before the ASX delisting. While some may re-establish positions on the U.S. exchange, changes in market participants, regulation, and potential new investor interest could alter the stock’s dynamics significantly. If BrainChip executes this transition well, shorters could lose their grip on the stock, at least temporarily.
My experiences, of which I have several, are admittedly mostly to do with struggling mining companies "restructuring" but there "is" a tech company thrown in there (9SP).Hi Dodgy.
Absolutely correct regarding consolidation in theory.
Perhaps I have just been unlucky, but in each case where I have experienced it in practice, the share price pretty quickly retreated leaving me in a worse position. And I have heard many similar reports from others, although I do not know the veracity of their claims.
In truth, given my relatively small sample of lived experience, perhaps others could inform us all of their experience of consolidation?
Particularly interested in these kind of artificial circumstances where it is done just to engineer a particular share price to accomodate a listing rule.
Thanks mateAs I understand it, if you do nothing, your shares and the BrainChip listing on the ASX will simply cease to exist at a certain point and be replaced by an equivalent number of shares in the new American entity trading on an as yet unknown American exchange.
Can you show us vanguard with 50 million shares of brn.
Hi Dingo.My experiences, of which I have several, are admittedly mostly to do with struggling mining companies "restructuring" but there "is" a tech company thrown in there (9SP).
Well it sure would be good if the sp was actually $6aud then there would be no need for any share consolidation and would there and the number of shares would remaining the same over 1000mill shares."The statement that you will own the same proportion of the company after as before is verifiably true.
Any issue of further shares is a separate action, not part of consolidation"
Yes, both true, but an issue of further shares obviously dilutes share holdings.
This is as of January 2025.
I haven't fully read it and am only "rotten" apple picking.
The AUD adjusted share price for listing is $6.
We could easily "be" $1, within the next 12 months.
This would require a share consolidation of 6 to 1.
This would result in 300 million shares and the basic requirements for liquidity are having 1250 million unrestricted publicly held shares.
In this scenario, they would need to issue 950 million more shares.
Many of these, could be issued at "no cost" to Company employees and upper management, as part of the deal and a large quantity also sold in the US IPO (obviously no more cash concerns).
But the net result to current share holders, is a dilution of over 75%.
I understand the Company being hamstrung by ASX requirements.
My experience has without exception, always been negative.Hi Dingo.
Was your experience of consolidation positive or negative or mixed?
Gosh, I hope you're right there Bravo.My "women’s intuition" is telling me this must be good news.
I wouldn’t be shocked if that long-awaited 5-year license gets inked in the next few months, conveniently before the AGM in May.
Let’s not forget that the BOD needs shareholder approval to move forward. And what better way to win us over for a US redomicile than by serving up a massive, juicy incentive first?
My money’s on Arm. It just makes sense to me, given projects like Stargate, Izanagi, the US Iron Dome defense system, and SoftBank/Arm’s grand vision of rolling out their own chips.
As always, time will reveal all.
GLTAH!
Consolidation has never been positive in my 20 odd years experience. ALWAYS leads to dilution at some point from what I have witnessed. Worse still is consolidated notes. If any company you are involved with issues these it is time to get out.......it is the death rattle. Never seen a company come out of these it is just a golden handshake for the BOD. Take my advice but DYORHi Dodgy.
Absolutely correct regarding consolidation in theory.
Perhaps I have just been unlucky, but in each case where I have experienced it in practice, the share price pretty quickly retreated leaving me in a worse position. And I have heard many similar reports from others, although I do not know the veracity of their claims.
In truth, given my relatively small sample of lived experience, perhaps others could inform us all of their experience of consolidation?
Particularly interested in these kind of artificial circumstances where it is done just to engineer a particular share price to accomodate a listing rule.
Elon Musk is in TexasYou are all assuming that they are looking at a Nasdaq listing.
The timing here works out as well.
View attachment 78279
View attachment 78280
View attachment 78281
I like your women's intuition! I really hope you are right. Shareholders must approve, so there must be some incentive otherwise it will never get across the line.My "women’s intuition" is telling me this must be good news.
I wouldn’t be shocked if that long-awaited 5-year license gets inked in the next few months, conveniently before the AGM in May.
Let’s not forget that the BOD needs shareholder approval to move forward. And what better way to win us over for a US redomicile than by serving up a massive, juicy incentive first?
My money’s on Arm. It just makes sense to me, given projects like Stargate, Izanagi, the US Iron Dome defense system, and SoftBank/Arm’s grand vision of rolling out their own chips.
As always, time will reveal all.
GLTAH!