2025 BrainChip Discussion, page-4211

Would you invest new funds into a company if it had any of the current directors of this one on its board?

It’s a valid question — because people matter when it comes to investing. Boards shape culture, guide disclosure, and set the tone for how seriously a company engages with its shareholders. What we’ve witnessed here, unfortunately, is a series of missteps that suggest a worrying absence of governance experience, investor-facing capability, and basic empathy for long-term holders.

What the individual members of this board have done is create a report card for each of themselves that is on view for potential new board positions. A report card that is seriously underwhelming and is marked with a lot of red ink.

Take, for instance, the redomiciling announcement issued via the ASX. A release of that significance, carrying direct implications for shareholder rights and the company’s strategic direction, was put out with zero pre-consultation, no contextual follow-up, and seemingly no awareness of the concern it might raise among Australian shareholders — who still form the bulk of the registry. When clarification was eventually offered, it contradicted the original announcement. That isn’t just a communications failure — it’s a governance one.

What this tells us is that, absent proper investor relations oversight and local market understanding, a board can inadvertently make itself a long-term liability. When directors repeatedly demonstrate a lack of awareness about how their actions affect investor confidence, it’s only natural for shareholders to question not just the company’s direction — but whether those individuals should be entrusted with oversight roles at all.

In this case, the damage may already be done.

If trust is a precondition for capital, then the trust deficit here is real. And unless meaningful changes are made, many of us would likely think twice before backing a board with this kind of track record — whether here or anywhere else.