As well as other DOD contracts.
news update:
http://www.forceprotectioninc.com/news/in_news.html
chart:
BUSINESS SUMMARY
Force Protection, Inc. engages in the design, manufacture, and marketing of mine and blast protected vehicles in the United States, South Africa, and England. The company's vehicles are designed to protect personnel during transport, removal of unexploded ordnance, rout clearance, humanitarian de-mining, and other missions that require protection from landmines and hostile fire. Its products include Buffalo, a heavy weight vehicle designed principally for mine clearing activities; and Cougar, which is used for urban patrol, route clearance support, utility transport, and special unit activities. Force Protection is headquartered in Ladson, South Carolina.
Iraq is still a very dangerous place to be. A lot of bombings going on, people are dying, and even the vehicles uses by US Marines & Army are not tough enough to withstand the bomb blast. That is why (FRPT) Force protection Inc. comes into play. Their Truck Transporter, Fully armored can withstand bomb blast. Force protection Inc. was featured recently in Discovery Channel, CBS, CNN, FOX, & CNBC.
Force Protection's Buffalo mine clearance and Cougar EOD and combat team transport vehicle series have been used by U.S. and Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan for nearly three years. More than 90 vehicles are currently in use in active operations. That number is expected to more than double in the second quarter of 2006.
Force Protection delivered more than 70 vehicles during 2005 alone, an increase of 500 percent from the previous year. Its workforce, which stood at 180 at the end of 2004, has increased to more than 300. Production capacity has also increased, with the company producing three vehicles per week, up from less than one vehicle per week a year ago
Some good news recently: read the whole article - http://finance.yahoo.com/q/h?s=FRPT.OB
Force Protection Announces New Director - has named former Marine Corps Major General Jack A. Davis (Retired)
Force Protection Records Substantial '05 Growth
Force Protection Announces New Finance VP
I've included Some pictures of the armored truck: http://www.forceprotection.net/
we got volume in the last 2 trading days ;) :D ;D
A lot good news in this stock recently. is this a good long-term investment?
National Review Online Features Force Protection Blast Protection Technology
Wednesday December 21, 3:51 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 21, 2005--A prominent Web site, National Review Online, said today that Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) and its specialty armored vehicle "may well be the replacement for the up-armored Humvee" in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.
ADVERTISEMENT
NRO noted that Force Protection produces larger-scale vehicles than the Humvee - the Buffalo mine clearance vehicle and the Cougar combat engineer and EOD team transport - and is developing a Mine-protected Utility Vehicle/Rapid Deployable (MUV-R) as a lighter-weight personnel carrier that incorporates the same protective capabilities as its larger counterparts. There have been no fatalities in Force Protection vehicles in more than two years of use by U.S. forces.
National Review cited Force Protection's development of the MUV-R as a new armored vehicle with the same speed, climb, and general off-road performance capabilities as the Humvee. At 10 to 12 tons, the MUV-R is designed to meet these requirements as well as offer mine and blast protection. In addition, it incorporates a roof-mounted weapons system that is remotely controlled by the right front-seat passenger.
"A 360-degree battlefield requires vehicles small enough to enable a full range of motion and strong enough to take the punch of an IED," said Force Protection Vice President Michael Aldrich. "A lighter weight troop carrier is designed to fill this critical role. The MUV-R is being developed with that purpose in mind, and will likely be ready for active operations near the end of 2006."
South Carolina-based Force Protection's vehicles have been used by all branches of the military in mine clearance, EOD and Combat Engineer team operations in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003.
I have bought FRPT before the reverse split last february & sold it just after the reverse split... but then i have 1 share left in my account @ TDWaterhouse, I don't know what happened, maybe my broker or the company gave me that share...
Looking to add shares on tuesday ;)
Force Protection's infrastructure, workforce, and production capacity have expanded dramatically since 2003. The addition of Hamilton is the company's latest step to build a strong financial team to plan, analyze, and control its continued growth.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060109/20060109005338.html?.v=1
To quote directly from an article in the January 7, 2006 New York Times, "The production of a new armored truck called the Cougar, which military officials said had so far withstood every insurgent attack............."
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=67
READ THIS ARTICLE:
As roadside bombs remain the No. 1 killer of U.S. troops in Iraq, the route-clearing missions are of vital importance in a city that continues to be a battleground. On some nights, crews find as many as five roadside bombs in just a few hours. On other nights, they come up empty-handed.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=66
Deadly attacks prompt safer combat vehicles
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051229-122509-5557r.htm
Financial Statements
Hey Terlisa,
This is a local company here in Charleston, when they were at the old navy base here I got a chance to see the operation, a friend had a business in the same building. I wasn't impressed, they were basically just welding onto standard truck chassis. This was at the height of the uproar over the lack of protection in the current Humvees and they got a lot of press at the time. They were seen as a stop gap measure until all the up armored Humvees were deployed. Just from the people I know that worked for them they were known for paying low wages and had a high turnover rate.
Since their move (down the street from my parents) to the old GE Turbine plant
in Ladson I have not heard much about them but will go over and see what is new.
The stock may move in the short term and a new contract is good. This may be a good play but I would watch for news about some of the larger companies coming out with purpose built armored vehicles instead of FRPT's off the shelf modified vehicles. This is a small company and when the big boys come out with a purpose built vehicle it will not be good for this company.
Long term no, but count me in for the short term.
Thanks boatguy@
Interesting press release:
Force Protection Armored Vehicles Win Praise from Combat Troops in Iraq
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060118/20060118005567.html?.v=1
Ha, ha, ha.... never been wrong, never been right...just the right time baby ;)
not too bad to make 30% profit in 3 days...I will hold for now, i got this strong feeling this baby will come up @ 1.70 range or maybe $2 but i will watch carefully not to let this profit turn into a loss.... CHIAO BABY!!! ;) :D ;D
Ok.. let's look deeper on the chart of FRPT & decide where to take profit ;)
--- There is Resistance around $1.70.... I think 1.40-1.50 is reasonable to take profit (i'll take it) ;)
-- FRPT close @ HOD @ $1.32 ;) I think this baby will rock some more on monday
I'm currently sitting @ 32% profit in 3 sessions ;)
Prepare to take profit ;) If things goes OK @ open ...(HOLD)... I still want to see FRPT goes to 1.60 - 1.70 range .... Volume still strong you know ;) :D ;D
The last two candlesticks formed a Bearish (Doji) Star Pattern . This is a bearish reversal pattern that marks a potential change in trend. However, its reliability is not very high and it requires confirmation.
applaud for yor analysis and congrats to your profits
just fyi ;)
FRPT: Integrated Logistics Support Reports Dramatic Expansion
Tuesday , January 24, 2006 08:44 ET
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) reported a dramatic increase in its Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) business segment. ILS includes spare parts, battle damage repair, and preventive maintenance, as well as forward positioning of critical vehicle components. "This part of our business is growing rapidly," said Force Protection ILS Vice President Murray Hammick. "When you realize that the company's total revenue for fiscal year 2004 was less than the net total revenue generated by ILS alone in 2005, it gets quite exciting."
As part of contracts with both the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps, Force Protection has sent 19 of its employees to Iraq as field service representatives. "The number of field service representatives is growing monthly," noted Hammick. "We are seeing rapid growth as the rate of vehicle operations increases."
Thanks & applaud for the info La-onda ;).....
FRPT currently up 7.46%...& i'm still holding it ;)
47% profit in 5 sessions... i'll take it ;)
Quote from: Terlisa on January 24, 2006, 11:24:55 PM
47% profit in 5 sessions... i'll take it ;)
Sold FRPT @ 1.45...45% profit ;) :D
FRPT reach my target @ 1.70.... i sold early... but no regrets better than nothing ;)
Recent news for FRPT
2006-02-08 See all News
08:10:01 - Wednesday
Force Protection, Inc. Confirms $21 Million Contract for Buffalo Armored Vehicles; First Delivery Order for Route Clearance Defined and Received
Business Editors / Defense Writers
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 8, 2006--
The U.S. Army has issued an initial order to Force
Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT) for approximately 19 Buffalo mine
clearance vehicles to be used in Iraq and Afghanistan, the company
announced today. The order for vehicles, training and field support is
the first given under a procurement contract and is worth an estimated
$21 million.
"We are encouraged by this order and the fact that it has come so
quickly after the procurement contract was announced," said Force
Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "This is a clear indicator that the
critical need for the Buffalo continues to increase, and we will
respond accordingly by delivering the first vehicles to the Army in
the next 30 days."
The Buffalo was first deployed with the Army Corps of Engineers in
2003. This is the first time, however, that the Army's Tank-automotive
and Armaments Command in Warren, Michigan has placed an order.
"Force Protection has the necessary infrastructure in place to
meet customer requirements for both the Buffalo and Cougar series,"
said McGilton. "The processes and resources are unique to each
vehicle. We will be able to maximize already-existing Buffalo
production cells while moving forward on expansion of multiple Cougar
production lines. These distinctions are necessary due to the
dramatically larger market represented by Cougar and its multiple
configurations."
Since its inception in 1997, Force Protection has become the
nation's leading center for research against IEDs and blast protection
technology.
About Force Protection
Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected
vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles
are protected against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised
Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs).
Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technology is among
the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside
Charleston, S.C.
For more information on Force Protection
FRPT: Hits February Production Goals
Wednesday, March 01, 2006 08:52 ET
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) announced it has met production objectives for the month of February. The company, which supplies blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles to all branches of the U.S. armed forces, delivered 15 Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRVs) to the government in February alone. To date, Force Protection has delivered 28 vehicles since the beginning of the year.
"We have systematically built a foundation to support the increasing demand for our vehicles," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "Our objective is to meet the requirements of an assembly-line manufacturer. We know that the ability to meet higher production volumes is important to our customers. We believe it additionally demonstrates that our expanded plant capacity is ready for higher volume, follow-on orders. The steadily improving production numbers since fall of last year clearly show that this objective is being accomplished."
Second round & second profit coming up :D ;D
Heavy Volume!! Heavy Volume...Breakout!!...Breakout!!..
50 Million Contract for armored vehicle ;) http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=FRPT.OB
Price went up above 50(SMA)
Terlisa great chart!
I found this also...and jumped in today... ;)
Quote from: ket1390 on May 04, 2006, 11:41:30 AM
Terlisa great chart!
I found this also...and jumped in today... ;)
1) Chart is looking pretty good & I like it very much ;)
2) Price is above moving averages...VERY BULLISH
3) Volume for YESTERDAY & TODAY that's the RECORD Volume for FRPT ----> something is cookin'.....
4) Golden Cross ---> first week of March ;)
FRPT up 5.11% today
My armored vehicle stock is currently up 9.72%
UP gain 9.58%
It's now up 13.03%
It's very hard to decide when to take profit especially when EMA(200)
WALL is hovering above @ 3.05
WHOAA... reach 3.07 17.62%
[/size]
Awesome call!! UP 17% :)
Ohh man... this is great break the resistance EMA(200) ..I hope it holds
up 22.29%
I'm out... looks like it's going back to the WALL EMA(200) ;)
Good trade...
This thing got even hotter after I sold it.... Price rocketed just like PTSC ;)
up over 15%
this stock is powerful...had consolidated very nice at 2.00....then boom up.....i keep the half for long term....volume is powerful...someone knows something...more orders maybe from government follow...... :o
applaud >:D >:D
what about todays price action?
I started buying FRPT.OB about about six weeks ago but just in the last two weeks I began to get an idea what the company really may be -- one of those companies that sometimes we find after the fact that went from below a dollar a share to $30 a share!
The following senate mark-up page 18 shows that an additional $100 million is being directly allocated for FRTP
http://armed-services.senate.gov/press/07mark.pdf
The final version of the bill should be complete and voted on by most likely the end of May.
May 31 the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle contract will be awarded to someone and it might be FRPT. The contract will be initially for around $47 million but will probably be multi-year.
In addition, FRPT may get additional contracts beyond the $100 million mentioned in the Senate Armed forces mark-up. The Army is going to award a contract for 765 vehicles and FRPT.ob is bidding on that contract. The contract should be awarded by the end of may.
The point is that there are several opportunities for FRPT to get major contracts. If they get any of the major contracts, those contracts will likely become multi-year contracts because the military likes to have a lot of the same kind of vehicles. It makes logistics much simpler.
Any large multi-year contract means that FRPT goes from a small obscure company to a major player in military armored vehicle supply.
After that, FRPT either get purchased (for a huge premium) or they apply for listing and get listed on a major exchange and are very profitable.
Form 10-Q for FORCE PROTECTION INC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15-May-2006
Quarterly Report
ITEM 2 - MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Report contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements concerning possible or assumed future results of operations and those preceded by, followed by or that include the words "believes," "could," "expects," "intends," "anticipates," or similar expressions. Our actual results could differ materially from these anticipated in the forward-looking statements for many reasons including our ability to raise capital when necessary; availability of parts and raw materials for our products; continued customer acceptance of our products; on-going success of our research and development efforts and other risks described elsewhere in this report. Although we believe the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, they relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made, and our future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements may not meet these expectations. We do not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this document to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations, except as required by law.
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, issued Financial Reporting release No. 60, "Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure About Critical Accounting Policies," or FRR 60, suggesting companies provide additional disclosure and commentary on their most critical accounting policies. In FRR 60, the SEC defined the most critical accounting policies as the ones that are most important to the portrayal of a company's financial condition and operating results, and require management to make its most difficult and subjective judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates of matters that are inherently uncertain. The methods, estimates and judgments we use in applying these most critical accounting policies have a significant impact on the results we report in our financial statements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
As a general rule, financial information is accounted for and based on cost, not current market value. Revenues and gains should be matched using the accrual method with the expenses giving rise to the revenues and gains to determine earnings for the period. Expenses are necessarily incurred to produce revenue. Expenses are then "matched" in the same accounting period against the revenue generated. Revenues are recognized when they are earned and expenses are recognized in the same period as the related revenue (matching or using a systematic and rational allocation or expensing in the period in which they expire), not necessarily in the period in which we receive or expend cash.
We believe the following critical accounting policies and procedures, among others, affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements:
† Revenue recognition;
† Inventory cost and Associated Reserves; and
† Allocation of direct and indirect cost of sales.
We recognize revenue upon formal acceptance of vehicles by customers. We receive performance based payments from the U.S. Army and U.S. Marines and record such payments as deferred revenue, carrying them on our balance sheet as such until acceptance by the customer.
In December 2004, FASB issued Statement No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, which establishes accounting standards for transactions in which an entity receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of the entity or
(b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the entity's equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of equity instruments. Effective in the third quarter of 2005, SFAS 123(R) will require us to recognize the grant-date fair value of stock options and equity based compensation issued to employees in the statement of operations. The statement also requires that such transactions be accounted for using the fair-value-based method, thereby eliminating use of the intrinsic method of accounting in APB No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, which was permitted under Statement 123, as originally issued. To date, we have expensed stock based compensation on the intrinsic method. We are currently evaluating the impact of Statement No. 123 (R) on our financial condition and results of operations.
In November 2004, the FASB issued Statement No. 151, Inventory Costs, to amend the guidance in Chapter 4, Inventory Pricing, of the FASB Accounting Research Bulletin No. 43, Restatement and Revision of Accounting Research Bulletins, which will become effective for us in fiscal year 2006. Statement No. 151 clarifies the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted materials. The Statement requires that those items be recognized as current-period charges. Additionally, Statement No. 151 requires that allocation of fixed production overhead to the costs of conversion be based on normal capacity of the production facility. We are currently following Statement No. 151 and do not believe that Statement No. 151 will have a significant impact on our financial condition and results of operations.
Principles of Consolidation: The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Force Protection, Inc., and our two wholly owned subsidiaries, Force Protection Industries, Inc. (formerly Technical Solutions Group, Inc.) and TSG International, Inc. for the three month period ended March 31, 2006. All inter-company balances and transactions are eliminated in consolidation.
Cash Equivalents: For purposes of reporting cash flows, we consider all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents consist primarily of United States government securities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventories: Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. The cost is determined under the first-in, first-out, or FIFO, base valuation method.
Property, Plant and Equipment: Property and equipment are stated at cost or at the value of the operating agreement. We capitalize additions and improvements which include all material, labor and engineering cost to design, install or improve the asset. Routine repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred. The capitalization threshold is $2,000 and a useful life greater than one year. Depreciation and amortization are computed using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives:
Leasehold improvements 20 years
Furniture and fixtures 3 years
Machinery and equipment 7 years
Tooling and molds 7 years
Vehicles 5 years
Goodwill: Under SFAS No. 142. Goodwill and other Intangible Assets, all goodwill amortization ceased effective January 1, 2002. Rather, goodwill is now subject to only impairment reviews. A fair-value based test is applied at the reporting level. This test requires various judgments and estimates. A goodwill impairment loss will be recorded for any goodwill that is determined to be impaired. We follow SFAS 142, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, which requires us to test goodwill for potential impairment annually. When the carrying value exceeds fair value, the impairment is the difference between the carrying value of goodwill and the implied value. The implied value of goodwill is the difference between the fair value for the unit as a whole and the value of individual assets and liabilities using an "as-if" purchase price.
Estimates: The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Revenue Recognition: Our revenue is derived principally from the sale of our vehicles and associated spare parts and training services. Revenue from products and services is recognized at the time goods are shipped or services are provided to the customer, with an appropriate provision for returns and allowances. We receive performance based payments based on completion of specific milestones. These payments are recorded as Deferred Revenue and recognized on the profit and loss statement upon customer acceptance of the completed vehicle. It is our policy to not recognize revenue until customer acceptance. All advance payments are treated as "deferred revenue".
Dividend Policy: We have never declared or paid a cash dividend on our common stock, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to pay cash dividends on our common stock will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend upon our financial condition, operating results, capital requirements, restrictions contained in our agreements and other factors which our board of directors deems relevant. Under the terms of the Certificate of Designation for our Series D Convertible Preferred stock, we are obligated to pay a 6% dividend in cash or shares of common stock on the outstanding shares of Series D stock.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Overview: The Company returned to operating profitability for the three month period ended March 31, 2006, due to the increased production of our vehicles and the increased efficiency of our operations. Sales for this period from all sources generated gross revenue of $34,802,585 against which we incurred total cost of goods of $28,164,816 generating a gross profit of $6,637,769. We incurred G&A expenses of $5,859,538 plus R&D expenses in the amount of $663,590 resulting in an operating profit of $114,641. During this three month period, we delivered a total of 44 vehicles (1 Buffalo and 43 Cougar JERRV), and on February 3, 2006 we announced the award of a Letter Contract from the U.S. Army for the delivery of 19 Buffalo Vehicles with an option for an additional 22 vehicles,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
having a total estimated value of $35,000,000. In addition to operating profitability, we experienced positive cash flows from operations of $7,118,898 during the three month period ended March 31, 2006.
The following table sets forth our consolidated statements of operations for the three month period ended March 31 for the years 2005 and 2006. The discussion and analysis that follows should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this report.
Consolidated Statement of Operations
Three Month Period Ended
March 31, 2006 March 31, 2005 Difference % Change
Revenues $ 34,802,585 5,853,423 28,949,162 495 %
Cost of Sales 28,164,816 6,395,319 21,769,497 340 %
Gross Profit 6,637,769 (541,896 ) 7,179,665 1325 %
G.P. % 19 % (10 )%
G&A Expense $ 5,859,538 2,991,444 2,868,094 96 %
R&D Expense 663,590 210,855 452,735 215 %
Total G&A 6,523,128 3,202,299 3,320,829
Operating Profit (Loss) $ 114,641 (3,744,195 ) 3,858,836
Interest Expense $ (807,324 ) (277,256 ) (530,068 )
Other Income/(Expense) 27,049 38,541 (11,492 )
Net Income (Loss) $ (665,634 ) (3,982,910 ) 3,317,276
Revenue: Revenue for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 was $34,802,585 representing an increase of 495% compared to the same period in 2005. The increase during this period was due to the increased level of vehicle production we have achieved compared with last year, which is primarily the result of the JERRV contract, awarded in May 2005. Our revenue is derived from the sale of our Buffalo and Cougar vehicles and the sale of spare parts and other support services, however we do not record any income until our products are formally accepted by our customers The revenue reported during this three month period thus includes amounts we carried on our balance sheet during prior reporting periods as deferred revenue pending acceptance of the final products by the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marines. During the three month period ended March 31, 2006, we received approximately $33,000,000 from vehicle sales and $1,800,000 from the sale of spare parts and other support services. The revenue from the sale of spare parts has continuedd to increase over past quarters, driven by the increasing number of our vehicles delivered and deployed to areas of operations. We intend to continue to develop this spare parts business as an increasingly important part of our revenue base.
Cost of Sales: Cost of sales for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 was $28,164,816 representing an increase of $21,769,497 compared to the same period in 2005. The increase during this period was due to the increased level of vehicle production, and the corresponding increased cost of direct and indirect labor and material associated with our manufacturing activities. The cost of sales for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 was 81% of gross revenues for such three month period representing a 19% gross profit for this period, compared with cost of sales of 110% of gross revenues for the same period in 2005. This improvement in our gross profit is the result in part of increasing efficiency of our manufacturing operations. As we continue to expand our production capacity, we expect to achieve increased cost efficiency from volume purchasing, improvements in our
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
manufacturing processes and the allocation of indirect costs across a broader production base, resulting in a projected decrease in the cost of sales as a percentage of gross revenue.
General and Administrative Expenses: General and Administrative expenses for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 were $6,523,128 representing an increase of $3,320,829 compared to the same period in 2005. The G&A expenses for the period ended March 31, 2006 included $663,590 in research and development expense. We expect our General and Administrative expenses to increase over time as we continue to expand our production capacity to meet increasing sales demand, however we expect the percentage of our G&A expenses in relation to gross revenues to decrease as we achieve greater efficiencies in our operations. Thus, for example, during the three month period ended March 31, 2006, our General and Administrative expense was 19% of our gross revenue as compared with 54% for the same period in 2005.
Net Gain/(Loss): Net Loss for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 was $665,633 representing an improvement over the net loss of $3,982,910 incurred during the same period in 2005. The improved performance is due primarily to higher production volumes and improved operating cost efficiencies.
Backlog: On April 23, 2004 we announced a contract award to deliver Cougar Hardened Engineer Vehicles, or HEV, to the U. S. Marine Corps, of which fourteen were initially funded under the contract. On March 8, 2005 the U.S. Marine Corps exercised its option to increase the number of HEV vehicles by fourteen, for a total of twenty-eight vehicles. As of March 31, 2006 we delivered a total of twenty-seven HEV vehicles, and have a remaining backlog of one Cougar HEV vehicle to be delivered under this contract, with a value of approximately $400,000. On May 17, 2004 we announced the award of a contract to deliver twenty-one Buffalo vehicles to the U.S. Army and in October 2004 we were awarded a separate contract by the U.S. Army for an additional fifteen Buffalo vehicles. Initial deliveries under these two Buffalo contracts began during 2004 and 2005, and as of March 31, 2006 we have delivered all thirty-six Buffalo vehicles, leaving no backlog under these two contracts with the U.S. Army. During the second quarter of 2005 we announced the award of a new contract by the U.S. Marine Corps for delivery of one hundred twenty-two Cougar Joint EOD Rapid Response Vehicles ("JERRV") to be delivered during 2005 and 2006, with a total value (with associated spares parts and training) of $90,000,000. As of March 31, 2006, we have delivered 61 JERRV vehicles and have a remaining backlog of 61 vehicles under the JERRV contract with an approximate value of $45,000,000, including associated spares and support. During the three month period ended December 31, 2005, we also announced a new order from the U.S. Marine Corps. for the purchase of four Buffalo vehicles (with associated spares, service and training) for a total contract price of $3,852,026.00. We delivered all four of these Buffalo vehicles under such contract during 2005.
On February 3, 2006 we announced the award of a Letter Contract from the U.S. Army for the delivery of 19 Buffalo Vehicles with an option for an additional 27 vehicles. The Army subsequently reduced the number of the additional vehicles from 27 to 22, for a total of 41. The Letter Contract is subject to definitization of terms. Additionally, on March 2, 2006 we announced the award of a contract with the U. S. Army, whereby we agree to provide the Army with authorized stock list supplies to service its Buffalo route clearance vehicle for the sum of up to $5 million.
Future Results: During the remainder of calendar year 2006 we expect to have incurred the majority of our presently anticipated infra-structure expansion costs and to achieve a substantially increased level of vehicle production capacity, resulting in increased revenues and profitability for such upcoming period. Set out below is a table showing actual and projected deliveries of our vehicles during 2004, 2005 and 2006 based on our internal estimates although our actual results may vary depending upon parts and material availability, actual production schedules, production efficiencies and other contingencies discussed in this report.
Vehicle Deliveries 2004, 2005 & 2006
Actual Projected
2004 Q1-2005 Q2-2005 Q3-2005 Q4-2005 Q1-2006 Q2-2006 Q3-2006 Q4-2006
Buffalo 9 2 22 3 4 1 12 12 12
Cougar HEV 5 8 2 8 4 0 0 0 0
Cougar JERRV 0 0 0 2 16 43 62 60 60
Total 14 10 24 13 24 44 74 72 72
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRENDS, RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES
The results of our operations for the period ended March 31, 2006 reflect the continued transition from net losses associated with our start up period to profitability as we evolve to become a manufacturing facility with stable production capability. During 2004 we were awarded contracts by the U.S. Army for a total of thirty six Buffalos and by the U.S. Marines for twenty eight Cougars, and were able to build 14 vehicles during that year. In 2005 we produced a total of total of 71 vehicles, representing an increase of 407%. During the three month period ended March 31, 2006, we produced a total of 44 vehicles, representing an annualized increase of 248%, and we are on track to achieve a minimum production capacity of 24 vehicles per month. During 2005, as we were working to complete our 2004 backlog, we also undertook the work necessary to increase our production capacity to meet the demand for our vehicles under the JERRV contract for one hundred twenty-two Cougars awarded in May 2005. This included substantial vehicle and automotive engineering work, manufacturing engineering development, hiring and training workers and the expansion of our manufacturing and administrative facilities. While the JERRV contract reflects a broader, growing demand for our vehicles, we continued to face the challenge of expanding our manufacturing capacity to fully exploit this opportunity. During 2005 we moved aggressively to meet this challenge by expanding our facilities, improving our operating systems and refining our manufacturing processes. These activities required a significant commitment of short term resources, but have positioned us to reap a long-term benefit. The results for the first quarter of 2006 demonstrate that we are beginning to be in a position to reap such benefits, in the form of increased liquidity and operating profitability.
We recognize there are risks associated with our on-going expansion activities. We continue to rely upon the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps for 100% of our sales, and if either customer elected not to issue further orders to us it would have a dramatic negative impact upon our financial performance. In addition, if we are delayed in meeting the delivery schedule under the JERRV contract, we may be obligated to pay liquidated damages for any delayed vehicle, and in the event of any substantial failure to perform, the customer could cancel the contract and/or claim additional damages. Payment of liquidated damages could negatively impact our future liquidity, and since we are incurring significant costs associated with our expansion program based on the expectation of future contract revenues, loss of the JERRV contract would have a dramatic impact on both our liquidity and our financial performance. We currently do not have any reason to expect that our customers will choose to stop buying our vehicles or that the JERRV contract would be cancelled.
