A HEADS UP, page-73

Mr. ManChild001, ....Primarily because I believe that investing in all stocks is risky. The biggest risk is that any stock can go to zero. Of course that is unlikely in many companies like Apple, Boeing, Fedex, or Pfizer, for example. Then you add in that Brainchip has been in research & development for almost a decade as a publicly traded company with no product and zero revenue to speak of, but big promise and cutting edge technology and first leader status. Now we find out that we have a product offering that is being QC'd by home office. Contracts for production and customers lined up portends imminent revenue stream. If this plays out as I and every other of the companies 37,000 +\- owners hopes, the stock should go higher.

But competitors are nipping at our heals and the competitive landscape is rife with companies racing to achieve cutting " edge " technology, because, well ...., they see the writing on the edge devices wall just like Brainchip does. And some of these companies can throw gobs of money around to solve it. And yes, patents are good. A mitigator to this competition, if you will. But the competitive risk is a clear and present danger to be overly dramatic.

Another big risk in my opinion is the huge number of shares outstanding for our little Brainchip. It will take heavy institutional buying to propel this equity higher. And I do not see heavy institutional buying at the moment. So another related possible risk is that a reverse stock split could occur. The jury is "split" as to whether a reverse split is a death knell to an equity or not. Such a split would have no inherent effect on the the companies value with market cap remaining the same, according to Investopedia. Such a split would boost our share price and hopefully make our equity more attractive in the market place. Trading volume seems okay on the Australian market. The trading volume on the dysfunctional (imo) OTC in the U.S. is pathetic and embarrassing. Let's go Integrous.

Another risk is that if one of our founders who are not spring chickens chooses to retire, how might investors react? Since no one knows, that is a potential risk. That we have Akida 1000 almost in production does mitigate this possibility I realize. Others might freak.

Then you can look at individual investors and wonder what is their average cost and is that average cost a risk? Perhaps.

Some on the HC forum apparently have average cost numbers in the single cent range. God bless them those smart sons of a gun. And lucky them. They obviously have less at risk than others even though they may have exposure of millions of shares versus thousands like I and others have, but at a much higher average cost. If I had 500,000 shares at an average cost of say, 5 cents per share, that's a cost of 25,000 dollars. A lot of money to be sure. But the risk-reward is skewed in favor of the investor in this case. If the stock goes to just $1.00 that is a $500,000 on a 25,000 dollar gamble. Imressive risk / reward return.

But with these risks in mind and my eyes wide open, and the fine hounds on the hunt for positive news and impressive research found on the HC Brainchip threads I have entered the risky investment waters on the good ship HMS Brainchip barque and am sailing home to old Maui on four strong winds (hat tips to Stan Rodgers and Ian & Sylvia). The stock is risky but is one I am willing to risk an investment in. Regards, dippY