Ann: Change of Director's Interest Notice - Van Der Made, page-230

Hi Green56FJ , I’m not 100% sold on your theory being “ the cost of needing to sell at this point in time “ , $420,000 is a lot of money in anyone’s language . My rationale that Peter has taken a hit on behalf of all shareholders may be supported looking at the below information . The first slide clearly identifies that LDA invest in growth and expansion opportunities . In the second slide we have a quote from Anthony Romano from LDA stating that they see Brainchip as a valuable asset in their portfolio . The third slide is an extract from an email conversation between Ken Scarince and myself , you will note that Ken indicated that Brainchip may negotiate an extension to the original agreement date , note at the time of this email an extension was not plan A , but have things changed ?

Did LDA plan to keep within their growth portfolio the 9.2 million dollar , minimum remaining commitment ?
Did Brainchip approach LDA for an extension due to the low share price , to reduce dilution on behalf of all shareholders ?
Did LDA hesitate at the extension idea , why would they want to pay a premium for shares intended for their own portfolio ?
Has Peter solved the problem at his own expense , by providing LDA a similar value deal to satisfy the planned portfolio ?

Also note , that I also believe when Brainchip goes back to the LDA well to provide funding for commercialisation activities , that they are going to execute a new deal to the higher side of available funding , so a higher share price is important for all shareholders due to dilution .

At this stage , it is all guesswork , but I believe Peter has done what is best for his company , LDA and shareholders .
















All in my opinion ......