In the past, we have encountered some difficulties in securing the necessary components for our vehicles, for example armor steel, truck chassis, axle sets and ballistic glass. To mitigate this risk, we have identified multiple vendors for certain components to ensure we have alternate sources of supply if necessary. Additionally, we have implemented a program of advance purchasing and stockpiling critical materials. For example, we currently have pre-purchased steel and truck parts to ensure availability of material needed for current and potential future orders. While we do not currently expect the potential non-availability of parts or raw materials to materially affect our operations, there is a possibility that delays or increased costs could negatively impact our financial performance if circumstances change. Apart from the foregoing, the main uncertainty about our future operations is whether we will continue to receive additional orders for our vehicles. It is impossible to predict with certainty whether such future orders will be placed by existing or new customers. If we do not receive future orders, it is unlikely that our business will continue. However, we believe our vehicles provide proven blast and ballistic protection, and that for so long as there is a risk of bodily harm to service personnel from explosive blasts, there will be a market for our products.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Current Liquidity:For the three month period ended March 31, 2006, we had a starting cash balance of $1,217,509 and an ending cash balance of $6,146,738 representing a net increase in our cash position for such period of $4,929,229. During this period we incurred positive cash flows from operations of $7,198,742 and used $1,627,553
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in connection with our financing activities, including paying $1,250,000 of the principal amount due under our short term debt.
Future Liquidity:During the three month period ended March 31, 2006 we experienced positive cash flows from operations of $7,118,898 and were able to retire a portion of our short term debt. During this period, we continued to manage our accounts payable, and continued to factor our U.S. Government receivables under the Purchase and Sale Agreement with GC Financial Services, Inc. which allows us to receive payment within 24-48 hours of vehicle deliveries and reduces the impact of the government contract payment cycle on our short term liquidity. During the remainder of 2006 we expect the infra-structure expenses we have incurred in connection with our production ramp-up will begin to level off or decline and that we will continue to experience increased levels of positive cash flows from operations as we increase the volume of vehicle production. Such positive cash flows will allow us to pay down all or a portion of our short term debt and reduce the level of our accounts payable. In addition, we are also undertaking to secure long-term, asset-based debt financing to provide liquidity to support our continued development and growth.
Uncertainties:The amount of working capital that we will require depends on several factors, including without limitation, the extent and timing of sales of our products, future inventory costs, the timing and costs associated with the expansion of our manufacturing, development, engineering and customer support capabilities, the timing and cost of our product development and enhancement activities and our operating results. The realization of a major portion of the assets shown on our balance sheet is dependent upon the success of such future operations. During 2006 we expect to be able to generate cash flows from operations sufficient to satisfy our cash requirements, but if we are unable to do so, we may need to seek alternative sources of cash. Potential sources of such cash could include senior debt facilities, new lines of credit, or additional sales of our securities. If we raise funds through the sale of securities, the common stock currently outstanding could be diluted. There is a risk that such additional financing may not be available, or may not be available on acceptable terms, and the inability to obtain additional financing or generate sufficient cash from operations could require us to reduce or eliminate expenditures for capital equipment, research and development, production, or marketing of our products, or otherwise curtail or discontinue our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Inflation & Material Cost
We do not believe that inflation has had or is likely to have any significant impact on our revenues, and we currently are not facing any material shortages of material or parts. We currently have enough steel on hand or on order to manufacture our existing contracts, and we continue to purchase steel anticipating future requirements. If the price of steel increases significantly, the cost of our products could increase, and we may not be able to pass on this . . .
Force Protection, Inc. Announces Operating Profitability, Positive Cash Flows for First Quarter
Tuesday , May 16, 2006 07:45 ET
LADSON, S.C., May 16, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT) achieved operating profitability and positive cash flows from operations during the three-month period ending March 31, 2006 on total sales of $34.8 million. The company recorded a gross profit for the quarter of $6.6 million, an operating profit of $114,000 and positive cash flows from operations of $7.2 million. These results reflect the dramatic increase in vehicle production from the same period in 2005.
"We are extremely pleased to have such a strong sales performance thus far in FY06," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "This reflects the fact that our life-saving vehicles are being shipped to the troops in increasing numbers, and that awareness of the proven solution these vehicles provide to the problem of IEDs is also increasing."
Force Protection's net cash flow from operations in the first quarter was recorded at $7.2 million, compared with a loss from operations of $5.4 million in the first quarter of 2005. The company realized an overall net loss for the three-month period ended March 31, 2006 of $665,633, resulting from interest expenses incurred during the quarter.
"To achieve operating profitability is a significant milestone for Force Protection," said McGilton. "We are now seeing the benefit of the hard work we put in last year to develop and execute our production plan. We look forward to continuing this strong performance during 2006 as we establish greater production efficiencies and optimize our internal business processes."
Force Protection expects the number of its Cougar troop transport and Buffalo route clearance vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan to more than double by July 2006. There are currently more than 100 vehicles deployed in the war in Iraq.
is there somebody still invested??
nice chart IMO!
Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT), Tuesday, the shares closed up 5.48% or up $0.20 ending at $3.85. The volume was 413,636. On May 16th, the Company announced that it achieved operating profitability and positive cash flows from operations during the three-month period ending March 31, 2006 on total sales of $34.8 million. The company recorded a gross profit for the quarter of $6.6 million, an operating profit of $114,000 and positive cash flows from operations of $7.2 million. These results reflect the dramatic increase in vehicle production from the same period in 2005. "We are extremely pleased to have such a strong sales performance thus far in FY06," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "This reflects the fact that our life-saving vehicles are being shipped to the troops in increasing numbers, and that awareness of the proven solution these vehicles provide to the problem of IEDs is also increasing." Force Protection's net cash flow from operations in the first quarter was recorded at $7.2 million, compared with a loss from operations of $5.4 million in the first quarter of 2005. The company realized an overall net loss for the three-month period ended March 31, 2006 of $665,633, resulting from interest expenses incurred during the quarter. "To achieve operating profitability is a significant milestone for Force Protection," said McGilton. "We are now seeing the benefit of the hard work we put in last year to develop and execute our production plan. We look forward to continuing this strong performance during 2006 as we establish greater production efficiencies and optimize our internal business processes."
FRPT
and I didn´t pick them up yesterday..... :'(
i think this was a breakaway gap...we opened over the previous year high of 4.28....i missed it at the open.....but in the future every breakaway gap is a must buy for me at open ....i got it later 4.60....at least:) it seems this one is heading to 10 in the near future big momentum and volume...did not crash during the 6 red days of the correction in mid may....good sign anyway
Hit $5 with no news, high volume ;)
From the FORM 8-K ..this is a strong buy as market cap is just 180 mio....wow :o :o :o
On May 31, 2006 the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command ("TACOM") awarded BAE Systems Land & Armaments L.P. of York, Pa ("BAE") a delivery order in the amount of $180,503,000 as part of a $445,439,000 firm-fixed-price contract for the production and delivery of 378 Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles ("ILAV") to be delivered to the Iraqi National Army. Force Protection Industries ("FPI") has an agreement with BAE pursuant to which FPI will license to BAE the use of FPI's Cougar vehicle as the basis for the ILAV design, and will act as BAE's principal subcontractor to provide the manpower and other resources needed to produce 50% of the vehicles in Ladson South Carolina. FPI shall also provide 100% of the after sales service and support required under the TACOM agreement. FPI is in the process of finalizing the detailed terms and conditions of the subcontract with BAE, which will have an estimated value to FPI of approximately $55,000,000.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001104659%252D06%252D039233%252Etxt%26filepath%3D%255C2006%255C06%255C02%255C&symbol=FRPT
Cesar analysis ;) :
http://www.otcbbcoverage.com/stocks/index.php?topic=78.msg1190#msg1190
&
FRPT: Continues to Set Production Records in May
Monday , June 05, 2006 09:00 ET
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) has continued its record-setting production performance for the seventh straight month. The manufacturer presented 20 Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV) to the U.S. government in the month of May.
"Our ramped-up deliveries began in November 2005, and the sustainable rate we sought then is evident yet again," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "We receive constant communication from troops in the field that these vehicles are saving lives. Their safety has been and will continue to be the driving force behind our efforts to meet demand for this critically-needed equipment."
http://www.knobias.com/individual/public/news.htm?eid=3.1.976b235841b2390c5606a6e9e7b40be5eafbd3f2db368256317bc105c4c7e74f
judst a few slides, I have bought @ 4.83$
>:D
part 1:
part 2:
;D
part 3:
:)
potential market:
over and out 8)
Great growth stock !!!!!
Article from yesterday...........
Making mine-protected vehicles
By BRUCE SMITH
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
On the Web
www.forceprotectioninc.com
(Original publication: June 4, 2006)
LADSON, S.C. — Almost three years ago, about a dozen people working in a largely empty factory turned out one of a new breed of armored vehicle called the Cougar each month.
Now, Force Protection Industries Inc. employs 385 over three buildings and each day they build one of the large mine-resistant vehicles that are preserving the lives of soldiers and Marines in Iraq.
And there will be more workers lining up on the assembly floor soon.
BAE Systems Land & Armaments Operating Group has been awarded a $445 million contract to build light armored vehicles for the Iraqi Army, the Defense Department announced last week.
Force Protection is a subcontractor on the contract, which initially calls for 378 Cougars at $180 million, said Michael Aldrich, vice president of sales. Eventually, as many as 1,050 could be built.
"The bad guys don't like these vehicles," Aldrich said. "We are coming up on three years, and we have not had close to a fatality. The worst we have had is a broken wrist."
Technical Solutions Group, formed in 1997 in California, took over a former propeller shop on the old Navy base in North Charleston in 1999 where it worked on mine-resistant technology. Force Protection bought the company four years ago and in 2003 moved to the Ladson location to a plant that once produced General Electric turbine engines.
Force Protection achieved profitability in the first quarter of this year, recording a gross profit of $6.6 million on sales of almost $35 million and a net profit of $114,000, the result of a sharp increase in demand for the armored vehicles, according to a release from the company, which is traded over-the-counter.
The Cougar and its cousin, the Buffalo, which is about twice its size, have V-shaped hulls designed to help deflect the blasts of land mines and roadside bombs.
Most combat deaths in Iraq are caused by roadside bombs, which the military calls improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.
A 4-by-4 Cougar weighs about 12 tons and is equipped with tires that will run even when flat. It can resist the force of the equivalent of 30 pounds of TNT under any wheel and 15 pounds of TNT exploding beneath its hull, according to its specifications.
"They are highly effective vehicles for what they are designed to do," said Capt. Jeff Landis, a spokesman for the Marine Corps Systems Command, who said the vehicles are generally used for escort and mine clearing.
There are more than 130 Cougars and Buffalos in Afghanistan and Iraq. The vehicles have taken about 1,000 IED hits without a loss of life, said Wayne Phillips, a company vice president in charge of Marine Corps programs.
"The Cougar has opened the door for other possibilities," Landis said. "Here you have a completely armored vehicle that serves a great purpose and need in Iraq. It has provided a way ahead for us to look at other possibilities for a utility vehicle."
Those possibilities include vehicles to move cargo and troops, he said.
Force Protection is working on a prototype, dubbed the Mover, for a planned replacement of the Humvees used by the military.
The government will put out a request for proposals in November with production expected to start in 2008, said Phillips.
SPAR: Spartan Chassis Secures $45M Contract
Tuesday , June 06, 2006 09:55 ET
Spartan Chassis, Inc., a subsidiary of Spartan Motors, Inc. (SPAR), announced it has secured a role through BAE Systems to supply and integrate key chassis components and assist in the manufacturing of 378 Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles. The expected order placed with Spartan Chassis will be worth approximately $45 million.
The Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles are similar to the Cougar armored vehicles and include Force Protection's (FRPT) V-shaped hull designed to deflect the force of explosions away from passengers inside the armored hull. Spartan reported it will begin work on the contract in June 2006 and expects to complete the contract by May 2007.
insiders buying info:
http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=4213552
http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=4213588
http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=4213610
chart update:
detailed description about the BAE deal ($445.4M ILAV Contract) >:D
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/06/bae-delivering-a-cougar-variant-for-iraqs-4454m-ilav-contract/index.php
Iraq War, Hurricane Aid Agreement Reached
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer
9:19 PM PDT, June 8, 2006
WASHINGTON -- House and Senate Republican leaders Thursday finalized agreement on a long-sought $94.5 billion bill to pay for the war in Iraq and deliver a much-needed infusion of relief to Louisiana and other hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast states.
The bill won't clear Congress for President Bush's desk until next week, but the official submission of the deal eases Pentagon worries of a money crunch caused by weeks of delays in creating a compromise bill.
GOP leaders overcame the last snag to agreement -- insistence by two Senate GOP moderates that the bill include a promise to increase future spending on education and health programs -- by winning endorsement from Democratic Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Daniel Inouye of Hawaii.
The bill includes $65.8 billion for military operations and maintenance in Afghanistan and Iraq, personnel and energy costs and new weapons and ammunition and a $2 billion initiative to locate and disarm roadside bombs.
SHOULD BE GOOD FOR FPRT
link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-congress-iraq-katrina,1,5407710.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true
Three years on, hundreds make mine-protected vehicles2-10048
By Associated Press
Saturday, June 3, 2006 - Updated: 11:38 AM EST
LADSON, S.C. - Almost three years ago, about a dozen people working in a largely empty factory turned out one of a new breed of armored vehicle called the Cougar each month.
Now, Force Protection Industries Inc. employs 385 over three buildings and each day they build one of the large mine-resistant vehicles that are preserving the lives of soldiers and Marines in Iraq.
And there will be more workers lining up on the assembly floor soon.
BAE Systems Land & Armaments Operating Group has been awarded a $445 million contract to build light armored vehicles for the Iraqi Army, the Defense Department announced last week.
Force Protection is a subcontractor on the contract, which initially calls for 378 Cougars at $180 million, said Michael Aldrich, vice president of sales. Eventually, as many as 1,050 could be built.
"The bad guys don't like these vehicles," Aldrich said. "We are coming up on three years, and we have not had close to a fatality. The worst we have had is a broken wrist."
Technical Solutions Group, formed in 1997 in California, took over a former propeller shop on the old Navy base in North Charleston in 1999 where it worked on mine-resistant technology. Force Protection bought the company four years ago and in 2003, moved to the Ladson location to a plant that once produced General Electric turbine engines.
Force Protection achieved profitability in the first quarter of this year, recording a gross profit of $6.6 million on sales of almost $35 million and a net profit of $114,000, the result of a sharp increase in demand for the armored vehicles, according to a release from the company, which is traded over-the-counter.
The Cougar and its cousin the Buffalo, which is about twice its size, have V-shaped hulls designed to help deflect the blasts of land mines and roadside bombs.
Most combat deaths in Iraq are caused by roadside bombs, which the military calls improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.
A 4-by-4 Cougar weighs about 12 tons and is equipped with tires that will run even when flat. It can resist the force of the equivalent of 30 pounds of TNT under any wheel and 15 pounds of TNT exploding beneath its hull, according to its specifications.
"They are highly effective vehicles for what they are designed to do," said Capt. Jeff Landis, a spokesman for the Marine Corps Systems Command, who said the vehicles are generally used for escort and mine clearing. There are more than 130 Cougars and Buffalos in Afghanistan and Iraq. The vehicles have taken about 1,000 IED hits without a loss of life, said Wayne Phillips, a company vice president in charge of Marine Corps programs.
When America went to war in Iraq, "I don't think the IEDs were a surprise. I think the extent and sophistication of them were. I'm speaking as a civilian instead of a (retired) Marine colonel, but we probably did underestimate it," he said.
"The Cougar has opened the door for other possibilities," Landis said. "Here you have a completely armored vehicle that serves a great purpose and need in Iraq. It has provided a way ahead for us to look at other possibilities for a utility vehicle."
Those possibilities include vehicles to move cargo and troops, he said.
Force Protection is working on a prototype, dubbed the Mover, for a planned replacement of the Humvees used by the military.
The government will put out a request for proposals in November with production expected to start in 2008, said Phillips, who estimated there are about 15,000 Humvees now in service.
Spartan Chassis Inc. of Michigan builds the chassis for the Cougars. The armor is installed at the factory in Ladson, about 17 miles north of Charleston.
Roy Driggers, a former truck driver, has been with Force Protection almost from the start.
He first built the Buffalos then the Cougars and now works in quality control, testing the trucks, including a 50-mile run at highway speeds, before they are turned over to the military.
He likes building vehicles that save lives.
"You know where this is going and what it is for," Driggers said, adding he has six cousins and nephews serving in Iraq. "They may have a chance to ride in one of these."
But building a mine-resistant vehicle is about more than putting steel armor on a frame.
When a mine or IED explodes, a vehicle accelerates straight up or to the side, said Greg Gordon, a Force Protection engineer.
"If it's too high - especially in really light vehicles like unarmored Humvees - that acceleration can be enough to kill you. It breaks your neck or tears your heart away from all the veins in your chest," he said.
The design of Cougars, including the seats and the floor, help counter the effects of such acceleration, he said.
Force Protection has received a number of e-mail testimonials from troops in the field.
One, from Sgt. Chris Clair with a Marine explosive ordinance disposal team, described how a tire on a Cougar ran over mines placed in a hole in the pavement filled with water after a rain.
"Right after the explosion, the Cougar was driven for two miles on the three remaining tires at speeds in excess of 20 mph so that we could make it to a safe area," wrote Clair, who gave his location only as somewhere in Iraq.
He said the three Marines had slight concussions, but "if we had been in another type of vehicle ... the outcome would have been much worse."
link:
http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=142010&format=text
update:
Force Protection Displays New Armored Vehicle at National Exhibitions
FT. BRAGG, N.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 12, 2006--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT) will demonstrate advances in its blast protection technology by putting the Mine-resistant Utility Vehicle/Rapid Response (MUV-R) on display in major national exhibitions. The MUV-R will be featured at the IED 2006 Symposium & Expo at the Crown Center Expo Center at Fort Bragg, NC on June 12-14 and the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) Advance Planning Briefing to Industry (APBI) on June 19-22 in Tampa, FL.
The MUV-R is Force Protection's prototype vehicle offering for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) program, which is intended to replace the current, aging HMMWV fleet. It incorporates similar protection levels as the manufacturer's other vehicle series, the Buffalo route clearance and Cougar troop transport vehicles, which have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003.
"The MUV-R has been observed by key decision-makers involved in the HMMWV replacement effort, beginning with the NATC Technology Rodeo in Nevada," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "We have received universally positive feedback regarding the vehicle, with officials confirming that the MUV-R hit the nail on the head. We are excited to see what the future holds for this vehicle."
The MUV-R was one of a select group of vehicles presented at the NATC Rodeo. Force Protection was the only manufacturer asked to stay on-site an extra day to discuss details of the vehicle's construction and capabilities. The company has now been included in a small, select group of manufacturers asked for their input regarding the further development and definition of JLTV specifications.
"This is a major accomplishment for Force Protection to be consulted on the JLTV," said McGilton. "It validates the credibility that the company and its vehicles have earned both in testing and in combat."
chart update:
Yesterday´s Candlestick Patterns:
White Marubozu
FRPT: Secures License to Develop Patented Blast Manipulation Technology
Thursday , June 15, 2006 08:47 ET
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) announced that its wholly owned subsidiary, Force Protection Technologies Inc., has signed an agreement with South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research focusing on a patented blast manipulation technology applicable to wheeled and tracked vehicles.
Under the agreement, which is pending regulatory approval from South Africa's Reserve Bank, Force Protection will have the sole right to perform research and development, conduct testing on any aspect of the technology, and market the product in countries around the world.
&
Force Protection is developing a Mine-protected Utility Vehicle / Rapid Deployable (MUV-R) as a lighter-weight personnel carrier that incorporates the same protective capabilities as the Cougar. The MUV-R will have speed, climb, and general off-road performance capabilities comparable with the up-armored Humvee. Weighing 10 to 12 tons, the MUV-R will be designed to offer mine and blast protection. The vehicle will also be equipped with a roof-mounted remote controlled weapons station. The vehicle is expected to be ready for field testing by the end of 2006.
Photo here:
http://www.defense-update.com/products/m/MUV-R.htm
update:
Force Protection is a Joint-Service Endeavor, Army General Says
Friday , June 16, 2006 23:45 ET
Jun 16, 2006 (DEFENSE DEPARTMENT/ContentWorks via COMTEX) -- WASHINGTON, June 16, 2006 -- Ongoing efforts to provide better protective gear for soldiers also benefits other servicemembers, a senior Army officer said at a House Armed Services Committee hearing here yesterday.
"The Army's Number One concern is force protection," the service's chief force-development official Maj. Gen. Stephen M. Speakes told Capitol Hill legislators. In fact, Army research teams, he said, have developed and fielded better body armor, improved helmets and enhanced vehicle protection systems.
Yet, "we're a member of a joint team," Speakes said. For example, Army efforts to develop better body and wheeled vehicle armor, he said, benefits soldiers and Marines alike.
The Army also is partnering with the Navy and Marine Corps to devise methods of defeating improvised explosive devices employed by enemy forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, Speakes said. IEDs cause the most U.S. combat casualties in the war against terrorism.
By pooling brainpower and resources the armed services can "work for common solutions as we look at a battleground that is increasingly challenging for our men and women who are deployed-forward," Speakes said.
One solution involves an improved integrated body armor vest, Speakes said, that features improved ceramic plate-armor as well as added protection to guard soldiers' upper shoulder and side areas. About 20,000 sets of the improved body armor have now been issued to troops in combat zones, Speakes said. About 200,000 sets of the improved body armor are slated for issue by December 2006.
The new body armor is the best that technology can provide at present, Speakes said. But at an average weight of about 31 pounds, the new armor isn't light.
However, "we continue to improve and work with everything we can to try to find new technologies and new opportunities," Speakes said, noting several new ideas are now being evaluated.
"We will improve and will continue to make soldiers safer," he said.
New, improved head protection called the advanced combat helmet is being issued to the field to replace the Kevlar helmet issued since the early 1980s, Speakes said. The old helmet, he said, limits a wearer's upward vision, interferes with the new body armor, and doesn't seat well on a wearer's head.
Speakes said the new helmet has improved ballistic protection, weighs about 2 pounds less, and is trimmed down at the front and sides to provide a better field of vision for wearers.
"It is much more effective operating in today's complex battlefield," Speakes said.
The Army began fielding the new helmet in 2002, he said, noting more than 600,000 have been issued to soldiers.
Providing enhanced armor for Humvees used in Afghanistan and Iraq has been another important task, Speakes said.
"Up-armored Humvees continue to be an area of great concern," Speakes said. "They are the primary combat platform that soldiers are using in Iraq."
Speakes said the Army is working to provide Level 1-type Humvee protection to new additions to its fleet featuring factory-installed vehicle armor, ballistic windows, and air conditioning. Last year, the Army met theater commander's requirements for enhanced-armor, Level 1 Humvees, he said, and expects to do so again this year.
Level-2 equipped vehicles with factory-supplied, field-installed supplemental armor will gradually be phased out, he said, while Level 3 variants with jury-rigged armor or no armor at all are prohibited from leaving forward operating bases.
About 18,000 factory-armored Level 1-type Humvees will be delivered to combat zones by spring of next year, Speakes said.
i am holding this one....looks good could breakout soon.
Force Protection Announces Follow-On Order for Additional Cougar Vehicles
Tuesday June 20, 1:12 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 20, 2006--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced a follow-on order by the U.S. Marine Corps for 15 additional Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV). The order, which includes associated support items and services, is worth an estimated $9.3 million.
ADVERTISEMENT
The U.S. Department of Defense awarded Force Protection a contract for 79 Cougar JERRVs in May. This marks the second delivery order made under the contract in less than two months. All vehicles will be manufactured and delivered to the government this calendar year.
"The Joint IED Defeat Organization is funding these vehicles in a manner that leaves no question as to how urgently they are needed," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "We are responding in kind not only with this life-saving technology, but with the resources necessary to maintain the vehicles at the highest levels of performance."
Force Protection has placed more than 30 Field Service Representatives (FSRs) in the field to assist the armed forces in training and vehicle maintenance in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We have a proven solution to counter IEDs in the Cougar JERRV," said Vice President for Marine Corps Programs Wayne Phillips. "It is being fielded in greater numbers every day, and with the support system created by the deployment of our FSRs, troops will continue to have the resources that ensure optimal use of these vehicles."
Very tough Armored Vehicle ;)
June 13, 2006
Ansar Al Sunnah IED attack on Armored Buffalo Vehicle
The Army of Ansar Alsunnah, an Iraqi Insurgency group, released a video along with a satement of an attack on a US vehicle which they said took place on June 12th 2006 in the city of Mosul. Mosul is a city just north of the Iraqi Capital of Baghdad and has been a hotbed of Iraqi Insurgency actions against Coallition forces as well as Shiite groups in Iraq. The vehicle which was attack was an Anti IED unit called a Buffalo.
The Buffalo heavily armored EOD vehicle follows the South African monocoque capsule protection concept with US manufactured automotive platform, offering protection from IEDs and up to 45 pound landmine explosion under any wheel and 30 pound mine explosion under the centerline protection. An upgrade package offers protection from Self Forged Fragmentation (SFF) mines. The vehicle is used with US forces in Iraq for route clearing and counter IED activities.
No casualities were reported from this attack on the Buffalo
VIDEO:
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/ansar_al_sunnah_ied_attack_on_armored_buffalo_vehicle_Jun_13_2006.html
BO ALERT; MACD Crossing >:D >:D >:D
Force Protection Announces Follow-On Order for Additional Cougar Vehicles
Force Protection, Inc. today announced a follow-on order by the U.S. Marine Corps for 15 additional Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV). The order, which includes associated support items and services, is worth an estimated $9.3 million.
The U.S. Department of Defense awarded Force Protection a contract for 79 Cougar JERRVs in May. This marks the second delivery order made under the contract in less than two months. All vehicles will be manufactured and delivered to the government this calendar year.
"The Joint IED Defeat Organization is funding these vehicles in a manner that leaves no question as to how urgently they are needed," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "We are responding in kind not only with this life-saving technology, but with the resources necessary to maintain the vehicles at the highest levels of performance." Force Protection has placed more than 30 Field Service Representatives (FSRs) in the field to assist the armed forces in training and vehicle maintenance in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We have a proven solution to counter IEDs in the Cougar JERRV," said Vice President for Marine Corps Programs Wayne Phillips. "It is being fielded in greater numbers every day, and with the support system created by the deployment of our FSRs, troops will continue to have the resources that ensure optimal use of these vehicles." About Force Protection Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles are protected against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technology is among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, S.C.
For more information on Force Protection and its vehicles, go to www.forceprotection.net.
New 52 week high again ;)
Hey La-onda, since we updated this thread last January FRPT skyrocketed from 0.80 to 5.30
that was 562.00% :o :o :o :o wow
I made nice profit on FRPT between that range ;)
This tough armored truck is saving lives of the american soldiers in Iraq....
I'd like to see the Humvee to be replaced by the Cougar for good. ;)
applaud Terliso,
unfortunaltely I was already a shareholder 2005 (in @ 0,26; out @ 0,4; before the reverse split) but I have sold much too early :'( :'(
Even at the begining of my postings, I wasn´t convinced enough.
Now fully convinced and in @ 4.7 $
long and strong
cheers
Oliver
Do you still consider this a good entry point? Or would I just be chasing this thing?
nice MACD crossing Terliso ;)
nice summarization:
By: amstocks82
23 Jun 2006, 12:53 AM EDT
Msg. 73785 of 73788
Jump to msg. #
Force Protection, Increasing Success
Force Protection has become increasingly successful. In 2003, Force Protection had a handful of employees and 6.2 million in sales. In 2004, Force Protection's revenue increased to 10.3 million. In 2005, revenue was 49.7 million. In the first quarter of 2006, Force Protection had 34.8 million in sales and is growing fast. Much of the reason for the recent growth in revenue is Force Protection building a true production line for the Cougar line of vehicles. Prior to building the production line, Force Protection built the vehicles on a one by one basis in what could be called 'pods'. This is a suitable manufacturing method for low numbers of vehicles but is not suitable for large contracts of several hundred vehicles.
Force Protection's production line is capable of manufacturing approximately 20 Cougar type vehicles per month. Force protection has the floor space in the manufacturing facility to add more production lines if needed and has recently added a second production line (according to an investment report by Catalyst). The second production line is still in the testing phase. Force Protection is designing the third production line which will be used to build the ILAV (Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle) which is another Cougar variant.
Along with the Cougars, Force Protection is currently manufacturing 4 Buffalo Mine Clearing Vehicles per month. Force Protection has said that they could potentially produce up to 16 Buffalos per month.
The armor plating and blast resistant design used by Force Protection is based on decades of research by South African companies. Force Protection's chassis is based on various designs including the MAC-10 truck from Peterbuilt. For the Cougar and Cougar variants, Force Protection uses Chassis provided by Spartan Chassis Inc. Spartan Chassis is one of the most innovative Chassis manufacturers in the United States. For the drive train, transmission and motor, Force Protection uses the best commercially available solution from US manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Mack, Allison, Fabco and Marmon-Herrington. This ensures high reliability because they are using proven designs.
Force Protection is able to build a highly reliable vehicle by using the best technology from many different vendors. Recently, Force Protection announced the acquisition of the manufacturing and development rights to a new "Blast Manipulation Technology" that may be used on wheeled and tracked vehicles. The new technology substantially reduces the blast effect on vehicles and it is possible that this technology will be one of the most valuable technologies Force Protection has acquired in future years.
Force Protection has a solution that was designed from the ground up to survive mine and IED blasts. Force Protection's vehicle is called the Mine Resistant Utility Vehicle - Rapid Deployable (MUV-R). This vehicle is intended to be used as a replacement for smaller wheeled vehicles such as the Humvee.
Looking at Force Protection's future, they have a long term contract with BAE and the US Defense Department to build ILAVs. They have current contracts to manufacture Buffalo vehicles and Cougar vehicles. They are likely to benefit from the recent Supplemental Defense Spending bill and 2007 Defense Appropriations bill with even more Cougar and Buffalo contracts.
Longer term, Force Protection is competing for the replacement for the Humvee which will be called the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) Family of Vehicles. Force Protection will likely get a contract to continue development for the Humvee replacement. It is feasible that they will get an interim replacement contract to produce MUV-R vehicles to replace some Humvees used in dangerous areas.
With one Cougar production line and the Buffalo line, Force Protection could easily produce over $200 million per year worth of vehicles. With the second Cougar production line and the ILAV production line, this figure increases dramatically. In addition, Force Protection has support contracts for deployed vehicles. The larger the number of deployed vehicles, the more support Force Protection will provide. Force Protection's future looks very bright!
link:
http://www.ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=FRPT&read=73785
new 52 week high:
FRPT: New 52-Wk High @ $5.580 up 3.72%
Thursday , June 22, 2006 09:56 ET
This is the 1st 52 WEEK HIGH alert for FRPT in the past 7 calendar days.
The share price for Force Protection, Inc (OTCBB: FRPT) reached a new 52-week high today, trading at $5.580, up $0.200 (3.72%) from its previous close of $5.380.
The Company's previous 52-week high of $5.490 was set yesterday on June 21, 2006.
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $1.400. The price has climbed more than 298 percent since then.
At the time of this alert, the stock had traded 67,200 shares via 65 trades, 88.99% below it's 20day average of 610,295 shares.
This new 52-week high currently puts the stock:
25.62% above its 20day Moving Average of $4.442
65.75% above its 50day Moving Average of $3.367
111.13% above its 100day Moving Average of $2.643
>:D >:D
FRPT: Jumps +6.61%; Vol +114%; Last 90 Min of Trading
Monday , June 26, 2006 16:22 ET
During the last 90 minutes of today's session, shares of Force Protection, Inc (OTCBB: FRPT) demonstrated a strong UPWARD close relative to its 13:30 ET statistics. "Strong Closers" are determined by proprietary Knobias calculations performed during the last segment of each trading day.
sym: FRPT @13:30 ET @CLOSE % CHANGE
---------- ----------- ----------- ------------
PRICE $5.60 $5.97 +6.61%
VOLUME 383,900 822,700 +114.30%
#TRADES 162 339 +109.26%
DAY-HI $5.60 $5.98 LATE-HI
DAY-LO $5.17 $5.17 N/A
TODAY'S RAiDAR HEADLINES for FRPT:
06/26/2006 13:50 FRPT: New 52-Wk High @ $5.600 up 6.67% - knobias
06/26/2006 08:52 West Point Cadets Train with Force Protection's Buffalo Vehicle - Business Wire
nice summarization:
Force Protection Inc. (FRPT.ob) - Blast resistant stock for your portfolio?
Force Protection is an interesting niche story. The company is an innovative manufacturer of blast-protected military vehicles that successfully shield against land mines and IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) - which have been the leading cause of combat deaths for U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq. To date, not one single fatality has occurred inside any of Force Protection's military vehicles. This sterling track record, coupled with rising demand, has begun to generate attention in the investment community for FRPT stock, which has been on a tear since early May, rising over 150% from just under $2 to the low-mid 5s. Whether or not FRPT stock is a buy here at the current risk/reward is open to question, but what is certain at this time is that FRPT is a story stock worth learning about and keeping a watchful eye on toward the future.
Force Protection, Inc. is the world's leading manufacturer of ballistic- and blast-protected vehicles, which have been used to support armed forces and security personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo and other hot spots around the globe. Headquartered near Charleston, South Carolina, Force Protection also has become the nation's leading center for blast protection technology and research to counter improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Built for a variety of missions and designed for rapid adaptation, Force Protection's specialty vehicles provide the solution for a 360-degree battlefield where the "front line" is on all sides.
PRODUCTS
The company currently produces two blast-protected vehicles with different mission capabilities: (1) the Buffalo and (2) a lighter vehicle, the Cougar. A third vehicle, the Mine-protected Utility Vehicle/Rapid Deployable, or MUV-R, is in the proto-type and development phase.
The Buffalo
The Buffalo is the heaviest vehicle—weighing 22 tons—and is designed principally for route clearing activities. It integrates a blast resistant capsule with an American-made truck engine and drive train. A key aspect of mine protected-vehicle design is the management of hot gasses and concussive energy released by a mine or IED blast. The Buffalo is designed to deflect and dissipate the explosive blast away from the passenger compartment, thus protecting the occupants from harm. Utilizing FRPT's advanced technology, the Buffalo is able to withstand even a major explosion. Competing vehicles without benefit of such an advanced V-hull design—such as up-armored Humvees—rely solely on retrofitting heavy armor plates to absorb blast energy as just one aspect of its use. The Buffalo design emphasizes blast and ballistic protection as the vehicle's primary mission.
The U.S. Army tested the Buffalo at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds to determine its measure of "survivability"—i.e. the ability of the Buffalo's blast capsule to effectively protect the occupants and the critical automotive components from the effects of explosive blasts. Following such tests, the U.S. Army has ordered and deployed more than fifty Buffalos for service in Afghanistan and Iraq, and has announced its desire to use the Buffalo in the newly established "Route Clearance Companies" being developed as part of the IED Defeat Task Force. This real-world experience has demonstrated the Buffalo's ability to withstand blasts without injury to the occupants. The Buffalo fills a niche in the U.S. Army's route clearance systems and when used in this capacity, the Buffalo currently has no direct competition. The company has developed its infrastructure and manufacturing capacity to produce four Buffalo vehicles per month (with initial upside toward 8 per month) to meet anticipated near term demand. The Buffalo generates about $850,000 in revenue per vehicle.
The Cougar
The Cougar first launched in 2004 and was designed to serve a broader market and mission range than the Buffalo. Its missions include urban patrol, route clearance support, utility transport and special unit activities. Like the Buffalo, the Cougar employs the geometric V-Hull design to deflect blast energy along with an armored steel capsule affording ballistic protection, and while the Cougar, at 14 tons, is lighter than the Buffalo, it offers a similar level of blast protection. Like the Buffalo, the Cougar uses a standard American automotive drive train and control components which allow service and maintenance similar to that of a commercial truck, making servicing the Cougar less expensive and easier to service. The company has developed its infrastructure and manufacturing capacity to produce twenty or more Cougar vehicles per month (with initial upside to 40 per month) to meet anticipated near term demand. The Cougar generates about $650,000 in revenue per vehicle.
Mine-protected Utility Vehicle/Rapid Deployable (MUV-R)
The company is currently well into the development of a third vehicle, the MUV-R (pronounced "Mover"). The MUV-R will be the smallest of the three vehicles—weighing seven tons or less. Management positioned the MUV-R for use by security services and other agencies requiring blast and ballistic protection for personnel transport in high threat and insurgent-hostile regions. While not specifically positioned as a replacement for the two-decade old armored Humvee, Department of Defense efforts to "up-armor" Humvees already deployed to the Army and Marines have proven less than effective. The added weight of the armor strains the vehicle's engine and drive-train and the method of armor plating is vulnerable to blast energy. The MUV-R's geometric V-hull design conducts this energy out the sides, protecting the occupants. Being specifically designed for blast and ballistic protection, the MUV-R protects vital engine components to allow continuing vehicle operations even after surviving a blast from a landmine, an IED or a roadside bomb. The U.S. military has recently undertaken market studies to develop a fleet of new "Joint Light Tactical Vehicles" specifically intended to replace the Humvees, and Force Protection believes that the MUV-R can effectively compete for a share of this newly evolving opportunity. The vehicle is still in its developmental stage and will require further work before it is ready for production.
The company is in hypergrowth mode. Full Year 2005 revenues were up almost five-fold from 2004 ($49.7 mil vs. $10.3 mil) on increased capacity and production with 71 vehicles shipped in '05 (31 buffalo; 40 cougar) vs. 14 total in 2004. The ramp has continued into 2006, with 44 vehicles (43 cougar, one buffalo) shipped in Q1 alone, driving revenues of $34.8 million. Significant investment in ramping up manufacturing processes and production facilities has led to production records in April and May. Without any additional production lines added (additional lines are likely) or additional shifts utilized (again, likely) the company should be able to ship close to 60 Cougars and 12 Buffalo per quarter. (It should be noted from the two releases that April/May shipments look to have included 40 Cougars, but possibly only 3 Buffalos). Gross Margins should expand off Q1's 19% as volumes increase, and its not a stretch to look for $11 mil or more in gross profit Q2 (off revenues of $55 mil). Q1's operating profit of 114k will be easily surpassed, and could surprise toward $3-4 mil or more, and the company should put up positive EPS for the first time.
Recent significant developments keep the outlook bright.
Delivery orders for 63 additional Cougars totaling $41.3 mil have already been received as part of a Department of Defense contract ($50 mil; 79 Cougars) awarded in early May. This boosts backlog nicely, which stood at 101 vehicles as of the end of Q1. Its important to recognize that as the "installed base" of vehicles grows, the opportunity for higher-margin after-market service and parts revenue expands commensurately, as the vehicles are built to have a 20-year useful life, and are generally "attacked" several times per year. Additionally, Force Protection will act as a subcontractor to BAE Systems, who received a $180 million contract to manufacture 378 Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles (ILAV) for use by the Iraqi military police which will be similar in design to the Cougar and will result in license fees being paid to Force Protection. There is upside to this contract as it calls for as many as 1050 vehicles; it will lead to additional service and parts revenue for FRPT; it has also already provided the seeds for takeover speculation.
However, there's still not a lot of visibility on the numbers here. In spite of the strong revenue growth, G&A expense could still surprise to the upside with capacity inreasing sharply, so it may be best to let the company deliver for a quarter or two, at the risk of potentially overpaying for a hot stock of a developing company in a cold and turbulent market. There are risks here. Interest expense in Q1 was over 800k; the company's financial statements have been prepared on a "going concern" basis; and while the company noted its $7.2 million cash flow from operations in Q1, two/third's of that came from an increase in accounts payable (hardly an achievement), and the rest can be accounted for by receivables collection - so this company hasn't exactly turned the corner yet operationally. But that turn could be right around the corner, and FRPT stock should be on your radar now and ahead of Q2 earnings in mid-August. In the meantime, the prospect of additional meaningful contract announcements and/or further developments related to the MUV-R gaining traction with key decision-makers in the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program would only fortify the company and its stock price further.
link:
http://www.goldenmeanstockreport.com/2006/06/frpt_force_prot.html#more
the party is still continuing...... >:D
small correction after nice run upwards to new 52 week high
update:
Force Protection Exceeds June Production Objectives, Fulfills DOD Cougar Contract
Monday , July 03, 2006 10:25 ET
LADSON, S.C., Jul 03, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT) today announced it has again exceeded vehicle production objectives. The armored vehicle manufacturer produced and delivered 19 Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV) and three Buffalo route clearance vehicles to the U.S. government in June.
"This is an important season for Force Protection," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "Starting in November 2005, we committed substantial time and resources to the expansion of our production capacity and capabilities, and we have met or exceeded production schedules each month since as a result. We look forward to continuing this remarkable upward trend as we address the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle (ILAV) contract."
Force Protection was awarded a contract by the U.S. Department of Defense in May 2005 for 122 Cougar JERRVs for use by all branches of the armed forces. The contract, administered by the Marine Corps, was slated for completion in June 2006.
"We have done precisely what we committed to do," said Vice President for Marine Corps Programs Wayne Phillips. "The completion of the JERRV contract took place as we told the Marines last year when our ramp-up efforts began. In addition, we are on track for the on-time completion of the current Buffalo contract with the Army, and will apply these same practices to the ILAV program."
Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar vehicles have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003. Popular with military engineers and explosive ordnance disposal teams, not a single reported fatality has occurred in three years despite more than 1,000 mine detonations and improvised explosive device attacks.
>:D >:D
party on.... >:D >:D
wonderful article about FRPTs future:
REQUIEM FOR A FIGHTING VEHICLE
Ground-Pounders look to replace the old-soldier HMMWV
The Marine Corps is looking to replace the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle, or "Humvee."
The new vehicle is officially known as the CTV. The Combat Tactical Vehicle is part of the family of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles, or JLTVs, that are being jointly developed in conjunction with the Army.
"We're going through the requirements process right now with an eye toward production around 2012," said Lieutenant Colonel Mike Micucci, JLTV project manager for the Marine Corps Combat Development Command at Quantico, Virginia.
Micucci told SOF the Marine Corps has an acquisition objective of 19,000 JLTVs. Because of the cost involved, the Marine Corps is pooling its resources with the Army to determine its requirements and quantities. Army and Navy versions would have 80% parts interchangeability, said Maj. Gen. William Lenaers, commander of the Army Tanks and Automotive Command.
The war in Iraq has painfully demonstrated to both the Army and the Marine Corps that the venerable Humvee has had it as a combat tactical vehicle. "I think we are finding that the Humvee with all of the attachments and all of the armor that we've put on, the vehicle is pretty much maxed out," said Micucci, a combat engineer officer whose battalion from Camp Lejeune cut breaches in sand berms separating Kuwait and Iraq so that First Battalion, Fifth Marines, the unit this reporter was embedded with in 2003, could spearhead Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Humvee worked very well in the initial phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, but Colonel Clarke R. Lethin, G-3 for the First Marine Division in Iraq and also involved in Task Force 58 that took down the Taliban in Kandahar, says the enemy also has a vote in how we fight: Lethin says what we are seeing in Iraq with IEDs is going to be the wave of the future on the battlefield.
"The key to this [new] vehicle is survivability. That's our Number One Priority," said Lt. Col. McCucci: Both the Army and Marine Corps are looking for a mine-IED-resistant vehicle that has underbody protection, something the up-armored M1114 Humvee does not have. There have been 341 Marines killed in action and 4,099 wounded in combat in Iraq since February 2004 when the insurgency shifted from RPGs [Rocket-Propelled Grenades] to IEDs, Improvised Explosive Devices.
Like a turtle, the underbelly of a Humvee is its most vulnerable spot. It is not uncommon for five Marines or U.S. soldiers to be killed in the twinkling of an eye if an IED explodes beneath their seats. For that reason, the Marine Corps is looking for ways to develop some "Six Pack ABs" in the belly of its combat vehicles.
Harder Body, Longer Range
"We're looking at A and B Armor Kits. The A-kit is your underbody protection for hard to reach areas like the firewall. The B-kit is additional armor that we would add on to windows, doors and tops of vehicles," McCucci said. Those kits are being developed right now as an immediate fix to the increasing IED threat in Iraq. No word when they'll be available. On the new family of vehicles, an A kit will stop 7.62mm rounds at 30 meters; a B kit will stop 14.5mm rounds. An A kit will withstand a 155mm shell burst at 100 meters, while a B kit will withstand the same at 60 meters.
Col. Lethin says fuel consumption is another requirement. "The vehicle we are designing has to be able to go farther than a Humvee on the same amount of fuel," Lethin said.
Humvees currently have a fuel capacity of 25 gallons -- enough diesel to take them 350 miles on hard-surfaced roads. Off road, the operating range drops considerably.
Lethin says hybrid-electric power plants might increase the range of the next generation Humvee, thus reducing the number of convoys placed in Harm's Way to keep them "humming."
The ability to generate on-board power is another major requirement for future combat vehicles. The current Humvee has a 24-volt, negative ground, 60-amp electrical system. This is not enough juice to power up systems being developed to address the IED threat, such innovations as IED jamming and pre-detonation systems, and even remote-controlled automatic weapons to insure the survivability of gunners who are most at risk standing in open turrets on the battlefield.
"At a minimum on the JLTV, we want to have exportable power on board the vehicle, in the range of 15 to 30kw," said McCucci, "but we don't have a preconceived notion as to what the replacement Humvee will look like when it hits the battlefield in 2012."
Other system requirements include rollover protection, greater reliability, enhanced towing capacity and a design wish list that includes the ability to detect and respond to small arms fire, allow gunners to fight from cover, have run-flat tires, fit inside a CV-130 or even a CH-47, and so on. The requirements are many, varied, and all predicated on combat experience.
However, one thing is certain. This time around, the military is going to build a combat vehicle first and then create a utility vehicle, not vice-versa as it did with the Humvee.
Born in the 1970s when the United States Army concluded that militarized versions of civilian trucks in use no longer satisfied their requirements, HMMWVs have become the backbone of U.S. forces around the world. More than 10,000 were used during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, but they are very vulnerable to rocket propelled grenades, or RPGs, and they offer only minimal protection from small arms fire.
Shortly after the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003, the Georgia Technology Research Institute was tasked by the Office of Naval Research to develop a vehicle that was about the size of a Humvee that could generate a mega-watt of power, enough electricity to power a small city or a small hospital.
Dr. Gary W. Caille, head of the Systems Program Office, was contracted to do a feasibility study, but his marching orders were changed a year later in May 2004 when the IED threat surfaced in Iraq.
Admiral Jay Cohen, who headed ONR at the time, ordered Caille and company to come up with an armored patrol vehicle that can accommodate two to four people, provide integrated blast/ballistic protection, and go 60 miles per hour. "And..... By the way, we needed it yesterday," said Admiral Cohen.
Without a lot of time or money, undergraduate and graduate students at the Georgia Technology Research Institute, and consultants including the chief engineer for Corvette, took an artist's conception of a CTV [Combat Tactical Vehicle] and in conjunction with Techno Sports, a fabrication shop in Livonia, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit, produced a prototype called "Ultra."
At first glance, the vehicle looks like something out of a "Mad Max," movie starring Mel Gibson. "We tried to take a systems approach to what causes significant injury and death in vehicles," Caille told SOF. In other words, the vehicles are expendable, the personnel inside them are not.
Since weight was a factor, the students at Georgia Tech only armored the passenger compartment. They came up with a unique way to mold the armor around hard-to-reach places. That's how the "blast bucket" concept was conceived.
"We also developed seats that will slow down the acceleration force on the human body during an explosion, and arranged those seats in a back-to-back 360-degree configuration so that four personnel have increased situational awareness by facing outboard," said Dr. Caille. By bringing personnel closer together, Caille discovered they could communicate easier.
"We also wanted to get people farther away from the tires, because IEDs and mines can turn wheel rims into shrapnel," Caille said, "but let's set the record straight. These devices being used against our troops are no longer 'improvised'."
Time and funding constraints forced Professor Caille to purchase an off-theshelf frame, a Ford F-350 chassis, for his concept vehicle, so he could get Ultra rolling, but the prototype has no off-road capability.
"That capability has yet to be defined by the military," said Caille, "but the real nugget here is the blast bucket crew configuration." Col. Lethin agrees. "The configuration, the angles, the blast bucket concept is very interesting, but we need to do some modeling and simulation to find out what kind of advantages that may give our personnel in terms of protection from mines and IEDs," said Lethin.
For example, sitting in seats facing outboard can be beneficial in a firefight, but Lethin says there is evidence that sitting sideways in a vehicle can cause a person to become disoriented, especially during long periods of time spent staring at landscape passing by on a horizontal plane. That's why Lethin is not looking at Ultra as a whole system, but a concept that can provide crucial components for the vehicle that replaces the Humvee.
Ultra's shock-absorbing seat design also looks promising, but Lethin says six-point harnesses will only be effective if Marines use them. During the first year of Operation Iraqi Freedom, 40% of the casualties, some 100 troops, involved accidents such as rollovers and wrecks. Now more than 75% of the casualties can be blamed on IEDs.
Hollow tube construction in Ultra's undercarriage allows for fire and flame from a blast to be vented, and thus reduce the blast effect of an IED. But Lethin won't know if it works until Caille and crew put Ultra to the ultimate test. They plan to blow up Ultra next year.
Lethin also told SOF the fire retardant system being built into the Marine Corps' new Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, which will replace the Armored Amphibious Assault Vehicle, is another area worth exploring since so many of the Humvees that are hit by IEDs explode and burn.
Interim Solutions:
Combat engineers in both the Marine Corps and U.S. Army are employing new vehicles against IED threats in Iraq. The Cougar Hardened Engineer Vehicle [HEV] and the Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicle, or JERRV, can serve as a mineproof troop transport, a weapons platform or an escort protection vehicle. "They can survive a larger blast from an IED or mine than your typical Humvee," said Lt. Col. Micucci.
"What really separates these vehicles is their level of survivability," Micucci said. The Cougar and JERRV are larger than the RG-31 that is currently being used in Iraq by Explosive Ordnance Technicians and Combat Engineers. Three variants of each vehicle are being produced: a 4x4 EOD vehicle, a 6x6 EOD vehicle and a 6x6 engineer vehicle. EOD vehicles usually carry four troops while the engineer vehicles carry 10. There are minor differences in the two vehicles. The Cougar has firing ports while the JERRV has a ring mount for crew served weapons.
Combat Field Tests
The Marine Corps purchased 27 Cougars for use in Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. The Pentagon's Joint IED Task Force designated the Marine Corps as the lead procurement agency to buy 122 JERRVs to be distributed among the Marine Corps, Army, Navy and Air Force. The Corps is receiving 38 vehicles.
The contract to produce the vehicles was awarded to Force Protection Industries of Charleston, South Carolina.
Weighing 52,000 pounds and costing $600,000 per vehicle, neither Cougar nor JERRV have the transportability or cost effectiveness to serve as a replacement for the Humvee, Micucci told SOF.
"They're just too big and too heavy to airlift," said Micucci, "and they take up too much room on our pre-positioned ships." But the new vehicles are getting rave reviews from Marines and soldiers who ride in them.
Proven Survivability:
Cougars have survived at least a half dozen IED attacks to date. One Cougar being used by Marines with Security Detachment, 8th Engineer Support Battalion needed to have the left front wheel assembly replaced. Of the Marines inside the vehicle, two had their bells rung by the blast, two others received minor burns, but all survived.
The IED detonated directly under the vehicle, pushing outward instead of straight up due to the "V-shaped" undercarriage. That spared crewmembers from serious if not life-threatening injuries.
"Ground clearance has a significant impact on mitigating blast," said Col. Lethin, but he believes Cougar sits too high off the ground, making it top heavy and too difficult to transport by air or sea.
As we wrapped up our interview, Dr. Caille noted that the military has known for years that the Humvee wasn't able to do what it was being called upon to do, and should be replaced. But he says defense dollars went into other projects like the F-22 Raptor and the Virginia class of nuclear submarines.
Caille says the slaughter of 18 U.S. Army Rangers from the 10th Mountain Division and the wounding of 73 other troops as Humvees ran through a gauntlet of RPG and AK-47 fire in the crowded streets of Mogadishu in early October 1993 should have been a wakeup call to replace the Humvee.
But the Pentagon apparently pushed the snooze button, and only now is waking up to the fact that Humvees can no longer take the kind of hits they're taking in Iraq and Afghanistan and keep on rolling.
The opinions expressed above do not necessarily represent the views of Soldier of Fortune.
link:
http://www.sofmag.com/display.do?articleId=469
Analysis quotation from another board:
"We're going through the requirements process right now with an eye toward production around 2012"
1. FRPT may have a big advantage by having their vehicle available more quickly than any competition. The competition is working on plywood models, while the MUV-R was demonstrated to the DoD in Febuary.
2. This gives Force Protection and the partner they choose for the MUV-R plenty of time to ramp up production capacity.
3. In message 73014 and 72912 we believe the Cougar 4x4 will displace the Armored Humvee as the interim vehicle, so there are several years of contracts for the interim vehicle available.
"The Marine Corps has an acquisition objective of 19,000 JLTVs" "the Marine Corps is pooling its resources with the Army to determine its requirements and quantities"
1. I believe this means the desired quantity is 19,000 for the Marines, plus whatever quantity the Army needs. The number of soldiers in the Army is much greater than in the Marines, so it is likely the Army would need at least 19,000 more.
2. Even if the total need is "only" 19,000, at a price of 265,000 each, that would be a 5 Billion contract for FRPT and its partner.
"what we are seeing in Iraq with IEDs is going to be the wave of the future on the battlefield. The key to this vehicle is survivability. That's our Number One Priority"
1. Survivability was the number one priority in the selection criteria for the ILAV and, as we know, the FRPT design won.
2. There is no other manufacturer that can come close to making a claim of 1000 IED hits and no fatalities.
3. No other vehicles can compare for took a direct IED hit and kept going to get me to safety stories. From testimonials on FRPT web site.
cheers
O.
I began purchasing Force Protection FRPT.OB (FPI) a few months back starting in April when the share price was less than $2.00 a share. It is now $6.38 a share but I believe this is only the begining of the run to $40 or $50 a share.
FPI is a relatively new company that produces vehicles for the military that can survive IEDs and mines. They have two main products that they are currently selling. They have the Cougar and Bufallo vehicles. There are a family of vehicles based on the Cougar design. The Bufallo is designed specifically for rapid and safe route clearance in areas that may have IEDs and mines. FPI has a third vehicle that they produced which is in the prototype and testing phase call the MUR-R.
The bottom line for FPI is that they manufacture the most survivable combat support light trucks, engineering vehicles and transports available.
Revenue is growing fast. The government basically gives FPI contracts for as much business as they can handle and FPI has been ramping up production fast. But even with the rapid production ramp up, there is a lot more business than FPI can handle. Therefore, FPI recently began partnering with other companies such as BAE. The recent contract for the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle which BAE recieved is based on FRPT's Cougar design. BAE was awarded the contract but FPI will produce about half the vehicles, gets all the parts and other support business and gets a license fee from BAE.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/06/bae-delivering-a-cougar-variant-for-iraqs-4454m-ilav-contract/index.php
Within the next three months, FPI will likely be awarded new contracts for both the Buffalo and Cougar vehicles and a development contract for the MUV-R. It is likely that the MUV-R will be picked as the interim replacement for the Humvee in Iraq. sometime late this fall. FPI is already searching for a suitable partner because the volume of production will require a large physical plant and workforce. Force Protection has announced that there will be 140 Bufallo in service by the end of 2006. This will require them to begin building approximately 14 Bufallo per month which is a very significant ramp up of production. FPI has indicated that they may work with a partner on large future Bufallo contracts.
Some Statistics:
FPI's Sales
2003 -> $6.25 million
2004 -> $10.27 million
2005 -> $49.7 million
2006 Q1 -> $34.8 million
2006 Q2 prediction -> $49 million ( * Solid low ball estimate based on production see note)
2006 Q3 prediction -> $58 million
2006 Q4 prediction -> $65 million
2007 conservitave Prediction $350 to $550 million
Note: FPI has announced 59 Cougar's and 6 Buffalo produced/delivered in Q2. These vehicles add up to around $49 to $52 million in revenue. In addition, FPI will get approximately $2 million in spare parts business. There are sometimes deliveries of additional vehicles not announced. Normal production of Buffalo vehicles would be 9 to 12. The lower production may be explained by the expansion of the production line for Cougar's and a draw down in man-power for the Buffalo lines. FPI is currently trying to hire an estimated 50 to 100 people based on it's employment adds many of which state multiple positions. If additional vehicles are delivered, then the revenue prediction would be low. BAE may pay a license fee to FPI in Q1 which would be additional revenue.
April Production announcement:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060501/20060501005665.html?.v=1
May production announcement:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060605/20060605005659.html?.v=1
June Production announcement:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060703/20060703005185.html?.v=1
Employment Info:
http://www.forceprotection.net/about/employment.html?order=date_posted
This is an OTCBB stock go to "penny stock picking board" there is already a thread started exclusively for FRPT ;)
click this link:
http://www.3stocksonfire.org/trading/index.php?topic=3375.60
In 2003, FPI had a handful of employees and $6.2 million in sales. In 2004, revenue increased to $10.3 million. In 2005, revenue was $49.7 million. In the first quarter of 2006, FPI had $34.8 million in sales, and the next quarter should have more than $50 million in sales.
Sales began ramping up fast in 2005 after FPI built a production line for the Cougar line of vehicles. Prior to building the production line, FPI built the vehicles on a one by one basis in bays. This is a suitable manufacturing method for low numbers of vehicles but is not suitable for large contracts of several hundred vehicles.
FPI's Cougar production line is capable of manufacturing approximately 20 Cougar type vehicles per month. FPI has the floor space in the manufacturing facility to add more production lines if needed and has recently added a second production line. The second production line is still in the testing phase. FPI is designing the third production line which will be used to build the ILAV (Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle) which is another Cougar variant.
Along with the Cougars, FPI is currently manufacturing 3 to 4 Buffalo Mine Clearing Vehicles per month. Force Protection has said that they could potentially build up to 16 Buffalos per month by adding additional shifts. Based on recent media reports that had the following quote, "more than 140 Buffalo vehicles will be deployed by the end of 2006." To deploy around 140 Buffalo vehicles by the end of the year, FPI will have to build 14 per month or more because prior reports indicated that there were approximately 65 Buffalos currently in use (end of June). FPI currently has not announced contracts sufficient to build 140 Buffalo vehicles.
FPI's Buffalo and Cougars are in demand because they are the safest vehicles in Iraq. So far, there have been no reported casualties of soldiers in Buffalo and Cougar vehicles. Although this statistic may change in the future, it indicates the extraordinary toughness of their vehicle design.
The key to the blast protection for FPI's vehicles is the armor plating and blast resistant design that FPI acquired from South African companies. The South African design is based on over 40 years of development of blast resistant and economical vehicles.
FPI's chassis is based on various designs including the Mach truck from South Carolina-based Hughes Motors in the Buffalo vehicles. For the Cougar and Cougar variants, FPI uses Chassis provided by Spartan Chassis Inc. Spartan Chassis is one of the most innovative Chassis manufacturers in the United States. For the drive train, transmissions and motors, FPI uses the best commercially available solutions from US manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Mack, Allison, Fabco and Marmon-Herrington. This ensures high reliability because they are using proven designs. It ensures the vehicles are economical because FPI is purchasing products already produced in volume. In short, FPI is able to build a highly reliable vehicle by using the best technology from many different vendors and integrating it together. FPI's genius has been their ability to rapidly adapt, design, prototype and manufacture the best in class vehicle faster than their larger competitors.
Recently, FPI announced the acquisition of the manufacturing and development rights to a new "Blast Manipulation Technology" that may be used on wheeled and tracked vehicles. The new technology substantially reduces the blast effect on vehicles and it is possible that this technology will be one of the most valuable technologies FPI has acquired in future years. FPI believes that sales of products based on this technology are over a year away but that it might be their most compelling product.
The Buffalo was designed for use by Engineers for mine and bomb detection and destruction missions. The Cougar is a Medium Mine Protected Vehicle that has several possible roles. It can be used by Military Engineers, for the transport of soldiers, for convoy protection roles and for patrolling. For use where a lighter vehicle is more economical in roles currently taken by the Humvee, FPI has a solution that was designed from the ground up to survive mine and IED blasts. FPI's vehicle is called the Mine Resistant Utility Vehicle - Rapid Deployable (MUV-R).
With one Cougar production line and the Buffalo line producing 4 Buffalos per month, FPI could easily produce over $200 million per year worth of vehicles. With one Cougar line and the Buffalo line producing 16 Buffalo per month starting in June, the revenue potential goes up over $80 million per quarter. With the second Cougar production line and the ILAV production line, this figure again increases dramatically.
FPI's highest margin business is the support contracts for deployed vehicles. Support contracts include field representatives in Iraq and Afghanistan, spare parts, training and supplies. As the number of FPI vehicles grows, the amount of spare parts and field representatives also grow. By 2007, FPI's revenue potential could easily be in the range of $350 to $500 million assuming that they get sufficient contracts.
Congress recently passed the Defense Supplemental bill. Included in the Supplemental was more than two billion to be used to defend against IEDs and mines in Iraq and Afghanistan. The vehicles that can best address this threat are the Buffalo for route clearance and various versions of the Cougar to protect engineers and as the point vehicles in patrols. FPI's vehicles are made in the United States and more economical than other competing vehicles. FPI's vehicles have the best history of survivability in "real world" situations and have survived over 1000 IED and mine attacks without a single fatality. Nothing else comes close.
The future looks bright for FPI.
FRPT: Volume Spike; 8% > 20-adsv, Stock -7.05%
Monday , July 10, 2006 10:20 ET
This is the 1st VOLUME alert for FRPT in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Force Protection, Inc (OTCBB: FRPT) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 10:20 ET, the stock had already traded 627,600 shares via 145 trades. The cumulative volume is 8.41% above its 20-day average of 578,930. Normally the stock experiences around 284 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net decline in FRPT's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $5.930, down $-0.450 (-7.05%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $1.720. The price has gained more than 244 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session FRPT has traded in a range between $5.160 and $6.680 and is currently trading 11.23% below its 52-week high of $6.680 set on June 28,2006 and 759.42% above its 52-week low of $0.690 from December 30,2005.
In the previous 3 sessions, FRPT trading has displayed a mixed trend. Closing results have been as follows:
July 07, 2006 --- closed at $6.380 down $0.070 (-1.09%) on 311,100 shares
July 06, 2006 --- closed at $6.450 down $0.150 (-2.27%) on 385,500 shares
July 05, 2006 --- closed at $6.600 up $0.290 (+4.60%) on 242,400 shares
1)
BUYINS.NET: FRPT Have Also Been Removed From Naked Short List Today
Tuesday , July 11, 2006 10:34 ET
Jul 11, 2006 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- BUYINS.NET, www.buyins.net, announced today that these select companies have been removed from the NASDAQ, AMEX and NYSE naked short threshold list: Cardiogenesis Corporation (OTC: CGCP), Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB: FRPT). For a complete list of companies on the naked short list please visit our web site. To find the SqueezeTrigger Price before a short squeeze starts in any stock, go to www.buyins.net.
Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB: FRPT) and subsidiaries engages in the design, manufacture, and marketing of mine and blast protected vehicles in the United States and South Africa. Its products include The Buffalo, designed principally for route clearing activities; and The Cougar, a light weight vehicle that is used for urban patrol, route clearance support, utility transport, and special unit activities. It primarily serves the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps. The company was founded as Boulder Capital Opportunities III in 1996 and is headquartered in Ladson, South Carolina. With 38.73 million shares outstanding and an undisclosed short position, there is no longer a failure to deliver in shares of FRPT.
2)
From Raging Bull:
By: frpt_inv
12 Jul 2006, 05:00 AM EDT
Msg. 76596 of 76596
Jump to msg. #
August Announcements
August will be a big month for FRPT. All these announcements are high probability.
August 1
1) Announcement of receipt of contract for development funding for MUV-R for JLTV contract.
2) July's Monthly Production press release includes first ILAV shipments.
August 15
3) 2Q Earnings Release
Operating and bottom line profitability.
Revenue for quarter exceeds total revenue for all of 2005.
Major growth in highly profitable ILS revenue.
Two Cougar lines operational, ILAV line ramping up.
Buffalo line capacity significantly higher.
Dramatic increase in number of employees to support volume production on new lines, ILAV and development of MUV-R.
Positive cash flow allows continued pay down of debt.
Positive cash flow enables growth without further dilution beyond exercise of previously issued warrants/convertibles.
Most/all convertibles converted to common, further reducing interest expense.
On track for growing to 50 Field Sales Reps deployed.
Likely shortly after 2Q release
New Catalyst report with higher revenue and earnings projections, resulting in higher price per share target
Mid-August
Minor announcement possibly for additional armor contract. Example of the ongoing revenue stream created as vehicles in field are deployed.
If not announced in July, then August will have
Additional Buffalo orders to keep the pipe filled to hit the 140 by end of year number
Additional Cougar orders to keep the two lines busy. They would not be ramping up a second line if there wasn't an order in the pipe to fill it.
3)
FRPT answer regarding the LA Times Article:
Message from Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton
Publisher: Force Protection, Inc.
Date: 07/11/2006
Force Protection would like to confirm that, to the company's knowledge, all of its Cougar vehicles deployed in Iraq are currently operational or undergoing routine maintenance procedures.
Force Protection also confirms that the company has specific information to indicate that none of its Buffalo or Cougar vehicles were involved in the recently reported fatal attack in Ramadi.
Our mission to protect and save lives continues.
Gordon McGilton
July 11, 2006
4)
Small New Contract
Posted Date: Jul 10, 2006
The Marine Corps Systems Command, Ground Transportation Engineering Systems (GTES) intends to award a sole source Contract to Force Protection Industries, Inc (FPII) of Ladson, South Carolina for twelve (12) sets of Armox steel plates for Cougar vehicles.
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/DON%2DSNOTE%2D060710%2D002/Synopsis.html
pullback is good entry point IMO ;)
Demand for Specialty Armored Vehicles Increases as Force Protection, Inc. Announces Additional Production Lines
Monday July 17, 8:24 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 17, 2006--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced it is expanding production to meet increased demand for its mine-protected vehicles.
"Our customers in uniform recognize the unmatched protection our vehicles provide and continue to order them at an unprecedented rate," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "As a result, Force Protection is engaged in efforts to triple its internal manufacturing capacity, as well as make use of other companies' capacity to fill present and future orders. We are also increasing our workforce, and today exceeded our 500th employee. We had just twelve employees in the beginning of 2004."
Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar armored vehicles have been deployed in the global war on terror since July 10, 2003. Operated by combat engineers and explosive ordnance disposal teams, the vehicles have been used in dangerous detection and removal operations and are recognized as an effective solution to counter IEDs and other explosive threats. Despite inaccurate news reports, no fatalities have occurred in any Force Protection vehicle as the company continues to innovate and enhance the blast protection of its products to ensure that troops have the best protection available.
"We receive constant feedback from the troops that these vehicles are saving lives daily," said Vice President for Army Programs Damon Walsh. "They fill a vital role, and we are now establishing a second and third Cougar production line and doubling Buffalo production to ensure these vehicles are delivered in the numbers required by the men and women who need them most."
More than 200 Buffalo and Cougar vehicles are currently deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
good news fro FRPT ;D
Bombproof vehicles for troops in Iraq
MORE than 100 new heavily armoured patrol vehicles have been ordered by the government to protect British troops in Iraq against roadside bombs, writes Michael Smith.
The move — to be announced this week — follows a review ordered by Des Browne, the defence secretary, after the father of a soldier killed in a Snatch Land Rover accused the government of allowing soldiers to die needlessly to save cash.
Roger Bacon, whose son was killed by a roadside bomb last September, spoke out after the 18th death of a soldier in a Snatch Land Rover. Yesterday he welcomed the new move.
The latest vehicles will be upgraded versions of the armoured Cougars used by US marines in Iraq. They will have additional armour, making them the most protected vehicles of their kind in the world.
Browne, a former chief secretary to the Treasury, asked his former boss Gordon Brown to provide the tens of millions of pounds to rush new vehicles to Iraq, a senior defence source said yesterday.
Snatch Land Rovers cost about £50,000 apiece. The new vehicles cost about eight times as much but carry more troops.
Ministry of Defence (MoD)officials were ordered to bypass their complex procurement system and buy the best vehicle available. The Cougar, built in America by BAE Systems, came closest to fulfilling the requirement, but despite surviving a number of bomb attacks in Iraq it was still deemed to have insufficient armour.
"Browne accepted the arguments in favour of the Snatch Land Rover but ruled that the new range of roadside bombs meant that the situation had changed," the source said. The MoD aims to have the Cougars in Iraq by the end of the year.
The US marines initially used them as the lead vehicles in their convoys but found them so effective against roadside bombs that they replaced all their Humvee vehicles with Cougars.
Yesterday General David Richards, head of Nato's international security force in Afghanistan, described the situation in the country as "close to anarchy" and warned that western forces were short of equipment. The RAF is trying to persuade MoD officials to buy the Predator unmanned spy plane for use in Afghanistan. They believe they need better surveillance after Taliban forces took over two towns in southern Helmand province undetected by coalition forces.
link:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2281708.html
if YOU need the the 9 slides Reuters report (OUTPERFORM RATING on 11th of July), please contact me
Mean Machine, buffalo truck video
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/video.html?video=discovery
wow 8)
CORRECTING and REPLACING Force Protection, Inc. Announces $41 Million Equity Financing
Monday July 24, 6:28 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 24, 2006--Please replace the release with the following corrected version due to multiple revisions.
Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News), manufacturer of the Buffalo and Cougar armored vehicles deployed with U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, today announced it has closed on a private placement of 8.25 million shares of common stock, generating gross proceeds of $41.25 million.
The securities were sold to a select group of institutional investors, including John Hancock, at $5.00 per share with no warrants. C.E. Unterberg, Towbin acted as Force Protection's exclusive placement agent.
"We are extremely pleased to make this announcement," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton, who noted that this round of financing would help the company expand its production capabilities to meet expected demand. "The working capital generated by this financing will allow us to maintain focus on delivering armored vehicle technology to support U.S. and Coalition troops in Iraq.
"We appreciate the investors who have participated in this financing. Their efforts will help ensure that more lives are saved by the cutting-edge blast protection technology incorporated in the Buffalo and Cougar vehicles."
offical press release out & MACD crossing >:D >:D
The third, new element is the Cougar manufactured by Force Protection Incorporated of Charleston, South Carolina. We judge that this vehicle meets our requirement for a well protected, wheeled patrol vehicle with a less intimidating profile than tracked vehicles like Warrior or FV430. We are arranging to rapidly procure around 100 vehicles through US military sources. We have received excellent co-operation from the US Government, military and industry—an example of the special relationship bringing real benefits for our soldiers on the ground. Once we take possession of the vehicles, we must then customise them with Bowman radios and electronic counter-measures—and then fit additional armour beyond the standard level, to ensure they have the best possible protection. This procurement and enhancement process takes time. But we expect to be able to deliver the vehicles, in batches, with an effective capability in place before the end of the year and continuing through the next six month rotations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=115
Chart strong, volume strong. Looking good to $10. Great run on this one. Been on this one from $1.75 in and out but in again now.
Here is something I wrote about FPI...
Force Protection, Inc., Growing Fast
July 17, 2006 Force Protection Inc (FPI) announced that they were in the process of tripling their internal manufacturing capacity and just exceeded 500 employees. FPI is expected to continue to ramp up to over 670 employees as fast as reasonably possible. To put this in growth in perspective: In 2004, FPI began with about 12 employees and yearly revenue of $10.3 million. In 2005, revenue was $49.7 million and they ended the year with over 320 employees. This year, FPI is expected to have well over $200 million in revenue and will likely end the year with over 670 employees. To help fund the rapid growth, FPI announced July 25 that they had sold 8.25 million shares in a private placement for $41.25 million dollars.
FPI currently produces two major types of vehicles – the Buffalo and Cougar. The Buffalo was designed for use by Military Engineers as a mine clearing vehicle to keep roads and transportation routes clear of mines and IEDs. The Cougar has several variations and may be used for a large number of possible missions. It can be used to transport military engineers, as a patrol vehicle, as a troop transport or for command and control. FPI has a third vehicle under development called the Mine Resistant Utility Vehicle - Rapid Deployable (MUV-R). The MUV-R is a light weight vehicle that was designed from the ground up to survive small arms fire, mine and IED blasts. It would be used as a replacement for the Humvee.
In 2005, FPI increased production of the Cougar vehicles by building a production line. Before building the line, FPI built the vehicles on a one by one basis in bays. FPI's Cougar production line is capable of manufacturing approximately 20 Cougar type vehicles per month. Recently a second Cougar production line was built and as of June 2006 was still in the testing phase. FPI is designing the third production line which is specifically designed to build the ILAV (Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle) which is another Cougar variant. FPI is currently building ILAV Cougars as part of a BAE contract to build 378 Cougars. BAE is paying FPI a license fee and FPI retains all rights to the Cougar design. In addition, FPI is building Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV) Cougars for the US military.
FPI is currently manufacturing 3 to 4 Buffalo Mine Clearing Vehicles per month but they have said that they could potentially build up to 16 Buffalos per month by adding additional shifts. It is believed that FPI is going to rapidly increase production of Buffalo vehicles to meet increased demand. FPI has mentioned that they will have over 140 Buffalos by the end of this year and that implies that they will build over 14 per month.
Congress recently passed a defense supplemental bill and this has money allocated to buying additional Buffalos and other vehicles. The contracts for this have not yet been awarded. It is expected that the awards of contracts will begin to occur within the next few weeks for both Buffalo and Cougar vehicles. In addition, FPI should get a funding grant to help pay for the development of the MUV-R.
On July 24, there was an announcement by British Secretary of State for Defense that the British government would be purchasing 100 Cougars from US military sources. The details are sketchy but the British government may be purchasing a 6X6 Cougar. They expect to get the vehicles in batches before the end of the year and will be adding electronic counter measures, additional armor and British military radios.
FPI's Buffalo and Cougars are in demand because they have been a reliable, easily repairable and safe vehicle. FPI's vehicles have a history of survivability in "real world" situations where they have already survived over 1000 IED and mine attacks without any reported deaths. No other comparable vehicle has demonstrated that amount of survivability. The key to the Buffalo and Cougar blast protection is the armor plating and blast resistant design that FPI acquired from South African companies. The South African design is based on over 40 years of development of blast resistant and economical vehicles.
The Buffalo and Cougar use high volume commercial designs when possible. The Buffalo chassis is the same one as used in some Mack trucks. For the Cougar and Cougar variants, the Chassis are provided by Spartan Chassis Inc. Spartan Chassis is one of the most innovative Chassis manufacturers in the United States. For the drive train, transmissions and motors, FPI uses the best commercially available solutions from US manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Mack, Allison, Fabco and Marmon-Herrington. This ensures high reliability because they are using proven designs. It ensures the vehicles are economical because FPI is purchasing products already produced in volume. In short, FPI is able to build a highly reliable vehicle by using the best technology from many different vendors and integrating it together. FPI's genius has been their ability to rapidly adapt, design, prototype and manufacture the best in class vehicle faster than their larger competitors.
Recently, FPI announced the acquisition of the manufacturing and development rights to a new "Blast Manipulation Technology" that may be used on wheeled and tracked vehicles. The new technology substantially reduces the blast effect on vehicles and it is possible that this technology will be one of the most valuable technologies FPI has acquired in future years. FPI believes that sales of products based on this technology are over a year away but that it might be their most compelling product.
My Prediction for future FPI business:
1) The Cougar manufacturing line begins work on the ILAV contract.
2) The second Cougar line is ramping up by the end of July and begins work on other Cougar contracts.
3) The third Cougar line could be laid out and in the process of building by the end of July.
4) Once the third Cougar line has been completed and tested, production of the ILAV will move from the first Cougar line to the ILAV production line since it was developed specifically for this. The first line would then be taken down and upgraded and improved.
5) Sometime probably the end of July or early August, FPI begins to get new US military contracts. The decisions on how to spend the money Congress allocated to defeat IEDs may take another two or three months before all the contracts are announced. However, FPI will have continue to get follow on contracts to keep them going full steam ahead during this time – including new contracts for the Buffalo.
greta update amstocks82 (applaud)
TA update (quoted from RB Board):
-MACD is just about to cross over - showing uptrend. This rally today gave several positives that show a nice uptrend brewing.
-RSI is @ 65. CCI is still managable. Both not too high to stop the acceleration.
-CMF is still positive (of course)
-FRPT accum/dist is poiting up agin
-ROC is back positive, showing a decrease in selling pressure and momentum building
-Aroon and DMI are far apart, again showign strong uptrend
Mine-protected Utility Vehicle / Rapid-Deployable (MUV-R)
Force Protection Industries Inc., Ladson, SC, plans to compete in the competition to replace the Humvee. Neither the Buffalo nor Cougar has all the performance the Army is looking for in the nextgeneration vehicle. Specifically, they lack off-road capabilities. Force Protection's prototype, initially nicknamed the Lion, is said to weigh no more than 7 tons but still offer the same level of protection as the much larger Cougar. The prototype vehicle is known as the Mine-protected Utility Vehicle / Rapid Deployable (MUV-R). Earlier names included "Lion," which was dropped because the King of Swaziland's armored vehicle was named "Lion." The next name was "Kodiak," but Chevrolet was first with that name.
The MUV-R is a new armored vehicle with the same speed, climb, and general off-road performance capabilities as the Humvee. At 10 to 12 tons, the MUV-R is designed to meet these requirements as well as offer mine and blast protection. In addition, it incorporates a roof-mounted weapons system that is remotely controlled by the right front-seat passenger. A 360-degree battlefield requires vehicles small enough to enable a full range of motion and strong enough to take the punch of an IED. A lighter weight troop carrier is designed to fill this critical role. The MUV-R is being developed with that purpose in mind, and will likely be ready for active operations near the end of 2006.
link:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/muv-r.htm
FRPT -- The latest news.
August 11, FRPT announced a contract to build 85 Cougar for the British and that they would be called the Mastiff Protected Patrol Vehicles (Mastiff PPV). The contract with spares and manuals was for $62.9 million. The details of the contract are still sketchy but it appears that they are purchasing a 6X6 Cougar. First deliveries on the new contract are expected to ship by November 2006 and the contract is expected to be completed by May 2007.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060810/20060810005675.html?.v=1
In addition, FPI reported that they had delivered 11 Cougar JERRV and two Buffalo Mine Protected Route Clearance (MPCV) vehicles to the U.S. government in July.
Other non-published reports indicate that FRPT also delivered to BAE 8 ILAV Cougars as the first installment of the approximately 189 that they will deliver in the next few months. FRPT is working on the ILAV contract as a subcontractor and didn't report the additional 8 vehicles in in the monthly production report.
FRPT was falling ahead of the production report (they normally report monthly production in the first week of each month). This production report was late and the speculation is that BAE didn't want the 8 ILAV Cougars mentioned in the production report. Therefore, FRPT delayed the report for a few days until they would have good news the next day which was the $62.9 million dollar contract. It was expected that FPI would report at least 20 Cougars and 3 Buffalo vehicles produced. Instead they reported 2 Buffalo and 11 Cougars.
Another report from the institutional investement meeting at FRPT's headquarters last Friday is that FRPT has divided up the workers from their first Cougar production line into two groups. One group on the orginal line and the other on the new line. Then they added in the recently hired 150 people. Now FRPT has two lines but both of them are in training. They have half experienced people and half new people on each line. With one Cougar line, and producing around 3 Buffalo per quarter, FRPT could potentially have made approximately $50 million per quarter.
FRPT is waiting for the next Buffalo contract which should be announced in the next few weeks. After getting that, FRPT could potentially make 10 Buffalo per quarter. However, the new contract has not yet been given so it is unknown what the exact details will be. It is known that FRPT is getting the contract as there was language in the Defense Supplemental Bill mandating as much.
More Cougar contracts should also be given to FRPT in the next few weeks. Possibly a 1200 vehicle contract.
FRPT is in the process of getting another director. Their CFO resigned as a director so that they could get an independent director as part of their effort to get listed on a major exchange. FRPT has been above $4.00 a share for almost 2 months and above $5.00 a share for about 45 days.
I expect that FRPT applies to be listed on a major exchange when they qualify and to get listed fairly easy. FRPT is now trending to have in excess of $200 million in revenue this year and more than $400 million next year.
Nibbled some just over $6...still in the trend...glta.
from otcbb Stock Market:
http://catalystresearch.biz/files/FRPT_Note_08_15.pdf
"From a valuation standpoint, we are also raising our twelve-month price target to a range of $9.00 to $12.00 per share."
any comments on the price action ???
amstocks82, any news or updates from your side?
FRPT analysis from blog:
Force Protection--Explosive Turnaround Story !
Have you ever gazed at a stock that fundamentally looked like all the stars were in alignment for probable share price gains, but something nagged at you not to push the BUY button?
Sales at Force Protection (FRPT.OB-$6.41), a Ladson, S.C.—based maker of ballistic and blast-protected military vehicles, rocketed to $90.8 million for the six-months ended June 30, 2006, up from $1.2 million for the full FY ended December 31, 2001.
The Company, which bled red ink for five years, went from a 'Going Concern' being issued by its accountants in April 2006, to finally achieving profitability, recording a net profit of $568,382, or share-net of $0.01, for the 1H:06, the result of a sharp increase in demand for the Company's armored vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In February 2005, the Company affected a 12:1 reverse split of its Common Stock. The Company, however, has finally rewarded its long-suffering shareholders, with the stock price climbing 305.7% in the last year.
Roadside bombs, which the military calls improvised explosive devices (IEDs), are the cause of most of the combat deaths and injuries in Iraq.
According to a recent military report, insurgents planted a record number of roadside bombs last month. Approximately 2,625 bombs exploded or were discovered before they could detonate in July, up from 1,454 in January. And as the 'conflict' [Ed. note: O.K. CIVIL WAR!] widens in Iraq between Shiite and Sunni insurgents, more U.S. troops will find themselves in harm's way.
Force Protection produces two series of armored vehicles—the Buffalo and Cougar—to detect IEDs and landmines. These protective vehicles are designed with advanced V-shaped hulls to help deflect the blasts of the bombs away from the passengers within, too, and can travel at speeds up to 70 miles per hour.
The Buffalo is the heavier of the two products—weighing 22 tons—and is designed principally for route clearing activities. It integrates a blast resistant capsule with an American-made truck engine and drive train.
The Cougar—at about 14 tons—is lighter than the Buffalo—but is built to offer a similar level of blast protection. It is designed to withstand a 30-pound blast of TNT to either the front or rear axles as well as a 15-pound blast to the center portion of the vehicle. A 4-by-4 Cougar is equipped with tires that will run even when flat.
The Cougar can be configured to complete a wide variety of mission requirements. The newer, Hardened Engineered Vehicle (HEV) can serve as a mine-proof troop transport vehicle, a law enforcement special response vehicle, a weapons platform, or an escort protection vehicle.
Current backlogs indicate substantial growth in sales over the next several quarters (but are already reflected in recent stock price gains). The Company forecasts 2H:06 delivery of 164 armored vehicles, as compared to actual delivery of 37 vehicles in the 2H:05. Revenue is primarily recognized at the time goods are delivered and accepted by the customer.The world market for mine-protected vehicles is growing rapidly. Landmines and IEDs are the weapons of choice for terrorists and insurgent groups because they are highly effective yet relatively low cost. With increasing world tensions, we agree with management that there is a need for vehicles that can provide a level of protection against these threats during a variety of missions. Such missions include troop transport in and around unexploded ordnance or mine threat areas as well as route clearance and humanitarian de-mining—which require entrance into known mine fields.
Most of these missions require operating in areas of known terrorist activities and have traditionally been accomplished using light weight wheeled utility vehicles, including, for example, the High Mobility Multi Wheeled Vehicle (better known as the "Humvee"). However, Humvees were never designed to sustain high—powered explosive blasts and these un-armored utility vehicles are vulnerable to enemy fire and offer a prime target for attack.
Additionally, trying to better the armor and blast protection of the Humvee by retrofitting heavy armor into its hull, has not worked and has increased the mechanical wear caused by the added weight, too.
Conventional armored vehicles such as the Bradley and the Abrams tank do offer some protection from ballistic and blast threats. However, even these are too often no equals for the latest batch of powerful IEDs. Further, these vehicles are expensive, and require substantial resources to maintain. They are large and difficult to maneuver in crowded urban environments.
Force Protection is working on a blast-protective vehicle capable of carrying cargo and troops. This prototype, the Mine-protected Utility Vehicle/Rapid Deployable, or MUV-R (dubbed the Mover), is a potential replacement of the Humvees used by the military.
There are an estimated 15,000 Humvees in active service in the U.S. military. The government is expected to put out a request for replacement proposals in November (with production expected to start in 2008). A contract win by Force Protection could be a future footprint of success for the Company and its stock price.
To date, the Company has experienced no fatalities in any of its vehicles.
In our view, as the U.S. military increases its focus on protecting our troops—and expands [NOT contracts] its 'peace-keeping' efforts in Iraq, Force Protection should witness an increasing market demand for its products.During 2005, Force Protection depended on two principal customers, the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps. Albeit there is risk with such a limited customer base, the Company recently announced it has been awarded a contract by the British Ministry of Defense for more than 85 Cougar Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) vehicles.
As evident in the Common Stock price gain this year, investors have jumped onboard Force Protection due to the clear signs of a turnaround in the Company's fortunes. Given growth shows no sign of slowing—why the apprehension in buying shares for our portfolio?
Financial Considerations
In the 1H:06, gross margins improved 400 basis points to 18.5%, which management attributes to increased vehicle production and increased operating efficiencies.
Many government contracts are fixed-price and maybe subject to termination or renegotiation at the convenience of the government. And, large portions of the Company's factory expenses are fixed. Ergo, management would be unable to reduce expenses significantly in the short-term to compensate for any unexpected delay or decrease in anticipated revenues. As a result, expected profits could become realized net losses.
For the six month period ended June 30, 2006, after years of bleeding red ink, Force Protection generated positive cash flows from operations (CFFO) of 4.0 million. However, the 10Q Detective notes that if you back out the $7.2 million increase in accounts payable, CFFO flips back into the red--$(3.2) million.
The Company has (historically) depended on the capital markets to stay afloat and fund continuing operations. For example, on July 24, 2006, corporate realized net proceeds of $39.2 million through the sale of 8.25 million shares of its Common Stock (at $5.00 per share) in a private placement to institutional investors, including John Hancock and Cortina Asset Management.
As of August 14, 2006 Force Protection had approximately 51.1 million shares of common stock issued and outstanding, up from 21.7 million at FY ended December 31, 2003.
The accumulated deficit (as of June 30, 2006) was $(48.9) million. The book value was $0.08 per share.
Management is optimistic that infrastructure expenses previously incurred in connection with the production ramp-up will begin to level off or decline and that the Company will continue to experience increased levels of positive cash flows from operations as the Company increases the volume of vehicle production. Management also expects that such positive cash flows will allow the Company to pay down all or a portion of its short term debt and reduce the level of its accounts payable ($21.9 million).
In addition to growth acceleration, there is also the possibility of a growing recurring revenue stream from the sale of spare parts and other support services. During the FY ended December 31, 2005, spare parts contributed 10.9% to total sales of $44.8 million
As of June 30, 2006, the Company had $3.4 million in cash, the Total Debt was about 30.3% of Total Equity, and for the 1H:06, the interest coverage ratio finally swung positive—albeit a less than stellar 1.35 times operating income.
Corporate Governance Issues
Effective April 18, 2005, Gordon McGilton was promoted from Chief Quality Officer to CEO. Along with the usual salary [$420,000] and bonus-option incentives, the Company also agreed to pay Mr. McGilton "in kind" compensation in the amount of $20,000 (in the form of a Vortex jet boat). This "in kind" compensation was for work performed by Mr. McGilton as an independent contractor during 2001 and 2002—three years earlier?
And, it is not like McGilton could not afford to buy a NEW boat, for he received options to purchase 1,000,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.72 per share (which vest on January 1, 2007)—now worth an estimated $6.4 million.
In addition to his duties as CEO, McGilton is a principle of APT Leadership, a consulting firm the Company hired to provide various "business consulting services, training seminars and certain business software." Through the period ended June 30, 2006, APT Leadership billed Force Protection a total of $563,120 for such services, training and software. In addition, Force Protection entered into an agreement with APT Leadership pursuant to which the Company purchased a non-exclusive right and license to use the "diagrams, methods, concepts and business operating system functionality" contained in APT Leadership software and presented in APT Leadership's training seminars. Force Protection also paid a one-time license fee of $60,000 and agreed to pay an annual license fee thereafter of $50,000 under the terms of the said agreement.
The 10Q Detective would like to know—why the need for this leadership training? According to the APT Leadership website, the consulting firm provides motivational services designed to get employees "working together towards the organization's goal." The Company is selling armored vehicles—not burgers. Would not the monies be better spent on defense lobbyists? Or, given the highly politicized nature of weapons procurement programs, perhaps the monies ought be channeled as PAC money to the re-election campaign of embattled Congressman Henry Brown (R-SC), a big advocate for Force Protection on Capitol Hill.
Investment Risks & Considerations
Force Protection markets its products to a limited customer base and if the Company does not find acceptance of its products within that customer base, or if the Department of Defense (because of budget issues) cancels contracts, its business may fail. As previously mentioned, the Company did just receive a contract with the British government for 85 Cougar armored vehicles. The Company is subject to significant competition from companies that market products that perform similar functions. This competition could harm the Company's ability to win business and increase the price pressure on its products. The firms that Force Protection competes against include large, multinational vehicle, defense and aerospace firms such as BAE Land Systems, Iveco DVD (Italy), Textron, Stewart & Stevens, Australian Defense Industries, Oto Melara (Finmeccanica-Italy), and General Dynamics.
On June 16, 2006, Force Protection significantly improved its competitive position when it signed an intellectual property agreement to develop and market patented Blast Manipulation Technology (applicable to wheeled and tracked vehicles) with South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), a world leader in (blast-resistant) lightweight composite research. Still, it troubles us that corporate—perhaps to raise EPS visibility—is spending less than four cents of every sales dollar on R&D. Ought the Company be spending more on technology and research to exploit their competitive advantage?
With relatively short production runs and high fixed factory costs, contrary to what management would lead us to believe, sustainability of future profitability is difficult to predict. Force Protection is benefiting from the U.S. military's need to and ramp-up of combat-ready protective vehicles for service in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is no guarantee that the Company will be awarded procurement contracts in the future for the replacement of legacy systems (such as Humvees); and, to date, the Company has had limited success in diversifying into other markets.
Valuation Analysis
After an extended period of downsizing, followed by mergers (to consolidate excess capacity), the Land Combat Systems (LCS) industry appears to be in the midst of a robust growth period—both domestically and globally. For example, given the expanding demand for protected vehicles for military applications in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the move toward transforming legacy systems in both the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corp., industry pundits predict that more than $2.0 billion per annum over the next twenty years could be infused into the domestic LCS industry.
The impact of globalization is also leaving its footprint on the U.S. LCS industry.
In our view, the trend of mergers and acquisitions are likely to continue, and Force Protection could find itself on the front-end of a merger by a foreign concern (probably a U.S.-NATO ally) looking to build a presence, competitive advantage, and an increased access to U.S. markets.
Is the Common Stock of Force Protection worthy of new investments?
Manufacturing needs of the U.S Military will keep sales (and profits) trending higher through at least the 2008 timeframe. However, we believe that the market has already discounted this timeframe (witness the 305.7% price gain in the past 52-week period). After 2008, all bets are off—new faces in the White House, compounded by rising deficits and Social Security payments, could spell cutbacks in Department of Defense spending.
In our opinion, Force Protection's management does not have the know-how to be profitable as a 'low-volume' producer—with only two product lines, the Company is highly dependent on ramping up production for sustainable profitability. And management has yet to demonstrate its ability to leverage its core-competence by exporting its blast-resistant technology.
Is Force Protection attractive as an acquisition candidate? In our view, this is a probable outcome, for the Company would be an attractive purchase for a (NATO-ally) European defense contractor looking to establish a U.S. footprint to improve their likelihood of winning Pentagon contracts. FY 2005 LCS transactions sold at an average EV/sales multiple of 1.65 times.
The current enterprise value of Force Protection is $331.24 million. Assuming the Company sequentially grows sales in the 2H:06, and exists the year (optimistically) with $240 million in full-year 2006 sales, that places an EV/sales multiple of 1.38 times on the price of the Common Stock. EV/sales of 1.65 times puts the Common Stock of Force Protection at $7.75 per share--a 20.9% premium above its current share price.
In June 2005, Britian's largest defense contractor, BAE Systems, completed the acquisition of Arlington, VA. —based United Defense Systems (UDI), a dominant player in domestic LCS (like the M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle) and a global leader in ground combat vehicles and precision munitions. The transaction for UDI was valued at $3.97 billion, or 1.73 times trailing twelve-month sales of $2.29 billion.
In the summer of 2004, BAE Systems outbid General Dynamics (by $100 million) for Alvis Vickers, the UK's principal land systems business. BAE paid almost $651 million, or 1.03 times Alvis' trailing twelve-month sales.
At a current price of $6.41 per share, the Common Stock of Force Protection is valued at a P/S of 1.36 times FY 2006 exit sales of $240 million.
A turnaround at Force Protection is well underway, but lingering concerns on future contract wins will likely put a ceiling on further multiple expansion. A step-up in new product flow coupled with new contract wins—especially Humvee replacement orders—are the necessary positive catalysts for additional short-term trading gains in the price of the Common Stock.
Sales growth acceleration beyond FY 2008 is cloudier. However, industry consolidation trends bode well for shareholders in Force Protection.
The 10Q Detective, however, prefers to stay on the sidelines—at least for now.
link:
http://10qdetective.blogspot.com/2006/08/force-protection-explosive-turnaround.html
roth conference presentation quotation from raging bull:
500,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing. Fabrication in old building. Middle building is assembly line. ILAV in last building with offices as well. ILAV line is not yet assembled.
Problem solved: IED's. Existing vehicles do not handle this threat.
Picture of buffalo at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in slide. Picture shows the capsule is in tact. Standard vehicle parts are destroyed.
Desired company result: Troups returning home safely.
Picture of Crew members after 100lbs of IED. Crew stepped out to take pictures. Vehicle was repairable. All broken parts of the vehicle are repairable.
Offer 3 products: Buffalo (large capital piece of equipment in Afghanistan and Iraq), Cougar (base of ILAV and Mastiff and JERRV), Prototype MUVR (going to be renamed, not in production, latest and best technology)
Progression of intellectual property: Buffalo (South African technology, some of the technology is in the public domain). Cougar (FPRT is almost all FRPT proprietary technology). MUVR (All FRPT technology)
Buffalo (4 vehicles per month to meet contract) 64 in theatre. Largest opportunity GSTAIMDS program. Currently funded. Complex program. Buffalo is a central part of that program with a sole source procurement. Several hundred buffalos required as a part of that contract. Increase in production will be a result of the GSTAIMDS program. A few smaller oppoortunities. Actual soldiers in combat are requesting the vehicles.
Cougar: 20 per month but increased as PR'd on Friday. Will continue to increase production capacity moving forward. JERRV contract (joint service contract), 122 original 79 follow on and expecting further contracts. MRAP requesting 1,000 and they believe they have the best vehicle for this.
MUVR: Military is looking to replace the HUMVEE. They believe the MUVR meets the requirements.
The company is making many moves in different directions. IP portfolios. Parts and services. Aberdeen Process approval (they are way ahead of the competition). Use commercial components. Meet the requirements of procurement of off the shelf products.
Business operating systems are being put in place to achieve further efficiencies.
Run chart shows transformation from job shop to volume manufacturing (assembly line techniques). 20 cougars per month has been achieved. Company is now moving past that to expand to the greatest extent possible.
Hockey stick chart of sales. Migrated from Red to black in financials. Expanding markets. Cougar 6x6 can be manipulated to meet many different product requirements.
Gross margins are increasing. Achieved 19%. G&A declining. Going forward, G&A should decline as a percentage of sales.
Q&A
What is the demand: New territory. There were no armored vehicles like this. "what's the demand for saving soldiers' lives?" is the response. There is an enormous demand.
Competition. FPRT does not see any direct competition. The buffalo is a sole source award. There is no competition. Cougar: Textron, GD, Bushmaster, German Dingo. FRPT does not believe that any of those vehicles are a direct competitor (they cannot provide as much protection). RG-31 does not have a 6x6 variant or payload capacity. Performance characteristics outperform all other vehicles. THERE IS NOTHING THAT COMPARES TO THE MUVR!!!
BAE approached FPRT for the ILAV contract. FRPT might not have got the contract without BAE.
Gross Margin: Prefer to not comment on the go forward basis. Look at the trend. Each vehicle has its own pricing structure. The 19% is indicative of where the company would want. Spare parts is new territory. Parts are slow behind the vehicles. They have only recently started to get an idea of what the volume will be.
Spares provisions: Everyone one of the contracts calls for a spare provisions. $60-$100k per vehicle included in purchase orders. Known replacement and service included. Spares history beyond that is a bit difficult to forecast. Every single vehicle is in theatre and in direct threat of IEDs.
ILAV order. Requirement is 1,000. But vehicles are by delivery orders. First is 378 and then expect the next bunches to be broken up as well. Additional orders should be coming quickly. FUNDING FOR 07 BEGINS IN OCTOBER. Vehicles have already been delivered into IRAQ.
Backlog: He does not want to do the math on stage. He says look at monthly deliveries. FPRT's aim is to increase volume to the highest degree possible. Contracts is not the problem. Capacity is their problem. He understands that backlog is the historical model for military companies. However, he would say that capacity is the issue, not having the orders.
Timeline: A lot of moving parts. Steel 12-18 months in advance (they reserve production slots and then adjust per contracts). Axels, engines, etc (antipate future production and provide long leads). When contracts are awarded, they can sometimes deliver within 90-120 days. They are looking to shorten the cycle time.
Closing statements: Shareholder presentation. Guided tour. Many vehicles in parking lot. CEO will be there.
Presentation cut off.
here we go >:D >:D >:D
anybody else with me?
cheers
O.
oh yes...I'm with you. ;D
Media Kit that includes a description of each vehicle, including the latest addition - Cheetah:
http://www.forceprotection.net/pdf/fpmediakit.pdf
My understanding is the Cheetah (formerly MUV-R) is the vehicle that is targeted for the Humvee market.
FRPT has been initiated as a buy:
C.E. Unterberg initiates FRPT with a Buy and $11 tgt saying the co's vehicle offering has proven to be the only effective prevention of fatalities from improvised explosive devices and because of this the co's revs have grown from $10 mln in 2004 to an est $195 mln in 2006. Over the coming 12 to 18 months firm believes the co will continue to see rapid growth as the armed forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas purchase both the Buffalo and Cougar. Past that, however, firm thinks the co could participate in the HMMWV replacement cycle, a market with an ultimate size in the multi-tens of billions.
Force Protection FRPT CE Unterberg Towbin Buy
Price Target: $11
[/color]
http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/MarketAnalysis/Calendars/UpgradesDowngrades.htm
trustthetape quotation from otc board:
http://www.unterberg.com/research/news/091506FRPTInitiationWEB.pdf
Force Protection Inc.
(FRPT5,6,7,8,9 $7.03) Buy
FRPT: Initiating Coverage with Buy
James McIlree, CFA
212-389-8215
[email protected]Christine Bae, CFA
212-389-8217
[email protected]• We are initiating coverage of Force Protection Inc. with a Buy recommendation and $11 target price. The company's vehicle offering has proven to be the only effective prevention of fatalities from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and because of this the company's revenues have grown from $10 million in 2004 to an estimated $195 million in 2006.
• Over the coming 12 to 18 months we believe the company will continue to see rapid growth as the armed forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas purchase both the Buffalo and Cougar. Past that, however, we think the company could participate in the HMMWV replacement cycle, a market with an ultimate size in the multi-tens of billions.
• There is substantial room for margin improvement as Force Protection has spent considerable resources responding to the urgent operational needs of the Army and is still early in the process of optimizing its supply chain, production line and back office support. Reported operating margins in Q2 were 3.6%, but we believe a target of 10% or more is possible over the coming two years.
• The company is in the process of building a substantial spares, repairs and service business. In Q2, spare parts and support accounted for $12.3 million of the total $56 million in revenue. This is with less than 200 fielded vehicles at the end of Q2. As the number of vehicles deployed increases, we believe the company will benefit from a larger, high-margin recurring revenue and profit stream.
• Our price target for the shares assumes the stock can trade at 20x our fiscal 2007 EPS estimate of $0.53. Given the company's rapid growth rate, large addressable market and leading technological position, we believe both our multiple and EPS estimate could be low. Risks to achieving our target include a slow-down in spending for Iraq, advancements by competitors and its ability to deliver on a significant increase in expected revenues and earnings.
up another 16% without any PR.
New 52 weeks high @ 8.9$
>:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
I love to be a shareholder since 4.7$ 8)
Win some, lose some...I'm set with FRPT but my HQSM took a dump today!
Quote from: la-onda on September 18, 2006, 08:34:28 PM
up another 16% without any PR.
New 52 weeks high @ 8.9$
>:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
I love to be a shareholder since 4.7$ 8)
Applause Laonda for holding this baby ;)
Look at that chart, what a run!! ;)
Force Protection, Inc. 2006 Shareholder's Meeting - CEO Remarks
Publisher: Force Protection, Inc.
Date: 09/20/2006
I had the honor to be invited to join Force Protection's management team in January of 2005. That's 21 months ago now. Back then, it seemed that there were a lot of unknowns for all of us. We had little manufacturing capability, we had only the hope of a few small vehicle orders from the United States Government and there were only a few people that made up our entire workforce. It seemed that around every corner there was risk just waiting to deal the company its final blow.
I had the distinct pleasure of joining a group of people that were willing to "suit-up" and "show up" every single day, even when hope was at a premium.
These people felt an obligation to two groups of people: The military personnel that needed the protection that we knew our vehicles would provide, and the shareholders that had been willing to invest in what was, at the time, certainly a "long shot". They may not have considered these groups during every working moment, but whenever they got a chance to take a short break, from the grueling schedule that most have been working for the last 20 or so months, it was always easy recall why we were all here: To save lives and to pay a return to the shareholders that had bet on the company.
I trust that you, our shareholders, now feel that you made at least a "reasonable" choice when you invested in Force Protection, Inc. We have worked very hard to create the value that we think you deserve. This return was made available to you; while at the same time doing something very important.....that's saving the lives of our fighting forces that are carrying out a mission that our government has chosen to take on.
I guess a better way to summarize it is: We are delighted to be able to do well, by doing good!
It has not always been easy, but growing and running a business seldom is. Due to the immediate demand created for our products and the effectiveness that our technology has delivered against a powerful threat, we did not always have time to do it the way we would have liked. It caused us to have to build a company.... while we ran it at full speed. I'm sure you can imagine that this led to some inefficiency.
We feel that most of that is behind us now. The early investments we made in good people and good processes now pay benefits daily. Evidence that we are on the right track appears daily as we increase the performance both operationally and financially. We are not through yet and there is probably more to do that we have already done. That is the situation in a company that is growing. Each success creates the opportunity for more success and we are ready for the challenge.
The future of the company looks better than it ever has, to those that are working in, and on, it daily. Vehicle deliveries to the customer are increasing steadily. We have now secured contracts with an international customer, and we have future products well into the development process that will create an even broader product offering as we go forward.
There are still conditions that are difficult to predict, such as the situation with the conflict in the Middle East and the upcoming elections. Both of those could have an effect on Force Protection, Inc. We will be vigilant in looking for signs that require action, on our part, to respond to any pending changes in either situation. We don't predict that there will be a decrease in demand for the products of our company, but there could be a change in the rate in which our customers demand them. We will be very proactive in addressing any such changes, even though it is sometimes difficult to anticipate what our customers will do next.
Right now we are very optimistic about the opportunities that we see before us and we will continue to take steps to be prepared to take advantage of them. We have literally created the market for vehicles of the type we offer and they are widely considered the "Gold Standard" against the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) and other similar such devices that our enemies use. Our job is to stay one step ahead of our enemies with our technologies and we plan to do just that. By the time our competitors get to where we currently are with our technology we plan to be at a new more desirable level of protection and capability to manufacture it.
Thank you for your past confidence in our company, we will continue to work to earn it in the future as well.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=122
If you want to receive the ROTH presentation, please contact me!
part 2:
In Iraq, mine and Improvised Explosive Device (IED) warfare has proven to be a huge force multiplier for the terrorists and domestic "insurgents". A relatively small number of terrorists and insurgents can plant a significant number of IEDs and mines. If a mine or IED detonates near a vehicle not specifically designed to survive the blast, it is likely that the vehicle will be destroyed and the passengers injured or killed. To date according to reports at least 70% of all military casualties in Iraq are caused by mines or IEDs.
To combat this threat, the US and allied militaries have devoted significant resources to finding the mines and IEDs before they explode and finding the terrorists and insurgents that build and plant the explosive devices. More importantly, the US and allied militaries are forced to devote a large number of resources on defensive actions significantly degrading the combat effectiveness of the military in Iraq.
Military patrols must move very slowly in order to detect mines and IEDs. This slows down patrols limiting the area that may be patrolled.
Humvees are soft targets – even up-armored Humvees. They can be easily destroyed by mines, IEDs, small arms fire, or RPGs. Since patrols must move slowly, Humvees are not only soft targets but slow moving soft targets. This means that patrols must be large enough to offer strength in numbers. Small patrols consisting of Humvees could be completely destroyed by enemy action.
Logistics are difficult because roads may be mined or there may be IEDs near the roads. Therefore, roads that are used by supply convoys must be heavily patrolled – and the patrols must move slowly enough to make sure that all mines and IEDs are detected.
Roads that have not been recently swept for mines are dangerous for military vehicles not designed to survive mine or IED blasts. It is as a practical matter impossible to patrol all roads for mines. Therefore, insurgents and terrorists restrict US and allied military operations to areas that they have resources to keep relatively clear of mines and IEDs.
In short, the insurgent's tactics are effective and have drastically reduced the tactical effectiveness of the allied militaries in Iraq and to a lesser extent in Afghanistan.
As US tactical effectiveness is degraded, terrorists and insurgents are able to devote more resources to attacking "soft" targets such as civilians, government employees, politicians, and those cooperating with allied rebuilding efforts.
The US military has reacted to the mine and IED attacks by purchasing small numbers of MPVs. The MPVs are used for mine clearing operations and sometimes as the lead vehicle in patrols. They are also sometimes used as troop transports or to carry high value cargos or to transport VIPs.
The problem with the tactic of purchasing limited numbers of MPVs is that this is primarily a defensive tactic. The overall tactical situation is improved but the status quo remains. The US military is able to removed IEDs and mines more quickly. Patrols are safer. However, the majority of vehicles such as up-armored Humvees cannot move freely. Patrols still must be very large and move very slow to protect up-armored Humvees and other unprotected vehicles.
What is the solution to the problem? How do the allied militaries render the terrorists and insurgent's tactic of planting mines and IEDs ineffective? I think the answer is simple. Replace vehicles that are easily destroyed by mines, IEDs and small arms fire with vehicles that are not easily destroyed. The solution is to provide every soldier patrolling in Iraq or Afghanistan with an MPV of some type. This will make IEDs and mines relatively ineffective and allow the military to concentrate on other missions such as protecting civilians, hunting down terrorists and insurgents and generally making it very difficult to be a terrorist in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Can the allied militaries afford to purchase MPVs for every soldier? The answer for the US military is yes. The US military is purchasing "large ticket" items for defense. Many of them are necessary for the future of our nation's defense. Other "large ticket" items such as the "Osprey" vertical take-off plane are perhaps not so necessary yet get funding. None of the "large ticket" items being budgeted will do very much to increase the effectiveness of the military operating in Iraq or Afghanistan. None of them will do very much to reduce the casualties both civilian and military in Iraq or Afghanistan. But there is something that can be purchased for less than many of the "large ticket" items that will increase the effectiveness of the soldiers, reduce casualties and improve operational effectiveness. That "item" is many more MPVs.
The cost of not replacing up-armored Humvees and other vehicles with MPVs is a large number of casualties both wounded and dead. Each time an IED or mine destroys a Humvee, it is a tragedy in human terms as soldiers are often wounded or killed. The costs to tax payers can be large. The Humvee needs to be replaced including the semi-effective up-armor kits. The wounded must be cared for sometimes for the rest of their lives in cases of amputation or other major injuries. It costs to train replacements for those injured and killed.
The cost that is discussed less often is the cost to Iraqi and Afghan civilians. IEDs and mines that are meant for Allied military vehicles often injure civilians. If the mines and IEDs were ineffective in destroying or damaging military vehicles, it is likely fewer would be placed. If soldiers were in MPVs that could survive IED and mine blasts, patrols could be smaller. Smaller patrols would mean that there can be more patrols using the same number of people. Patrols could move faster because they would not have to be as careful in searching for mines and IEDs. Together this would drastically increase the area patrolled. How many Iraqi and Afghan civilians would this save?
Not having enough mine protected vehicles causes the military to sometime use M1 Tanks and Bradley vehicles to move through dangerous areas. These vehicles are made to fight wars and are not the useful in hunting insurgents. They use a large amount of fuel, are very heavy machines that will quickly destroy roads and have hefty maintenance costs. It is arguable that replacing up-armored Humvees with mine protected vehicles will save money simply on logistics costs for the M1 and Bradley vehicles won't need to be used very often and won't incur huge future repair costs to bring them to an "as new" condition.
Force Protection has recently completed the design and company testing of an MPV that may be used to replace the Humvee. It is called the Cheetah. It is a very tough vehicle that is designed to withstand large mine and IED blasts and small arms fire. It has many large bullet proof windows with firing ports. It can be configured with a remotely fired weapon mounted on the roof for added fire power. The Cheetah is able to carry 6 or 8 people depending on the configuration, has a range of 700 miles, has better fuel efficiency than many SUVs and has a top sprint speed of 89 MPH. Unlike the Humvee, the Cheetah was designed from the ground up to survive in IED and mine infested areas. The Cheetah is much less expensive than foreign made MPVs and offers a higher degree of ballistic and blast protection. Force Protection also sells two other MPVs. They are the Buffalo and Cougar. There are more than 200 Cougars and Buffalos in Iraq and Afghanistan and are used in the most dangerous areas. Already they have survived more than 1000 mine and IED blasts without any major injuries.
The future of anti-insurgent warfare exists today and it is fast, well armed and maneuverable mine protected vehicles. The best of such vehicles is made in the United States by Force Protection, Inc.
FPI (Force Protection, Inc) has the stock ticker FRPT.OB and is traded on the OTCBB exchange.
Many new contracts are in the works. Force Protection should get listed on a major exchange sometime in early November. The new contracts and listing are the catalysts that will take it to the next level.
hi amstock,
thanks for the update,
let´s use the alreday existing FRPT thread for posting:
http://www.3stocksonfire.org/trading/index.php?topic=3375.90
(please use the search functionality ;) )
normal pullback today...
FRPT P&F Bullish Catapult Alerts
[/color]
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.scan?s=TSA[t.t_eq_s]![t.e_eq_n]![as0,20,tv_gt_40000]![ya_eq_1]
Bullish Catapult Breakout
A triple top breakout followed by a double top breakout is recognized as a bullish catapult breakout. The implication is that there was supply at the triple top level that was keeping prices from going up, but the triple top breakout took some of that supply away. Prices then retraced, allowing more buyers to create demand which continued to power the up move in prices.
link:
http://stockcharts.com/help/doku.php?id=support:pnf_alerts
please read updated analyst information >:D >:D >:D
link:
http://catalystresearch.biz/files/CFR__FRPT_Note_09_26_06.pdf
EMA 20 should be our first support here IMO ;)
amstock82 update:
Force Protection, Inc., Growing Fast (Sep 27 update)
In July 2006, FPI announced a major production ramp up, "... Our customers in uniform recognize the unmatched protection our vehicles provide and continue to order them at an unprecedented rate," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "As a result, Force Protection is engaged in efforts to triple its internal manufacturing capacity,...".
Increasing production is nothing new for the company. In 2004 FPI produced 14 vehicles. In 2005 they produced 71 vehicles and in 2006 will produce more than 260 vehicles. The large increase in production was not without its challenges. In 2004, the company was building the vehicle in bays on a one by one basis but that process does not work well for volume production. Therefore in 2005, FPI began building a regular production line for Cougars. In early 2006, FPI had completed staffing the new line and by April 2006 they had reached target production of 20 Cougars per month. In July, 2006 FPI began the process of once more tripling internal production. The current production ramp up is intended to increase production from approximately 20 Cougars and 3 Buffalo per month to approximately 50 to 60 Cougars and as many as 8 to 10 Buffalos per month assuming new contracts continue to be received.
Revenue is growing in line with production and the number of deployed vehicles; in 2004, revenue was $10.3 million, in 2005, revenue was $49.7 million, in 2006, revenue should exceed $210 million and in 2007, revenue should exceed $500 million.
FPI currently produces two major types of vehicles – the Buffalo and Cougar. The Buffalo was designed for use by Military Engineers as a mine clearing vehicle to keep roads and transportation routes clear of mines and IEDs. The Buffalo has no direct competition and was made an official part of the "IED Defeat Task Force." The Cougar has several variations and may be used for a large number of possible missions. It can be used to transport military engineers, as a patrol vehicle, as a troop transport or for command and control.
A third vehicle called the Cheetah has been developed to provide a smaller mine protected vehicle to replace Humvees or the Snatch type vehicles. The Humvee and Snatch are either unarmored or use up-armor kits to provide a limited amount of ballistic and blast protection. The up armor kits are not effective against most mines and IEDs. The Cheetah was designed from the ground up to survive small arms fire, mine and IED blasts.
FPI has a large order backlog. In June BAE and FPI won a bid on a contract to build 378 Cougars for the Iraqi Army and police. The contract may be extended to 1050 vehicles. The ILAV Cougar is FPI's design but both FPI and BAE will build the vehicle and share in the revenue. FPI retains all rights to the Cougar design and BAE will pay FPI a license fee for each vehicle built.
On August 11, a contract was announced to build 85 Cougars for the British military. The version of the Cougar that the British military is purchasing will be called the Mastiff Protected Patrol Vehicles (Mastiff PPV). The contract with spares and manuals was for $62.9 million. First deliveries on the new contract are expected to ship by November 2006 and the contract is expected to be completed by May 2007.
FPI has a smaller backlog of JERRV Cougars and Buffalo vehicles for the US military. This backlog is expected to grow as new contracts are announced for the defeat IED task force. In addition, both the British and the US military are considering purchasing Cheetah vehicles. It is likely that a few Cheetah prototypes will be purchased late this year or early in 2007 to begin testing these vehicles on military proving grounds and perhaps in Iraq and Afghanistan.
FPI's vehicles are easy to repair, economical and practical because wherever possible they rely on commercially available parts and sub-assemblies. The Buffalo chassis is the same one as used in many Mack trucks. For the Cougar vehicles, the Chassis are provided by Spartan Chassis Inc. The drive train, transmissions and motors are provided by manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Mack, Allison, Fabco and Marmon-Herrington. High reliability is ensured by using proven highly reliable parts and sub-assemblies. It ensures the vehicles are economical because FPI is purchasing products already produced in volume. In short, FPI is able to build a highly reliable vehicle by using the best technology from many different vendors and integrating them together. Part of FPI's genius has been their ability to rapidly adapt, design, prototype and manufacture the best in class vehicle faster than their larger competitors.
FPI initially acquired much of the "mine and blast protection" design used in the Buffalo and Cougar from South Africa. A long insurgency was fought by the South African against insurgents and terrorists whose weapons of choice were mines and IEDs. Due to both import and budget restrictions, South Africa could not import armored vehicles. Therefore, for over 40 years, the South Africans developed an armor technology that was very sophisticated but inexpensive enough to be affordable for large scale deployment. The armor allowed South Africa to defeat the insurgency by rendering the insurgent's main weapon -- mines and IEDs ineffective. FPI was granted the exclusive design rights to some of South Africa's latest technology in return for a per vehicle royalty.
FPI's chief scientist is Dr. Vernon Joynt. Dr. Joynt is a pioneer in the field of ballistic and mine protected vehicle design and worked on many of the South African designs. He has over 30 years experience in developing armored vehicles. One of his early accomplishments was the design of the first "wedge shaped" mine protected vehicle for the South African government. Dr. Joynt is leading the effort to both develop and acquire new technology that will improve the blast and ballistic protection on new vehicles. The Cheetah uses new technology developed exclusively by FPI to make it as light as possible while still providing a large measure of blast and ballistic protection. FPI recently acquired the manufacturing and development rights to a new "Blast Manipulation Technology" that may be used on wheeled and tracked vehicles. The new technology substantially reduces the blast effect on vehicles.
Buffalos and Cougars have a history of survivability in "real world" situations. They have already survived over 1000 IED and mine attacks without any reported deaths. No other comparable vehicle has demonstrated that amount of survivability.
FPI has several competitors that also produce mine protected vehicles: Textron offers the ASV; GD builds the RG-31; Australia has the Bushmaster; Germany builds the Dingo. FPI does not believe that any of those vehicles are direct competitors to the Cougar because they don't offer the same measure of ballistic and blast protection or the performance characteristics of the Cougar. None of the competing vehicles have the same record of surviving IED and mine attacks.
The military is likely to continue to acquire new mine protected vehicles. In Iraq, most casualties are caused by IEDs and mines. Mines have not only caused most of the casualties but have significantly degraded the effectiveness of soldiers who must carefully inspect every area they wish to operate in for mines. Roads must be continually patrolled and inspected to ensure that no new IEDs or mines have been planted. Therefore, mines and the threat of mines have been one of the largest problems faced by US forces and also the deadliest threat to soldiers. The solution to this problem is to acquire more mine protected vehicles from manufacturers such as FPI and it appears that the military has begun the process of doing just that.
Latest News:
August 15, FPI reported revenue of $56,074,537 and a net profit of $1,234,015. This is an amazing increase in profit considering that FPI has been rapidly hiring new employees and expanding production. A large part of the total revenue was from the sale of spare parts and other support services which accounted for $12,309,355. The company has over 200 vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan. This number will be over 700 with the ILAV vehicles included by the end of next year. By the end of 2007, revenue from spare parts and support services will be larger than FPI's yearly sales for 2005. Spare parts and support services are a much higher margin business.
September 7, FPI presented at the Roth Capital Partners Conference. One comment (paraphrased slightly) made at the conference in particular highlights FPI's strategy: "Our aim is to increase capacity to the maximum extent possible. Orders and Sales have never been our problem. Our challenge has always been increasing production and capacity."
good news and nice bounce back ;D
Force Protection Extends Agreement with South African Technology Partner
Friday September 29, 9:00 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced that it has reached an agreement with MECHEM, a division of DENEL (Pty) Ltd of South Africa, to extend the term of their relationship for an additional five years effective September 13, 2006.
Under the agreement, MECHEM, an organization that specializes in the supply of landmine detection, de-mining, and unexploded ordnance disposal equipment and services, will continue to work exclusively with Force Protection on all projects relating to the exploitation of its technology.
"We are extremely pleased to continue this important relationship," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "As a world leader in the field of humanitarian de-mining, MECHEM has unequaled knowledge and expertise in the detection, removal and defeat of all types of explosive devices. They will be an invaluable resource to Force Protection's expanding R&D initiatives."
Force Protection manufactures the Cougar and Buffalo mine-protected vehicles that have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003. Despite thousands of mine detonations and IED attacks, no fatalities have occurred in a Force Protection vehicle.
&
trustthetape quotation:
Looks like CEUT likes the pull back here in FRPT as well:
FRPT: Force Protection: Firm's Top Pick; focus on defense budget conference, passage should bring flow of orders - CE Unterberg (7.91)
[Update]
CE Unterberg says with the recent pullback in the shares, as well as a
promising (though still pending) FY07 Defense appropriations bill, they are highlighting FRPT as their top pick. Firm believes the stock's recent weakness reflects investor concern over insider selling, and is overdone. Firm believes the selling is primarily from 10b5-1 plans and were set in motion months ago and do not reflect an opinion of upcoming business. Firm believes focus should instead be placed on the defense budget conference report, which includes substantial funding for the Joint IED Defeat Fund and FRPT's Cougar variants.
Firm believes the bill is close to final passage in the Senate and that orders should begin flowing in shortly after the new government fiscal year begins. Firm believes the current stock price is a compelling buying point. Firm reiterates their Buy recommendation and $11 tgt.
update:
Force Protection, Inc. Breaks Production Records in September
Monday October 2, 12:10 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Armored vehicle manufacturer Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) exceeded production records in September as it delivered more than 30 of its Buffalo, Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response (JERRV), and Iraqi Light Armored (ILAV) vehicles to the U.S. government.
"In addition to our September vehicle deliveries, we have also verified the successful integration of improved materials such as domestic steel for the JERRV and Buffalo vehicles," said Vice President for Program Management Damon Walsh. "The effect of this testing is to increase the availability of raw materials for vehicle production, which in turn enhances our ability to increase production to meet customer demand."
Force Protection vehicles have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003 without a fatality to a passenger. This unmatched record of success has led to major contract awards from U.S. and Coalition governments who recognize the vital role of the vehicles for their armed forces.
"Force Protection continues to experience the fruits of its efforts to ramp up production of these life-saving vehicles," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "We are currently ahead of schedule in deliveries of the Cougar JERRV and are on track with our Buffalo and ILAV programs. We are fulfilling our commitment to get the highest levels of protection available to the field as quickly as possible."
&
Safe truck, explosive business
Force Protection manufactures trucks that can protect its passengers from a landmine blast.
FORTUNE Small Business Magazine
By Maggie Overfelt, FSB writer-reporter
October 2 2006: 10:57 AM EDT
(FSB Magazine) -- The UN estimates that more than 110 million active landmines lurk beneath roads and fields around the world, and for every mine cleared, 20 are planted. That's a growing market for Force Protection (Charts), a Ladson, S.C., manufacturer of armored vehicles.
Unlike its competitors, Force Protection fits its trucks - such as the Buffalo, pictured - with V-shaped hulls, which deflect the energy blasted from mines up into the sides of the chassis instead of directly at it.
"Soldiers have a much better chance of coming back alive in our vehicles vs. anything else," says vice president Michael Aldrich. In the three years since the trucks were launched, no fatalities have been reported in any Force Protection truck.
Britain, Israel and South Africa have inquired about using the company's trucks, but Force Protection's recent revenue spike - from $6 million in 2003 to more than $200 million so far this year - comes from U.S. government contracts.
About 200 trucks have been shipped to Iraq, and in May, Force Protection won a $445 million multiyear contract from the Pentagon to build 1,000 trucks for the Iraqi army. The first Cougars, four-by-four trucks that fit ten soldiers and can hit speeds of up to 75 mph, were shipped in July.
link:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2006/10/01/8387294/index.htm?source=yahoo_quote
Armor's Next Target?
Matthew Swibel 10.30.06
Not a single serviceman has been killed riding in the 23-ton Buffalo vehicle or the 17-ton Cougar urban fighting vehicle used in thousands of missions on the bloodiest routes in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's a record Humvees fortified by Armor Holdings can't match.
In January 2006 the Army ordered 41 Buffalos from Force Protection Industries, the $50 million (sales) company, which also builds the Cougar and two other models. The Buffalos, which earn rave reviews for protecting convoys from mines and improvised explosive devices, incorporate components from Caterpillar, General Motors, Volvo Group and Mack Trucks.
The Army's fiscal 2007 budget includes $180 million for another 250 to 300 Buffalos over three years. The company recently won a $65 million contract from the British government for 85 Cougar-based vehicles.
Unlike armored Humvees, Force Protection vehicles feature a V-shape hull that sits on the axle. "This leaves the vehicle less vulnerable to blast energy," says Michael Aldrich, vice president of marketing at Force Protection, which forecasts 2006 sales of $200 million. With production at capacity at its main campus in South Carolina, Force Protection is in discussions to set up another assembly line at Armor Holdings' Stewart & Stevenson plant. "Armor Holdings has expertise in this field that makes a partnership look good to both of us," Aldrich says.
Might a partnership lead to an acquisition? "We think they have great products," allows Armor Holdings' Schiller.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2006/1030/146a_print.html
This news also today:
http://10qdetective.blogspot.com/2006/10/force-protection-update-would-bernard.html
Lots of insider selling, too. I'm still holding some shares but am getting concerned that there may be better places for my money to grow.
???
sold 2/3 the last few weeks (average around 8), today I will sell the rest or my shares (50% profit)
there are better investment opportunitys in the market now
FRPT will be on my watchlist
cheers
Oliver
of course up again after I have sold :o
Looks like it took out some stops only to rise on great volume...I added for the third time on the dip since last time I added was above $8 :-\
Held nicely above the 50dma.
No money left :(
Dougherty initiates FRPT with a Buy and $10.50 tgt saying they believe demand for the co's vehicles will continue to result in rapid top and bottom line growth for the next several years. Firm ests the co's current backlog is in excess of $200 mln, representing 388 vehicles as of 6/30/06. Firm notes FRPT's opportunities extend beyond the U.S. Military and the co is steadily increasing its capacity to support demand.
(from otc webside, trustthetape)
Link for 10.50 tgt.:
http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/MarketAnalysis/Calendars/UpgradesDowngrades.htm
may I kindly ask for some TA advise?
tia
Oliver
My amateur $.02
The stock is still being accumulated and looks to be gaining force. Also, it just bounced off the bottom bollinger band and the 50% fibonacci (from $5.07 low to $9.43 high). I think it's holding well and should be considered a buy. I do own shares and expect it to close right on the 50dma.
I hope I'm not being biased.
GLTA...Jody
nice article:
BAE Delivering a Cougar Variant for Iraq's $445.4M ILAV Contract
Posted 25-Oct-2006 04:14
Related stories: Americas - USA, BAE, Contracts - Awards, Delivery & Task Orders, Engineering Vehicles, Middle East - Other, Other Corporation, Partnerships & Consortia, Warfare - Trends
BAE Systems has now received a $188.3 million in Foreign Military Sales delivery orders from the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, for a total order book to date of 398 Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles (ILAVs). The original contract and associated work began at the end of May 2006, and the total value of the contract could reach $445.4 million and 1,050 vehicles if all options are exercised. The first ILAVs were delivered to Iraq 90 days after contract award, i.e. by the end of August 2006.
What's even more interesting is the vehicle that BAE bid and the Iraqis selected: a design based on Force Protection Inc's v-hulled Cougar 4×4 that has earned such praise from US Marine Corps and Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams in Iraq. BAE Systems already made a number of eligible armored vehicles. So why the Cougar?...
After all, BAE's vast array of products include the M2/M3 Bradley, the M113 APC family, the highly-regarded v-hulled RG-31 Nyala 4×4s that are also in battlefield use by American and Canadian troops, and larger v-hulled Casspir personnel carriers that have a long history of effective use in mined war zones.
DID spoke with a BAE executive, whose simple response was that they looked at the Iraqis' stated requirements, looked at what was available on the market, decided that this option would be the best offering, and put the consortium together.
This has not stopped BAE from making competitive moves of its own toward the Cougar/Buffalo's market niche, however, just as Force Protection is making moves toward the smaller mine-resistant vehicle niche of BAE OMC's RG-31/32 offerings. See below for further details.
BAE Systems Land and Armaments is the prime contractor for the ILAV, with subcontractors Force Protection Inc. in Ladson, SC, and Spartan Chassis, Inc. in Charlotte, MI. This consortium will also have the happy result of expanding the manufacturing capacity for Cougar-type vehicles; BAE Systems personnel told DID that work would be going on at Spartan Chassis in Michigan and BAE's manufacturing plants in Anniston, AL and York, PA, as well as Force Protection's South Carolina facilities; note, for instance, the work split in the original May 31, 2006 order.
All contracts are issued by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, MI.
Oct 23/06: BAE Systems announces that it has received a $7.8 million Foreign Military Sales contract modification to manufacture 20 additional Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles. The contract modification follows an initial order for 378 vehicles issued in May 2006, and represents another step on the road to 1,050 potential vehicles if all options are exercised. BAE's release notes that work on the contract is ongoing with deliveries scheduled to continue through May 2007. The first ILAVs were delivered to Iraq 90 days after contract award, i.e. by the end of August 2006.
Aug 15/06: UK Land Forces Order 86 'Mastiff PPV' Cougar Vehicles. The Mastiff is another Cougar variant, and will be employed in Iraq and Afghanistan. DID's article also adds relevant background concerning Force Protection's efforts & plans to increase production capacity.
May 31/06: The original ILAV order. BAE Systems Land & Armaments LP in York, PA received a delivery order amount of $180.5 million as part of a $445.4 million firm-fixed-price contract for Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles. Work will be performed in Anniston, AL (50%), and Ladson, SC (50%), and is expected to be complete by May 2007, or by November 30, 2009 if all options are exercised. Bids were solicited via the World Wide Web on May 5, 2006, and 16 bids were received (W56HZV-06-D-VB01).
We'd also like to note two other points of interest:
One is the new Marine Corps Armored Turret System sitting on the BAE photo release of the new ILAV. Good thinking.
The second item is the fact that unlike the RG-31 or Casspir, the Cougar is built in the USA and has just expanded its manufacturing capacity there. While it's a bit early to float merger & acquisition rumors, and the BAE executives we talked to didn't even hint in that direction, BAE Systems is quite open about its desire to be a major trans-Atlantic competitor in all areas of its business. The Airbus sale will give them over $1 billion in cash, and Force Protection vehicles like the Cougar and Buffalo are proving quite popular in the USA and gathering an enviable combat reputation.
With the ILAV order, the Cougar takes an important step forward, moving beyond an EOD specialty vehicle and into the growing niche for mine-protected patrol vehicles. Working with Force Protection to produce these vehicles gives plenty of time for due diligence and corporate culture compatibility checks, and adding the Cougar and Buffalo to its stable would give it a formidable set of options for international competitions against Krauss-Maffei's Dingo, Iveco's MLV/Panther, and ADI's Bushmaster IMV. Not to mention a US option that none of the others could match, as the US military considers what vehicle or vehicle mix should follow the Hummer.
This contract will be worth watching, for a number of reasons.
ANALYSIS UPDATES:
* The field is getting more crowded. In early October 2006, BAE moved to introduce the RG-33L as a Cougar/Buffalo competitor, while Force Protection introduced the 4×4 Cheetah as a smaller vehicle that competes with BAE OMC's RG-31/RG-32. Meanwhile Protected Vehicles, Inc. in North Charleston, SC has introduced their PVI-Alpha, which uses similar design approaches and adds a unique resin armor developed with Battelle. Its founder Garth Barrett headed a firm that was acquired by Force Protection.
* Force Protection (Sept 29/06) - Force Protection Extends Agreement with South African Technology Partner. That partner, Mechem, is a division of South Africa's Denel Pty Ltd. The new agreement extends to September 2011.
* 10Q Detective (Aug 26/06) - Force Protection--Explosive Turnaround Story. In 2001, Force Protection looked like it might go out of business. Things have changed. An interesting business/stock analysis of Force Protection, Inc., which sees them as a potential takeover target. DID adds that we don't do stock recommendations, that this is one source of information among many whose reliability you must evaluate entirely on your own, and that if you buy stocks that's 100% your decision and your risk.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/10/bae-delivering-a-cougar-variant-for-iraqs-4454m-ilav-contract/index.php
down again ???
wrong again :(
in at 6.60 looking to sell at 7.00 tommorrow....why the sell off....bad numbers? way oversold based on bollinger band...a bounce for sure
The latest news about FRPT was released not by FRPT but by Spartan Motors. Spartan Motors is the sub-contractor for the FRPT Cougars as well as the BAE Cougars (FRPT's design). BAE had a conference call today (Oct 26, 2006) -- and below is some relevant comments from the conference call. My opinion now is that I believe that the current downturn in price per share is about over. I expect the price per share to rebound.
Spartan Motors Chassis Update
http://www .spartanmotors.com/webcasts. asp
Another reference:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/061026/clth022.html?.v=75
Below is a partial "transcript" from the Conference call. I might have missed a word or two. The speaker is Mr. Sztykiel the CEO. The times given are from the time in the conference call:
13:28
"Military vehicles
It's has been a strong year, it has been a great year, however I do believe the best is yet to come.
We continue to gain revenue and profits from our sub-contract work for both Force Protection's Cougars and BAE's ILAV in the third quarter.
In the specialty vehicles / chassis perspective sales were up 259% in the third quarter of this year versus last year.
In addition BAE recently announced a small add on order of 20 units relative to the ILAV product and what is exciting about that is add-ons don't happen unless you are doing a very good job.
And as we look at the current ILAV contract, as mentioned in our earlier releases, the current contract is for 378 units, we have now had an add-on for 20. The total opportunity is 1050 and again, I wish to compliment all the associates both at Force Protection and at BAE and Spartan and all those sub contractors to move the ball in the right direction.
When I look at where we were on May 31st, building zero ILAV from a support subcontract perspective and where we are today, building at a rate greater than 5 a day, it is absolutely amazing and other people have noticed it both within the military and within Congress.
15:45:
I am also pleased you know again I would like to compliment Rick Schalter of Spartan Chassis for the ramp-up of the production on the Cougar and the ILAV. What is also so exciting is we have tremendous room for growth in the Military slash specialty vehicles chassis end of the market place.
Today, we are operating at a 35 percent capacity on a single shift so we are not capacity constrained in this area. The other thing that I wish to just share with all of you is as of today, there has not been even a single fatality in a Cougar or Buffalo of ILAV product. This is something absolutely fantastic. The product is flat out performing."
31:10:
Question from caller, "On the Military side of the business, you have this BAE contract and the ILAV contract, and you have some work on the Cougar, I'm just trying to map out what the production will look like for the remainder of 2006 and then going into 2007."
Spartan CEO: "As you look at '06', I see it building on a similar rate versus where we were at in the third quarter and that is where Jim made the comment that there should be a little drop off of sales versus Q3. As we look at 2007, we really see nothing from the end user, the military indicating that there procurement cycle of mine blast protected vehicles is going to slow down. If anything, what we see is questions how fast can you accelerate, how fast can you ramp-up. I think all of us if we look at the news etc. perceive that what is going on overseas is not moving in the direction that everybody anticipated. So as we hear the voice of the consumer, the questions which they are asking us is not what happens you know if we slow things down, you know, all the questions are what's your capacity, what is the up-line opportunity, or the strategic supply chain management issues for you to accelerate production. And the interesting thing is the marines have received products on the Cougar, the Army is coordinating the ILAV projects with BAE and Force Protection, however, those units will be going to the Iraqi Army. What's interesting is that if you look at our own forces in Iraq, very few are scheduled right now to be getting mine blast protected vehicles."
<end of excerpt from the Conference Call>
There are several spending programs for mine protected vehicles in the 2006 military spending supplemenal budget, the 2007 spending bill and the 2007 supplemental spending bill that will likely go to Force Protection. Force Protection certainly has a strong position given that after thousands of mine and IED blasts, no one has yet died in a FRPT vehicle.
I think that there is so much business that the military is trying to evaluate just how many vehicles Force Protection can provide and on what schedule. In addition, Force Protection has gotten the order from the British which is delaying orders from our military.
The Buffalo had a simple redesign that was needed. The "Spork" which is the remote controlled arm that is used to pick up and check suspicious objects to determine if it is an IED. The hydraulic hoses were often getting broken by IEDs requiring that the Buffalo return to base to replace the hydraulic hoses. Therefore, the military asked for changes in the design to protect the hoses. This was done and has been tested. I expect that the military will have additional orders for the Buffalo after they complete evaluating the changes.
Further evidence that Force Protection is soon getting the new military contracts is the following link which has another attachment with some questions and answers about one of the military contracts. This is one of several that Force Protection is competing to get and Force Protection has already been selected as the sole source for the Buffalo or Category III vehicle:
https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis/detail.cfm?RecID=144910
"11. Category III supports route clearance missions, EOD operations, and required to transport no less than 12 personnel (up to 64 vehicles). Category III vehicles identified in RFI M67854RFIMPAV shall be pursued separately. Could you please let us know how the Marine Corps is going to pursue these vehicles? More specifically, will there be a full and open competition for Category III vehicles?
Answer: Marine Corps Systems Command plans to award Force Protection Industries Inc,. a sole source contract for Category III requirements."
nice bounce back, no money left to reenter now :'(
Press Release Source: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. Named South Carolina's Fastest-Growing Company in 2006
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) has been named South Carolina's fastest-growing company in 2006 by the state's leading accounting and business advisory firm, Elliott Davis, LLC, and by the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce.
The armored vehicle manufacturer was ranked first in the Top 25 winners who were announced Thursday (11/2) at the Chamber's Annual Summit event in Charleston. Now in its fifth year, the South Carolina's Fastest-Growing Companies(SM) program recognizes the private and publicly owned companies that have contributed to the state's economy through increases in revenue and employment.
"It is an honor for Force Protection to receive this recognition," said Force Protection COO Ray Pollard. "Since the company's beginning in 2003, the Palmetto State has continually had the resources we've needed to sustain our exponential growth. Force Protection is privileged to have South Carolina as an invaluable partner as we continue to provide our troops with the highest levels of blast protection available."
Force Protection has grown from a small start-up firm with fewer than a dozen employees in 2003 to a mainstream assembly line manufacturer with a workforce of more than 600 today. Production facilities and revenues have also expanded dramatically. The company's Buffalo and Cougar vehicles have been used by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for more than three years without a single fatality.
About Force Protection
Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles are protected against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technology is among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, S.C.
For more information on Force Protection and its vehicles, go to www.forceprotection.net.
This release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements concerning our business, future plans and objectives and the performance of our products. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties ultimately may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Technical complications may arise that could prevent the prompt implementation of the strategic plan outlined above. The company cautions that these forward looking statements are further qualified by other factors including, but not limited to, those set forth in the company's Form 10-KSB filing and other filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (available at http://www.sec.gov). The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any statements in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Contact:
Force Protection Contact:
Policy Impact Strategic Communications
Jeff Child, 202-737-5339 (Media Contact)
[email protected]or
Force Protection, Inc.
Investor Relations, 843-740-7015
[email protected]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Force Protection, Inc.
Press Release Source: Force Protection, Inc.
More Force Protection Vehicles for the Global War on Terror
Friday November 10, 8:55 am ET
Manufacturer Receives $214 Million Contract Award.................. ;D ;)
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced it has signed a U.S. Marine Corps contract for approximately 200 Cougar Joint EOD Rapid Response vehicles, 80 Buffalo mine-protected clearance vehicles, parts and services. The contract will be administered by the Marine Corps Systems Command, and is worth an estimated $214,124,450.
Force Protection vehicles have an unmatched safety record in Iraq and Afghanistan, withstanding thousands of mine detonations and IED attacks since 2003 without a fatality. The South Carolina-based manufacturer, recently named the fastest growing company in the state, has supplied all branches of American armed forces with its blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles.
"We constantly see evidence that the unique V-shaped hull design of our vehicles will be the standard for any vehicle on a 360-degree battlefield over the next 10 years," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "They have been proven countless times in the most demanding conditions. These vehicles represent a solution to the explosive threats our troops face, and they are being delivered in greater and greater numbers."
Force Protection, cited in Forbes, Fortune and other national media recently, has delivered more than 300 vehicles to the U.S. government to date.
For additional information, go to www.forceprotection.net.
About Force Protection
Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles are protected against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technology is among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, S.C.
For more information on Force Protection and its vehicles, go to www.forceprotection.net.
This release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements concerning our business, future plans and objectives and the performance of our products. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties ultimately may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Technical complications may arise that could prevent the prompt implementation of the strategic plan outlined above. The company cautions that these forward looking statements are further qualified by other factors including, but not limited to, those set forth in the company's Form 10-KSB filing and other filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (available at http://www.sec.gov). The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any statements in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Contact:
Policy Impact Strategic Communications
Jeff Child, 202-737-5339 (Media Contact)
[email protected]or
Force Protection, Inc.
Investor Relations, 843-740-7015
[email protected]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Force Protection, Inc.
"We constantly see evidence that the unique V-shaped hull design of our vehicles will be the standard for any vehicle on a 360-degree battlefield over the next 10 years," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "They have been proven countless times in the most demanding conditions. These vehicles represent a solution to the explosive threats our troops face, and they are being delivered in greater and greater numbers."
wow, two days away, and now this :o >:D >:D >:D
when will be good point of investing?
Pullback on monday morning?
Quote from: la-onda on October 20, 2006, 08:53:00 AM
sold 2/3 the last few weeks (average around 8), today I will sell the rest or my shares (50% profit)
there are better investment opportunitys in the market now
FRPT will be on my watchlist
cheers
Oliver
locked my profits too early. :'(
will be back invested in FRPT
cheers
O.
Good trading la-onda............Applaud !! ;D
black candle formed today, consolidation after earnings?
cheers
O.
candle midpoint, time for investing IMO
Applaud the update... keep up the nice work..... ;D
Welcome to "300" ! ;)
Force Protection, Inc. Announces Continued Profitability for Third Quarter
Tuesday November 14, 5:21 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB: FRPT - News) today announced sales of $42,160,858 as part of its third quarter results for the three-month period ended September 30, 2006. The company recorded a quarterly gross profit of $7,918,508, and a net profit of $602,698 for the same period. Force Protection has realized year-to-date net profits of $1,171,080, generating year-to-date earnings of $0.03 per share.
"This is Force Protection's third consecutive month of operating profitability," said Vice President of Finance Richard Hamilton. "Sales for the quarter bring our 2006 cumulative year-to-date revenue total to $133,037,980, reflecting a dramatic increase from our 2005 full-year results."
Force Protection was recently named South Carolina's Fastest-Growing Company in 2006. The award, based on gross revenues and employment, recognizes the top 25 companies that have contributed to the state's economy. Since their initial deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003, no fatalities have occurred in a Force Protection vehicle.
"The third quarter was a period of internal growth for the company," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "We added two new vehicle production lines, improved efficiency within the facilities, and continued our workforce expansion program. The focus on these activities caused an anticipated short-swing dip in our third quarter revenue compared with our second quarter results, but it has positioned us to secure new contracts and handle the increased workload flowing from them."
in @ 7.99 >:D
fyi: >:D >:D
FORCEPROTECTION INC. (OTC BB: FRPT) RATING: BUY
PRICE TARGET $15.00
Looking to the Future Through the Windshield, Not the Rearview Mirror!
FRPT announced their third quarter operating results late on the afternoon of November 14th. Everyone knows the bad news (At this time of night, that phrase makes me think I might be sounding too much like the radio personality, Paul Harvey, for comfort.), ten vehicles were not inspected in time to be accepted by the US Government. Therefore, the revenue recognition approach that the Company uses did not allow for those associated revenues to be included in the quarter's results. Hence, FRPT reported $42.16 million of total revenues for the period.
On the other hand, even with the lower level of quarter revenues, the Company's operating results—particularly gross margin and bottom line figures—were impressive. FRPT reported a $0.01 in profit. Remember, this was on the basis of a much lower revenue number and the significant costs of starting a second Cougar manufacturing line and other quantum increases in the production process.
I think that it is important to note that if the 10 vehicles did get inspected, that would have added another $6.5 million to $8 million in incremental revenue. A back-of-the envelope calculation suggests that the firm should have made an additional 2¢. Or, produced an operating profit figure that would have equaled what FRPT delivered in the second quarter.
We now just have something to look forward to in the final quarter of the year.
It is very significant that the quarter's operating costs--particularly the G&A costs—were as restrained as they were. Think about what is happening. The company ought to be 4-times the size is was in 2005, yet operating costs while adding manufacturing and fabrication lines are nearly stable. It portends very well for 2007.As to our model, we have updated the fourth quarter to better reflect the improved flow of business and strong operating margins: we are now using $0.10 for Q4. For next year, we have boosted out revenue number to reflect the start-up and operation of three Cougar lines, a ramp in production for Buffalos, and the beginning of "seeding" models of the Cheetah.
Given that combination of product increases,
we are now using $598 million in sales.Also based on the production ramp, we are modestly adjusting upward our estimated margins while continuing to restrain G&A in our model for next year. I know I'm going to be aggressive, but never have I witnessed in my 30 professional years in the market an operation that added production capacity and increased revenues like I have witnessed with FRPT.
More spectacularly, this has been done with incredible Op Ex restraint. On that basis, we are now using $0.90 in fully taxed EPS for 2007. Valuation for the shares can be approached from two perspectives: essentially 15-times $1.00, or using a higher multiple given the service and repair component of the trucks and the technology, on a lower risk-adjusted earnings figure. The target today is the mid –teens.
link:
http://catalystresearch.biz/files/FRPT_Update_Report_11_15_06.pdf
This little pup has run a nice 778.22% since 01/16/06
A good looking bullish uptrend.... ;D
Below the 1 Year chart will display just that.
52wk Range: 0.69 - 9.43
Volume: 3,835,048
Avg Vol (3m): 1,104,670
The most interesting thing which can be gleaned from the simple press release from Force Protection is that they now have 3 lines up and going.
http://forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=134
"The third quarter was a period of internal growth for the company," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "We added two new vehicle production lines, improved efficiency within the facilities, and continued our workforce expansion program. The focus on these activities caused an anticipated short-swing dip in our third quarter revenue compared with our second quarter results, but it has positioned us to secure new contracts and handle the increased workload flowing from them."
Additional information comes from the Spartan Conference call:
Spartan Motors Chassis Update
http://www .spartanmotors.com/webcasts. asp
Below is a partial "transcript" from the Conference call. I might have missed a word or two. The speaker is Mr. Sztykiel the CEO. The times given are from the time in the conference call:
13:28
"Military vehicles
It's has been a strong year, it has been a great year, however I do believe the best is yet to come.
We continue to gain revenue and profits from our sub-contract work for both Force Protection's Cougars and BAE's ILAV in the third quarter.
In the specialty vehicles / chassis perspective sales were up 259% in the third quarter of this year versus last year.
In addition BAE recently announced a small add on order of 20 units relative to the ILAV product and what is exciting about that is add-ons don't happen unless you are doing a very good job.
And as we look at the current ILAV contract, as mentioned in our earlier releases, the current contract is for 378 units, we have now had an add-on for 20. The total opportunity is 1050 and again, I wish to compliment all the associates both at Force Protection and at BAE and Spartan and all those sub contractors to move the ball in the right direction.
When I look at where we were on May 31st, building zero ILAV from a support subcontract perspective and where we are today, building at a rate greater than 5 a day, it is absolutely amazing and other people have noticed it both within the military and within Congress.
15:45:
I am also pleased you know again I would like to compliment Rick Schalter of Spartan Chassis for the ramp-up of the production on the Cougar and the ILAV. What is also so exciting is we have tremendous room for growth in the Military slash specialty vehicles chassis end of the market place.
Today, we are operating at a 35 percent capacity on a single shift so we are not capacity constrained in this area. The other thing that I wish to just share with all of you is as of today, there has not been even a single fatality in a Cougar or Buffalo of ILAV product. This is something absolutely fantastic. The product is flat out performing."
< End Excerpt from Spartan CC >
Put the fact that Force Protection now has 3 lines going and can produce about 75 Cougars per month with what Spartan said and that is they make Chassis for the vehicles at the rate of over 5 per day and the picture is clear. Force Protection is likely putting together 3 Cougars per day and BAE is putting together 2 per day.
That is a HUGE ramp up and will mean a very large increase in revenue next quarter.
Force Protection has mentioned that they have over 600 workers and are hiring at the rate of 25 to 40 per week right now and are bidding on contracts for at least 4000 vehicles in the next two years that are like a Cougar.
hi,
why is FRPT no 3SoF pick? ;)
cheers
Oliver
1)
Force Protection, Inc. Announces Partnering Agreement with General Dynamics
Thursday November 16, 8:30 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced it has reached an agreement with General Dynamics Land Systems to partner in the production of its Cougar medium mine-protected vehicle. The agreement, which took effect 11/11, marks the first vendor arrangement between the companies.
Force Protection will be prime contractor under the agreement, with General Dynamics as subcontractor, using available production capacity at the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio to perform structure fabrication of the vehicle.
Force Protection's Cougar vehicle has been deployed since 2004 in the global war on terror. It was first used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in Falujah, and is now used by all branches of U.S. armed forces due to its unmatched safety record in the field. To date, not a single fatality has occurred in a Force Protection vehicle.
"Warfare has changed, and the equipment needed by our troops to stay protected in the face of emerging threats must change with it," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "The blast protection technology incorporated in the Cougar is the best available in the world today. Force Protection is delighted to partner with an organization of the caliber, depth and experience of General Dynamics to ensure the production capacity necessary to get this vehicle to the field in the numbers needed."
General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics Corporation (NYSE:GD - News), designs, manufactures and supports land and amphibious combat systems for the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and allied nations. General Dynamics, headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia, employs approximately 81,100 people worldwide and expects 2006 revenue of approximately $24 billion. The company is a market leader in mission-critical information systems and technologies; land and expeditionary combat systems, armaments and munitions; shipbuilding and marine systems; and business aviation.
Force Protection has delivered more than 300 blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles to the U.S. government since 2003.
2)
Force Protection, Inc. Delivers First Round of Cougar Mastiff Vehicles to British Military
Thursday November 16, 1:21 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today presented the first round of Cougar Mastiff Patrol Protected vehicles (Mastiff PPV) to the British Ministry of Defence (MOD) at Force Protection's headquarters near Charleston, SC. Force Protection is manufacturing specially modified Cougar vehicles, known in Great Britain as the Mastiff, for the MOD. These are the first vehicles delivered under a contract awarded by the MOD in August 2006 for more than 85 Mastiff PPVs.
"It is an honor to have our British allies with us today," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "This presentation is three weeks ahead of schedule, with more vehicles to follow. Force Protection is extremely pleased at the efficiency with which this contract is being fulfilled as we work to provide British armed forces with this life-saving technology."
First deployed in 2004 with the U.S. Marine Corps, Force Protection's Cougar and other mine-protected vehicles have an unmatched safety record in Iraq and Afghanistan. British Secretary of State for Defense Des Browne told Parliament in July that the Cougar meets his country's requirements for a well-protected, wheeled vehicle.
"Our marines are your moms and dads, sisters and brothers, and friends," U.S. Marine Corps Colonel Dave Karcher told a crowd of workers and military officials. "I want you to know that what you do makes a difference for them."
The U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command is managing the Mastiff contract through the Department of Defense.
3)
New FRPT Auditors, preparation for Nasdaq Board Move ? 8)
FORCE PROTECTION INC: 8-K, Sub-Doc 1, Page 2
ITEM 4.01 CHANGES IN REGISTRANT'SCERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT.
The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of ForceProtection, Inc. (the "Company") has approved a change inauditors. At a meeting of the Audit Committee held on November 10, 2006,the Audit Committee approved the engagement of Elliott Davis, LLC to serve asthe Company's independent registered accounting firm for the fiscal year endingDecember 31, 2007. In addition, the Audit Committee dismissed Jaspers +Hall, P.C. as the independent registered accounting firm of the Companyeffective upon completion of the audit of the Company's consolidated financialstatements as of and for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and2004, and through November 16, 2006, the Company did not consult ElliottDavis, LLC regarding the application of accounting principles to a specifiedtransaction, either completed or proposed, the type of audit opinion that mightbe rendered on the Company's financial statements or any matter that was eitherthe subject of a disagreement (as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) and therelated instructions to Item 304 of Regulation S-K) or a reportableevent (as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K).
The reports of Jaspers + Hall, P.C. on the Company'sconsolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2005and 2004 did not contain an adverse opinion or a disclaimer of opinion and werenot qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accountingprinciple. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and2004, and through November 16, 2006, there were no disagreements withJaspers + Hall, P.C. on any matter of accounting principles or practices,financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedure, whichdisagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of Jaspers + Hall, P.C.,would have caused Jaspers + Hall, P.C. to make reference thereto in its reports on the Company's consolidatedfinancial statements for such years. During the years ended December 31,2005 and 2004, and through November 16, 2006, there were no reportableevents (as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K) with respect tothe Company.
The Company requested Jaspers + Hall, P.C. to furnisha letter addressed to the Securities and Exchange Commission stating whether ornot it agrees with the above statements. A copy of such letter is filed asExhibit 16.1 to this Current Report on Form 8-K.
bingo ;D
Force Protection, Inc. Announces NASDAQ Application
Friday November 17, 8:00 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) today announced its application for listing of its common stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market. The Company believes it meets all of the listing criteria except for its Board composition.
"We have worked diligently to expand our business and develop a leading technology for blast protection," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "As a growing public company, Force Protection believes that it is the appropriate time to apply for listing on NASDAQ."
Force Protection's common stock will continue to trade on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board until NASDAQ approves the application.
"If approved, we believe Force Protection will gain access to a broader institutional investor market, enhance its financing flexibility, and provide greater liquidity for its shareholders," said Chairman Frank Kavanaugh.
chart update >:D >:D
Force Protection (FPI) has a lot going for it since the military decided that they really need all their vehicles to have V-hulls and be mine protected and IED protected. Force Protection's vehicles have survived RPG hits as well as several thousand IED and mine explosions without anyone dying. They owe this partly to FPI adopting the South African technology. As those who follow FPI know, South Africa fought a 40 year insurgency in which the enemy relied on IED and mine warfare. After South Africa perfected their vehicles, it meant that effectively IED and mine warfare were not effective and South Africa defeated the insurgents and terrorists.
FPI later hired the best researcher who worked on the technology Dr. Vernon Joynt and through his help was able to secure the license to the best South African technology for use in their vehicles. In addition, he has helped FPI and their other engineers and technical staff to continue to make the vehicles better.
South Africa didn't have the money for expensive technology and therefore the tech based on South African technology is not all that expensive -- but it is very innovative, easy to patent protect (which they did) and easy to repair.
FPI has the advantage with their vehicles on price, survivability and reparability. Therefore it is not surprising that GD didn't think much of its chances of getting a medium mine protected vehicle contract and with the democrats in charge and decided to be a subcontractor for FPI. Perhaps GD's decision was partly based on the likelihood that the FCS concept will be scrapped. New Stryker battalions might also not be formed. FPI's vehicles have shown themselves to be more survivable than Stryker vehicles, easier to repair, less expensive and they look less lethal and therefore are better suited to use in Iraq and Iran where they are patrolling in civilian areas.
With FPI looking good to get the 4000 vehicle contract as well as contracts for thousands more vehicles in the future, the current price of $11.80 does not look all that high. I think $15.00 is not far away and with listing on the Nasdaq coming up in a few weeks, I can see FPI hitting $25 early next year.
Force Protection has two major Defense contractors as subcontractors. They are General Dynamics and Armored Holdings. What this does is allow Force Protection to bid on very large contracts and provide the Department of Defense with reason to believe that they can build the vehicles.
Currently, Force Protection is bidding on approximately 4000 vehicles for the Marines. The Army could potentially need around 20,000 vehicles not including replacements for the aging Humvee. Force Protection has the Cheetah which is viewed by many as a possible replacement for the Humvee and for which Force Protection has said they will build production lines for them in 2007. My expectation based on past Force Protection statements is that this means that they have began building a line or lines for the Cheetah vehicle.
The potential market for a Humvee replacement is around 150,000 vehicles. This is a multi-billion dollar contract. Some of the competing vehicles that are now on various company websites look like knock-offs for Humvees. Their specs show they have the power generation capacity to provide electricity for a few houses but they have not incorporated the new military requirement. The new requirement which has the highest priority is survivability. As one general put it, what good is a vehicle that won't keep the troops alive?
Right now, Force Protection a very small company appears the best candidate to provide thousands of medium mine protected vehicles to the military. With their new subcontractors, they are well positioned to meet the demand. Force protection also appears to be best situated to provide the replacement vehicle for the Humvee.
Force Protection, Inc., Growing Fast (Nov 24 update)
In July 2006, FPI announced a major production ramp up, "... Our customers in uniform recognize the unmatched protection our vehicles provide and continue to order them at an unprecedented rate," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "As a result, Force Protection is engaged in efforts to triple its internal manufacturing capacity,...". In November 2006, Force Protection currently has over 600 employees and is according to Mike Aldrich of FPI hiring 25 to 40 people a week.
The large increase in production was not without its challenges. In 2004, the company was building the vehicle in bays on a one by one basis. More vehicles were needed than could be built on a one by one basis. Therefore in 2005, FPI began building a regular production line for Cougars. In early 2006, FPI had completed staffing the new line and by April 2006 they had reached target production of 20 Cougars per month. In July, 2006 FPI began the process of once more tripling internal production. The production ramp up was intended to increase production from approximately 20 Cougars and 3 Buffalo per month to approximately 50 to 60 Cougars and as many as 8 to 10 Buffalos per month.
Due to the rapid increase in demand for Force Protection vehicles, even this rapid ramp-up is not enough. Due to strong demand for Force Protection vehicles, Force Protection teamed with General Dynamics Land Systems and Armored Holdings to build the Cougar medium mine-protected vehicle.
FPI's order backlog has been growing. Last June BAE and FPI won a bid on a contract to build 378 Cougars for the Iraqi Army and police. The contract may be extended to 1050 vehicles. FPI retains all rights to the Cougar design and BAE will pay FPI a license fee for each vehicle built. In August, FPI won a $63 million contract from the British to build 85 Cougars – to be renamed the Mastiff. In November, Force Protection won a $214 million contract to build 200 Cougar and 80 Buffalo and are currently bidding on contracts for over 4000 additional vehicles. These additional vehicles and perhaps 10s of thousands more over the next few years is why Force Protection has teamed with General Dynamics.
Revenue is growing in line with production and the number of deployed vehicles; in 2004, revenue was $10.3 million, in 2005, revenue was $49.7 million, in 2006, revenue should exceed $210 million and in 2007, contract backlog is already approaching $500 million. As the number of deployed vehicles increases, so does the reoccurring revenue for continued support, maintenance and repair. In 2006, the support, maintenance and repair revenue (the ILS revenue) should almost match FPI's 2005 yearly revenue. FPI now predicts that ILS revenue will be about $44 million in 2006. ILS revenue is the highest margin revenue and is reoccurring year after year based on the number of vehicles deployed and the amount of maintenance and repair required. FPI will get the ILS revenue from vehicles build under all of their current partnerships.
FPI currently produces two major types of vehicles – the Buffalo and Cougar. The Buffalo was designed for use by Military Engineers as a mine clearing vehicle to keep roads and transportation routes clear of mines and IEDs. The Buffalo has no direct competition and was made an official part of the "IED Defeat Task Force." The Cougar has several variations and may be used for a large number of possible missions. It can be used to transport military engineers, as a patrol vehicle, as a troop transport or for command and control.
A third vehicle called the Cheetah has been developed to provide a smaller mine protected vehicle to replace Humvees or the Snatch type vehicles. The Humvee and Snatch are either unarmored or use up-armor kits to provide a limited amount of ballistic and blast protection. The up armor kits are not effective against most mines and IEDs. The Cheetah was designed from the ground up to survive small arms fire, mine and IED blasts.
FPI's vehicles are easy to repair, economical and practical because wherever possible they rely on commercially available parts and sub-assemblies. The Buffalo chassis is the same one as used in many Mack trucks. For the Cougar vehicles, the Chassis are provided by Spartan Chassis Inc. The drive train, transmissions and motors are provided by manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Mack, Allison, Fabco and Marmon-Herrington. High reliability is ensured by using proven highly reliable parts and sub-assemblies. It ensures the vehicles are economical because FPI is purchasing products already produced in volume. In short, FPI is able to build a highly reliable vehicle by using the best technology from many different vendors and integrating them together. Part of FPI's genius has been their ability to rapidly adapt, design, prototype and manufacture the best in class vehicle faster than their larger competitors.
FPI initially acquired much of the "mine and blast protection" design used in the Buffalo and Cougar from South Africa. A long insurgency was fought by the South African against insurgents and terrorists whose weapons of choice were mines and IEDs. Due to both import and budget restrictions, South Africa could not import armored vehicles. Therefore, for over 40 years, the South Africans developed an armor technology that was very sophisticated but inexpensive enough to be affordable for large scale deployment. The armor allowed South Africa to defeat the insurgency by rendering the insurgent's main weapon -- mines and IEDs ineffective. FPI was granted the exclusive design rights to some of South Africa's latest technology in return for a per vehicle royalty.
FPI's chief scientist is Dr. Vernon Joynt. Dr. Joynt is a pioneer in the field of ballistic and mine protected vehicle design and worked on many of the South African designs. He has over 30 years experience in developing armored vehicles. One of his early accomplishments was the design of the first "wedge shaped" mine protected vehicle for the South African government. Dr. Joynt is leading the effort to both develop and acquire new technology that will improve the blast and ballistic protection on new vehicles. The Cheetah uses new technology developed exclusively by FPI to make it as light as possible while still providing a large measure of blast and ballistic protection. FPI recently acquired the manufacturing and development rights to a new "Blast Manipulation Technology" that may be used on wheeled and tracked vehicles. The new technology substantially reduces the blast effect on vehicles.
Buffalos and Cougars have a history of survivability in "real world" situations. They have already survived thousands of IED and mine attacks without any reported deaths. No other comparable vehicle has demonstrated that amount of survivability.
The military is likely to continue to acquire new mine protected vehicles. In Iraq, most casualties are caused by IEDs and mines. Mines have not only caused most of the casualties but have significantly degraded the effectiveness of soldiers who must carefully inspect every area they wish to operate in for mines. Roads must be continually patrolled and inspected to ensure that no new IEDs or mines have been planted. Therefore, mines and the threat of mines have been one of the largest problems faced by US forces and also the deadliest threat to soldiers. The solution to this problem is to acquire more mine protected vehicles from manufacturers such as FPI and it appears that the military has begun the process of doing just that.
FPI (Force Protection, Inc) has the stock ticker FRPT.OB and is traded on the OTCBB exchange.
The High Cost of Humvees (Repost)
The HMMWV (High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle - M1114) is the main utility vehicle used by the US military and allies and is commonly called the Humvee. It was designed to provide tactical mobility to the soldiers. It was not designed as a "fighting vehicle" and has very little ballistic or blast protection.
To address the problem of a lack of ballistic and blast protection, most Humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan have been up-armored. Although the additional armor added to the Humvee increases the survivability of soldiers riding in the vehicle there are still frequent casualties. Humvees were not designed as armored vehicles and it is not possible to add enough armor to make them truly mine or IED resistant.
A Humvee normally costs almost $65,000 dollars. An up-armored Humvee cost around $140,000 dollars. Humvees are not designed for the additional weight from the armor. Therefore, the design life of a Humvee that has been up-armored is very low probably less than half that of a normal Humvee. In addition, the motor, transmission and drive train was not designed for the additional armor and the vehicle requires more repairs. Since up-armored Humvees last half as long as normal Humvees and require more maintenance, it is fair to more than double the price tag of the Humvee to $300,000 given that every one that is purchased will need to be replaced very quickly.
Up-armored Humvees are top heavy and roll over more often than Humvees that are not up-armored. Some reports indicate that more than 50 soldiers are killed and over 100 soldiers are wounded each year in Iraq and Afghanistan due to Humvee rollovers. Many of the rollovers would not have occurred if the vehicle were not top heavy due to the additional armor.
When Humvees are destroyed by mines or IEDs, soldiers riding in the Humvees are often wounded or killed. The price of losing any life is incalculable. The cost to taxpayers in dollars for these tragedies is huge. Each person wounded or killed needs to be replaced, insurance needs to be paid and the wounded often require long term disability or rehabilitation. The cost is huge.
The fact that Humvees are easily destroyed means that the vehicles must travel in large groups to provide safety in numbers. This is a very inefficient use of manpower and drastically reduces the area that can be patrolled.
Each time a soldier dies, the moral of civilians and soldiers is harmed and the moral of our enemies is helped. If our enemies are bolstered, this helps them recruit other terrorists.
Using Humvees reduces the militaries efficiency and increases the moral of our enemies by allowing them to have easy victories. These last two costs are more than we can afford.
What are our options? The US military has the possibility of purchasing vehicles that have a large amount of ballistic and blast protection. As a class, those vehicles can be called MPVs (Mine Protected Vehicles). Such vehicles include the Cougar, RG31, RG33L, Buffalo, ASV, Bushmaster and Dingo. Recently a new type vehicle was introduced called the Cheetah that is a smaller and faster MPV intended as a utility vehicle. The foreign made vehicles are the Bushmaster from Australia, the Dingo from Germany, the RG31 is made by GD in South Africa, RG33L by BAE. In the US, Textron builds the ASV and Force Protection, Inc builds the Cougar, Buffalo and Cheetah.
The vehicles with the best safety record are the Cougar and Buffalo made by Force Protection. Those two vehicles have already survived thousands of mine and IED blasts without significant injuries. The Cougar and Buffalo cost less than the competing vehicles.
The Cheetah is a new vehicle from Force Protection. As of yet it has not been deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan and is therefore unproven. The Cheetah is small enough to be used as a utility vehicle. Its size is comparable to the Humvee but with many times the protection for the soldiers riding inside. The Cheetah is less expensive than the all current foreign competitor's vehicles and offers more protection than any of the competing vehicles.
The Cheetah is fast – can travel up to 89 miles per hour (burst speed) if needed. It has a high level of ballistic and blast protection. Normally configured, it can seat up to six people but can be configured to seat eight if needed. It is possible to mount a remote fired machine gun on the roof of the vehicle as well as firing ports.
Vehicles like the Cheetah will allow the military to mount smaller patrols increasing the efficiency of every soldier in Iraq. Patrols will be able to move faster and travel in more dangerous areas. More patrols will be able to be undertaken. The fact that they our soldiers are much more unlikely to be injured or killed by IEDs and mines will be a major boost to the moral of civilians and soldiers. The efforts of our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan will become much less effective.
Can the military afford to replace a significant number of Humvees with Cheetahs and other MPVs? The answer is that if all direct costs are compared (the cost of injuries, the cost of replacing vehicles, the cost of Humvee up-armor kits and the loss of efficiency), the direct cost of the Cheetah is less than the Humvee.
In war, the major consideration is not just the price but whether or not something will help achieve victory. The Cheetah is a vehicle that if purchased in large quantities for the troops will not only save lives but enable our soldiers to do their jobs in a much more efficient manner. Other MPVs should be purchased to provide troop transports, ambulances and larger patrol vehicles. Together, this will reduce the effectiveness of our enemies and increase our own effectiveness and reduce the number of US casualties. This will help them achieve victory.
Fortunately, the government is taking steps to order a large number of MPVs. In the next few months, it is expected that the government will place orders for thousands of MPVs.
[email protected]
FRPT truck video in Iraq....Buffalo truck pops shell ;)
http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=676633a885
"FRPT.OB" Threads have been Merged.
Please use the search before starting new threads on a Stock Pick.
Chances are a thread already exist.
So why not post whatever you have to comment about on that pick to that thread.
"Simplicity" My fellow traders. ;D
All history on a stock pick in 1 thread is awesome. ;)
Thank You....and good luck with all your trades....make some $$$ 8)
I will leave you the chart while I am in this thread......Awesome.... ;D
The new Director should be next with the pr for a new exchange date.
52wk Range: 0.69 - 12.01
Volume: 3,014,525
Avg Vol (3m): 1,249,560
Technicals
Record Price High
Gap Up
Percentage Gainer
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $461.79
P/E Ratio: NA
PEG Ratio: N/A
Next Earnings: N/A
Last Analyst Rating: Buy
I missed getting into this great stock... Damn I wish I could of entered near 1.00 hehe.
Todays move from FRPT (December 1, 2006 the up $2.05) was from the newly released 8k which really indicated to those who have not followed the stock all the good things that are happening -- or will happen in the next six months.
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/061201/frpt.ob8-k.html
Regulation FD Disclosure
ITEM 7.01 REGULATION FD DISCLOSURE.
On October 10, 2006, we had 750 full-time employees.
For 2006 we project annual revenues in excess of $180 million.
Our current manufacturing capacity is approximately 40 Cougar and 5 Buffalo vehicles per month at our Ladson, SC facility.
On November 10, 2006, we engaged Elliot Davis, LLC as our new independent auditors for fiscal 2007.
Through September 30, 2006 we have recognized approximately $30 million in Integrated Logistics Services (ILS - spare parts and support services) revenues and estimate that our annual revenues for the ILS division will be approximately $42 million.
On February 3, 2006 we completed the production of a total of 41 Buffalo vehicles. On May 5, 2006, we were awarded a sole sourced contract to provide the U. S. Marine Corps with 79 Joint Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV). On May 31, 2006, we announced an agreement with BAE Systems Land & Armaments L.P. whereby we will produce 50% of the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles (ILAV) awarded to BAE under a contract with the U.S. Army, resulting in an order for our company of 189 vehicles, with an option for as many as 336 additional vehicles. We were awarded our first foreign contract by the British Ministry of Defense on August 11, 2006 for more than 90 JERRV and an option to purchase an additional 18 vehicles. On November 9, 2006 we were awarded a contract by the U.S. Marine Corps for a maximum order of 200 JERRV and 80 Buffalo vehicles as part of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle (MRAP) Program. This preliminary award is a firm order for 100 JERRV and 44 Buffalo with an option to purchase an additional 100 JERRV and 36 Buffalo vehicles. We believe the award of these contracts demonstrates the confidence that the U.S. Military, and now the British Ministry of Defense, has in the capabilities of our vehicles.
The U.S. Military has indicated that it is beginning to transition away from the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMVV) towards armored vehicles that will offer greater protection to the men and women of our armed forces. The U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Navy have announced contract solicitations to increase the number and quality of their armored vehicles. We are striving to be an integral part of the transition to a new generation of armored vehicles. Under the MRAP Program, the U.S. Marine Corps is soliciting bids through a Request for Proposals (RFP) for three different categories of armored vehicles. Category 1 vehicles need to transport no less than six personnel and will be used in urban operations. The U.S. Marine Corps expects to purchase a minimum of 1,500 Category 1 vehicles with an option to buy an additional 7,500 vehicles. Our 4x4 Cougar design meets the requirements for vehicles in this Category. The U.S. Marine Corps have also released an RFP to purchase 2,600 Category II vehicles with an option to buy as many as 13,000. The Category II vehicles need to transport no less than ten personnel and will have multi-mission purposes including transport, explosive ordnance disposal and combat engineering. On November 9, 2006, 200 vehicles in this category were sole-sourced to us for the manufacture of our 6x6 Cougar vehicles. In Category III of the MRAP Program, the Marines have already sole sourced 44 vehicles to Force Protection as part of the agreement of November 9, 2006, with an option to buy an additional 36 vehicles. The Category III vehicles need to transport no less than twelve personnel and will support route clearance. Although the Marines have not yet committed to award any additional vehicles in this category, we believe that an RFP for Category III vehicles will be forthcoming in the near future. If all options on these contracts are exercised these contracts could have an estimated value of up to $10 billion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Army is in the process of improving its fleet of armored vehicles under the Ground Standoff Mine Detection System (GSTAMIDS) Program. Contracts under this existing and funded program are to be awarded for two types of vehicles, the Mine Protected Clearance Vehicle (MPCV) and the Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV). Our Buffalo vehicle meets the Army's MPCV specifications and our Cougar JERRV meets the specifications for the MMPV. The Army has a requirement for approximately 180 MPCVs and over 600 MMPVs at a total estimated value of $1.4 billion.
The information in this report on Form 8-K, shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to liability of that section. The information in this report shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing or other document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing or document.
This report may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, statements concerning our business and possible or assumed future results of operations. We generally use words such as "believe," "may," "could," "will," "intend," "expect," "anticipate," "plan," and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements for many reasons including: our ability to continue as a going concern, adverse economic changes affecting markets we serve; competition in our markets and industry segments; our timing and the profitability of entering new markets; greater than expected costs, customer acceptance of our products or difficulties related to our integration of the businesses we may acquire; and other risks and uncertainties as may be detailed from time to time in our public announcements and SEC filings available at www.sec.gov. Although we believe the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, they relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made, and our future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements may not meet these expectations. We do not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this document to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations, except as required by law.
Quote from: la-onda on December 04, 2006, 05:24:54 PM
the saga continues
La-onda, You can say that again ....It's an understatement ! ;)
Barring news of a buyout or a huge contract, some sort of a pullback is likely in the near term. Buying on weakness still makes a ton of sense, if any part of the Humvee contract comes their way the PPS will go through the roof. JMHO of course.....
Technicals
Record Price High
Percentage Gainer
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $461.79
P/E Ratio: NA
PEG Ratio: N/A
Next Earnings: N/A
Last Analyst Rating: Buy
Like the way this company is moving along,and agree a pullback would also be healthy.I am trying to label the progress so far this year and from my view this looks to be in the 5th wave,which followed a previous extended 3rd wave.With that said,I would expect some sort of correction after the new year as it appears to have made W1,W2 of the 5th but thats yet to be completed.I haven't figured out the label for wave 2,looks like a combo variation of some sort.Feedback appreciated..
pullback today (as expected)
Pulling back more today... Looks like a good buying opertunity may be around the corner, 10s possible?
great stock!
chart update,
update:
1)
New Partnership Aims to Speed Armored Vehicle ProductionBy KRIS OSBORN
Special Report: 1,000 Ship Navy
Force Protection, the maker of the popular Cougar and Buffalo armored vehicles, on Dec. 21 formed a joint-venture company with General Dynamics Land Systems to win a U.S. Marine Corps contract to build thousands of Mine Resistant Ambush Protection (MRAP) vehicles.
While the initial contract value is to be $770 million, the total value of the program could be as much as $10 billion, sources said. The 50-50 joint venture, to be concluded within a month, will allow the companies to address a key Marine Corps requirement for the program — rapid delivery of vehicles to meet wartime demands in Afghanistan and Iraq.
"The idea is to merge Force Protection's proprietary designs with GDLS's manufacturing and technological capacity," said Michael Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president. "Buying enough steel to meet the demand has been a challenge, GDLS brings buying potential in the steel market ... We feel a tremendous obligation to meet the needs of the war fighters as quickly as possible."
According to executives for the two firms, the alliance will allow production of Cougar vehicles to increase from 40 now being built per month by Force Protection at its plant in Ladson, S.C., to 200 a month with GD.
By 2008, the joint venture aims to be building up to 300 vehicles a month.Spearheading the rushed acquisition is the Marine Corps Systems Command, which stepped up MRAP orders in September, and in recent weeks total requests for production (RFP) have risen from several hundred up to about 4,100 vehicles, Marine Corps officials said.
"We quickened the pace because we recognized the urgent and compelling need," said Capt. Jeff Landis, a Systems Command spokesman at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va. Force Protection is known for the blast-deflecting V-shaped hull featured on the 23-ton Buffalo and the 14-ton Cougar vehicles, about 300 of which are in use in Iraq and Afghanistan. GDLS is the nation's leading armored vehicle maker, building the Army's Stryker family of armored vehicles and upgrading the service's venerable M1 tank.
Over the past several years, the vehicles have been subjected to some 2,000 attacks from improvised explosive devices, rocket-propelled grenades and mines. The Cougar vehicle was first used in 2004 by I Marine Expeditionary Force units in Fallujah.
The last time GD forged a joint venture was when it partnered with General Motors Defense Canada in 2000 to build the Interim Armored Vehicle that eventually that came to be known as the Stryker. The initial Stryker contract was valued at $4 billion for 2,131 vehicles and the alliance paved the way for GD to acquire the London, Ontario-based GM unit for $1.1 billion in 2003.
"We're pleased to be partnering with a strong Force Protection team to deliver a MRAP vehicle that will be used to safeguard servicemen and women," said Peter Keating, a GDLS spokesman. "It is an opportunity to use the skills and resources of both companies to the best advantage of our customers."
link:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2439211&C=america
2)
Army Due $50 Billion More in '07InsideDefense.com NewsStand | Daniel G. Dupont | December 21, 2006
The Army is due to receive more than half of a $99.7 billion supplemental funding request prepared for Congress by the Pentagon, according to documents and sources.
The Army´s share includes more than $18.5 billion for operation and maintenance costs covering the active Army and the National Guard and Reserve. The service is also slated to receive $20.8 billion for procurement,
with more than one-fourth of that total ($5.4 billion) earmarked for tactical and support vehicles, which are being used up at historic rates in Iraq and Afghanistan.The supplemental request figures are included in a program budget decision, No. 711, covering the fiscal year 2007 global war on terror supplemental request, expected to be submitted to Congress in February.
The Pentagon comptroller approved the PBD on Dec. 7, according to sources familiar with it.
Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan account for the vast majority of the funding included in the supplemental. According to the document, reviewed by InsideDefense.com, the PBD allots $41.5 billion for operations -- mostly personnel expenses, including pay -- $26.7 billion for reconstitution; $10 billion for force protection; and $9.75 billion for Iraq and Afghan security forces.
A total of approximately $3.7 billion is set aside for Army and Marine Corps brigade and regimental combat teams; another $2.5 billion is earmarked for efforts to defeat improvised explosive devices.
The Army, which has made its desire for more funding very public in recent months, is the unsurprising winner of the most money in the supplemental request because its forces are widely acknowledged as overly stretched by commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Last week, Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker told a commission on the National Guard and reserves that the service was underfunded by the Bush administration in recent years, leading to readiness shortfalls.
Frankly, we entered this war flat-footed, he said. Investment accounts were underfunded in the Army by approximately $100 billion, resulting in nearly $56 billion in equipment shortages across the Army.
In recent weeks, the service submitted a revised budget plan to the Office of the Secretary of Defense that included more than $3 billion in cuts to the Future Combat System, as well as numerous program terminations and decrements -- all moves the service insists it was forced to make because it has not received sufficient funding from the White House and the Pentagon.
The service also issued a stark warning of serious risks to the future of the force, according to sources and documents.
Some relief is due from the supplemental, assuming the new Congress approves it next year. In particular, the service is expecting a major procurement boost to replace, repair and reset equipment lost or damaged in operations abroad. The $20.8 billion in procurement funding set aside in the PBD includes $5.4 billion for vehicles, primarily trucks, as well as $3.9 billion for wheeled and tracked combat vehicles -- a funding account traditionally dominated by Strykers, Bradleys and Abrams tanks, all of which are in heavy use.
Other procurement accounts are also due for infusions of cash, according to the PBD. It sets aside $691 million for Army aircraft, $861 million for missiles and $681.5 million for ammunition.
The PBD does not break down where the funding would be spent within the procurement accounts.
As for the other services, the Air Force receives the second-largest chunk of operation and maintenance money in the PBD, with $7.7 billion set aside for the active-duty force. The Navy´s O&M allotment is $3.8 billion, the Marine Corps $1.3 billion.
Procurement coffers for the Air Force would be increased by more than $5 billion, with most of that money -- $3.9 billion -- slated for aircraft replacements, modifications and support.
Navy aircraft procurement money in the PBD amounts to approximately $3 billion; total Marine Corps procurement money is $2.2 billion.
A total of $34 billion is earmarked for service and defense-wide procurement programs.
Each of the services is slated to receive some research, development, test and evaluation money, as well: $1.6 billion for the Air Force, $483 million for the Navy and $164 million for the Army.
Bloomberg News reported details on the supplemental request earlier this week.
link:
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,120982,00.html
I am a long term FRPT investor ;) 8)
David, Michael, what kind of facts do you need to be convinced?
;D
Terliso:
MACD crossing alert ;)
cheers
Oliver
up 9% again ;)
I will double my FRPT position soon,
too much good news for 2007 in the pipeline IMO.
please check
amstocks82 update on IV:
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=17850&pt=msg&mid=1098766
MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU (all) >:D
I have told you >:D >:D >:D >:D
additional FRPT information from IV board:
A)
Existing and Future Contracts/Acronyms/New Investor Info
Here's the frpt_inv list of existing and reasonably likely future contracts for FRPT, as of 12/15.
Includes updates for the 12/1/06 8-K, located at
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1032863/000110465906078791/a06-24859_18k.htm
If you are a new shareholder of FRPT or just heard of it and considering a purchase, you have found a company with a lot of potential. FRPT recently received a 280 vehicle contract, but there are much larger orders in the pipeline, leading to a projected at least tripling of revenues in 2007 vs 2006. Near term the biggest deals are the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) contract with a Force Protection 8-K confirming the quantities could be up to 22,000 Cougars and the Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV) with possibly over 600 Cougars. This is over $10 Billion of potential contracts, for a company with under $1Billion market cap.
In summary,
1) FRPT is completing delivery on a 79 Cougar JERRV order and a 41 Buffalo order and supporting vehicles under current contracts.
2) Ramping up on the first 199 of 525 Cougar ILAV's they'll build, 86 Cougar Mastiffs, 200 Cougar JERRV and 80 Buffalo orders.
3) Applying for an MRAP contract of up to 4100/22000 vehicles, an MMPV contract of up to 260/600+ vehicles and a Product Support Integrator contract to provide additional support for their vehicles.
4) Supporting Cheetah evaluations for the JLTV round of contracts.
Check out the following summary for lots of details and links for background research.
Note: Line items within a product are approximately ordered based on confidence, i.e. awarded contracts first, soon to be awarded next, followed by likely or possible. Backlogs are as of October 1. References to the previous messages and links provide further details and justification so that you don't have to just trust me. If you have time, you may want to spend some time reading the background messages and links as well. The RB message numbers refer to messages on Raging Bull's FRPT board and IV for messages on Investorvillage's FRPT board. An acronym dictionary is at the end of the message. This is detailed enough you may want to print it out first, then come back to follow the links.
Cougar (Non-ILAV)
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/cougar/
The Mastiff is based on the 6x6, the HEV on the 4x4 and most JERRV's are based on the 6x6, but some are 4x4.
1) 100 JERRV to be delivered between Nov 06 and Nov 07. Part of the $125Million delivery order on $214 Mill contract awarded Nov 06.
http://www.forceprotectioninc.com/news/news_article.html?id=133
2) Delivery award for the second 100 JERRV on the Nov 06 contract. Awarded. $69 Million.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=142
3) 86 Mastiff PPV for the British. $65Mill awarded. Deliveries ahead of schedule and to be complete by 5/8/07.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=117
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/britain-buying-new-land-vehicles-for-iraqi-afghan-theaters/index.php
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=136
12/1 8-K says this order is actually for over 90 vehicles.
4) 15 JERRV to be delivered in 3Q-4Q06, $9.3Mill awarded. 4 remain in backlog.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=95
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=106
5) Delivery award for 16 more JERRV as the May 06 contract was for up to 79. $10Mill. This appears to have already been quietly awarded as FRPT are including the 16 in the backlog on this contract.
6) 1 HEV remaining to be delivered. $400K. awarded. This one is left over from a previous contract and keeps getting pushed out, perhaps waiting for another larger HEV order.
7) An additional 100 JERRV to be delivered between Nov 06 and Nov 07. JERRV balance on the $214 Mill contract awarded Nov 06. Per SEC filings and press release, FRPT expects to be awarded and is already treating it as if it has been awarded.
8) The 2600 Category II vehicles of the MRAP RFI have been specifically described as similar to the 6x6 JERRV's. RFQ response due in December 18th, with award to follow some time after that. Funded by $228 Million and $299Million line items in 2007 budget and likely other funds in the 2007 defense supplemental. Considering the JERRV has already been well tested in the field, and the desire is to commit funds before end of year, (IV4625) the initial delivery order could be large. 2600 vehicles is approximately $1.3-1.5 Billion over the 2 year life of the contract. 12/1 8-K added that this is now an up to 13,000 vehicle opportunity.
The 6x6 JERRV's have been selling for $650K+ each, even at a $550K volume discount, this is an over $7 Billion dollar opportunity.
MRAP details are at http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/M67854MRAP/listing.html and http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/M6785407R5000/listing.html
My MRAP competitive analysis is at IV 13359
There were news articles that confirmed FRPT is planning to apply for MRAP and is partnering for the manufacturing capacity. One was copied into post IV11169.
9) Per the 12/1, 8-K, it apppears FRPT has chosen to go with the proven, in production product for Category I of the MRAP and will be bidding the Cougar 4x4. The expected volumes are a minimum of 1500 vehicles, with an option to buy an additional 7500 vehicles. At $400K each, this could be a $3.6 Billion contract.
10) Ambulance Variant of Cougar recently announced. I expect contract will be included in the MRAP Category II award. http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=126
11) The Army has an MMPV draft solicitation out for a 260 Vehicle contract with award projected in April 07. The vehicle is very similar to the JERRV and the MRAP class II vehicle, so they are discussing merging this vehicle in with the MRAP program. Approximate value $125 Million. Likely to need two MMPV's for each Buffalo awarded to form a GSTAMIDS convoy. According to the 12/1 8-K the needs for this one are now over 600 MMPV's instead of just 260.
http://contracting.tacom.army.mil/majorsys/mmpv/mmpv.htm
12) The Army is now forecasting needs for up to 21,000 vehicles as an interim until JLTV developed. Cougars called out as specific example. IV8316 and IV14892 This would be many Billion $. Meetings to be held in early 07.
13) Follow on order of more Mastiff for the British. Contract specifies details for 4 more, but press articles refer to the total order being for about 108, which would be 22. Approximate value $15 Million. Also, the initial order for 86 could be considered a test quantity with much larger orders possible next year as they prove themselves. See IV8805. The 12/1 8-K says the initial order is for over 90 vehicles, with an option to purchase an additional 18.
Cougar ILAV
The Cougar ILAV is the Cougar 6x6 chassis on two axles.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/06/bae-delivering-a-cougar-variant-for-iraqs-4454m-ilav-contract/index.php
1) Total IDIQ ILAV contract shared with BAE is for up to 1050 vehicles for up to $445 Million delivered by May 2008. DoD can initiate delivery orders up to that number fairly easily. Indication is that they will be issued as equiping the Iraqis with ILAV's is one of the keys to the US handing over control. Partership terms with BAE are: 50/50 production split with BAE. Royalty paid by BAE to FRPT for units BAE builds. 100% of the training and support contract to FRPT. After 1050, contract with BAE is complete, so FRPT can provide 100% of future ILAV's or renegotiate.
2) Initial delivery order of 378 units awarded. 2 of FRPT's 189 have been delivered.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=103
3) Follow on delivery order for additonal 20 units awarded. None delivered yet.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=128
4) Proposed sale of 600 ILAV's announced to Congress. Approximate value of $240 Million shared with BAE. Not awarded yet, TBD.
http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2006/Iraq_06-69.pdf
5) Proposed sale of 276 ILAV's.
http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2007/Iraq_07-09.pdf
Buffalos
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/buffalo/
1) 44 Buffalos to be delivered by Dec 07. Part of the $125Million delivery order on $214 Million contract awarded Nov. 06.
http://www.forceprotectioninc.com/news/news_article.html?id=133
2) Contracts for a total of 41 Buffalos were awarded in 06 prior to the Nov contract. Approximate contract value $30-40Million. Remaining backlog is 33 units.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=78
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=79
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=131
3) Rental fees and toy license fees from appearance in the Transformers movie to come out in mid 07. Message RB75575
4) Delivery award for additional 36 Buffalos from Nov 06 contract to be completed by Aug 08. Portion of $214Million Contract. Per SEC filings and press release, FRPT expects to be awarded and is already treating it as if it has been awarded. Value $20 Million.
5) Sole Source award for up to 64 Buffalos from MRAP RFI. Date TBD (IV5568).
6) Should get a large portion of $200Mill for additional Buffalos (specific line item for mine clearance convoys in 2006 Supplemental).
7) Army procurement plans are to buy another 250 Buffalos between 2007 and 2009. Approximately $220Million. The Buffalo was officially made part of the FCS program for mine clearance and FRPT is the sole source. Message RB76355. These will show up under the GSTAMIDS line item in the budget.
8) According to the 12/1 8-K the Army has requirements for 180 Buffalos and they are expecting another Buffalo RFP soon.
9) British may start buying Buffalos as they gain experience with Cougars. Reference in one of the news articles.
10) The Buffalo is also used in the humanitarian mission of demining old battlefields so that they are safe for civilians. Once capacity allows, there is the possibility of additional Buffalo purchases for this use.
Note: For Buffalo items 5,6,7,8 it is difficult to tell how much of this demand is satisfied with items 1 and 4.
Cheetah (formerly MUV-R and MRUV)
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/cheetah/
1) Likely to get an initial production contract in 2007 to prove the vehicle. Then a larger award once testing is satisfactory.
2) Strong position to compete for the JLTV as it moves forward. JLTV is a many billion dollar, many year contract, that will take some time to roll out. see IV11135
3) British may also buy Cheetahs as we believe they have also evaluated them.
ILS/PSI (Field Support, Spares, Training, Maintenance, Repairs, Professional Services )
1) Buffalo ILS Contracts. $5Million for Buffalo spares. Awarded, $800K remaining.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=80
2) ILAV ILS Contract: $25Million over the next two years, message 76773 Included in 378 unit award.
3) RFI for 5-year PSI support for 288 Buffalos and Cougars. Response was due August 14. IV11881. FRPT will win this one. Award date TBD.
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/M67854RFICIED/SynopsisR.html
4) Additional ILS and PSI as number of vehicles in the field keeps going up. We will have over 1000 vehicles in the field within 12 months. See IV11091
5) Catalyst reports claim a high return on ILS/PSI, similar to how your auto dealer gets a high return on their service department. Repairs to the vehicle after an IED hit adds significantly to our revenue on an ongoing basis. See latest Catalyst reports on FRPT. http://catalystresearch.biz/ResearchFRPT.html
6) ILS/PSI revenue is somewhat based on total vehicles in the field. In other words, the revene from ILS/PSI would continue to grow every quarter, even if our vehicle shipments were to hit a steady state because the total number of vehicles in the field keeps going up.
Patent Licensing
1) Licensing Revenues from patent on blast protection for wheeled and tracked vehicles. In private negotiations.
FRPT Press release, on investor news page June 15. "The significance of this undertaking cannot be overstated, and we intend to fully exploit this opportunity," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "Since the technology can be applied not only to our vehicles, but to virtually any wheeled or tracked vehicle, the potential size of the opportunity may actually exceed that of our vehicle market." Also described in
http://catalystresearch.biz/files/FRPT_Update_Report_06_19_06.pdf
Brief comments:
Can FRPT deliver the units for this many contracts?
According to Spartan call, Spartan is now delivering over 5 Cougar chassis/day. IV6398. According to 3Q results, three Cougar lines are now running. According to the 12/1/06 8K their current capacity is approximately 40 Cougar and 5 Buffalos per month.
FRPT recently announced partnerships with GD and AH to increase capacity dramatically. The GD partnership gives them access to a pool of skilled welders to build more capsules and the AH partnership gives them access to a pool of skilled truck assemblers for final assembly. In addition, FRPT has a partnership wiht Ultra Machine and Fabrication that is growing very quickly. FRPT continues to keep 100% of the high margin aftermarket business.
GD Announcement
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=135
AH Announcement
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=138
Ultra Machine and Fabrication
IV14226
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=14226&pt=msg&mid=992531
This all confirms plans are in place and being executed to win the very high volume contracts. As we said months ago, the deal was get the production capacity in place and the orders will follow.
Additional Resources to review
Most recent announcement from company of over $10Billion in potential contracts in the pipeline.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1032863/000110465906078791/a06-24859_18k.htm
Force Protection Web Site: http://www.forceprotection.net/
Catalyst Financial Reports: http://catalystresearch.biz/ResearchFRPT.html
CE Unterberg Report: http://unterberg.com/research/news/091506FRPTInitiationWEB.pdf
Yahoo Group for Force Protection. http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/forceprotection/
Yahoo group has photos, files, contracts, and some message traffic. It could become our store for due diligence files if we started to post them there.
Spartan Q3 conference call. http://www.spartanmotors.com/webcasts.asp The most detailed conference call available describing Force Protection and Spartan's work over the last four months to more than triple Cougar capacity. See IV message 6398 for my summary.
Acronyms:
Vehicles
FCS – Future Combat System – Large Army program to define a new family of vehicles for the Army of several years from now.
GSTAMIDS - Ground Standoff Minefield Detection System. The convoy that includes a Buffalo and its supporting vehicles. An official program.
HEV – Cougar Hardened Engineer Vehicle. Based on Cougar 4x4.
ILAV – Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle. A Cougar 6x6 chassis on two axles instead of three. A troop transport designed to equip the Iraqi's so they can take over duties currently covered by US troops.
JERRV - Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicle – This is a 6x6 or 4x4 Cougar used by the Explosive Ordinance Disposal and Combat Engineer Troops. These job of these troops is to disarm and dispose of IED's.
JLTV – Joint Light Tactical Vehicle –Program designed to replace the Humvee family of vehicles. Many billion dollar program in early stages of development.
Mastiff PPV- Mastiff Protected Patrol Vehicle. A Cougar 6x6 purchased by the British for their forces.
MPAV - Mine Protected Ambush Vehicle. A briefly used acronym that is equivalent to MRAP.
MRAP – Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle. A series of three vehicles similar to the Buffalo, Cheetah and Cougar. Over 4100 vehicles currently planned.
MMPV - Medium Mine Protected Vehicle. Army program for a vehicle similar to the JERRV or Cheetah. Phrase has also been used to describe the RG-31, but don't think RG-31 will win the current contract.
MRUV – Mine Resistant Utility Vehicle. Used once or twice by FRPT to describe what is now called the Cheetah
MUV-R - Mine-protected Utility Vehicle / Rapid Deployable (MUV-R), now called the Cheetah.
Services
ILS – Integrated Logistics Support (Spare parts and supplies, routine maintenance service, repairs and training)
PSI – Professional Support Integrator. Delivers ILS plus more. See IV message 4617
Contracting Process
Delivery Award – Purchase order for X vehicles for Y dollars. Ship per schedule, or sooner.
CONUS - Continental US
IDIQ – Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Award. For example a contract is awarded for up to 1050 ILAV's for up to $445 Million, locking in pricing and supplier. But need a delivery award to actual ship product.
OCONUS - Outside continental US. In FRPT's case, typically Iraq and Afghanistan.
RFI – Request for Information. An initial query to industry for "what do you have in this space"
RFP – Request for Proposal. A more direct query for a proposal for industry.
RFQ – Request for Quote. A direct query for a bid on a very specific product or service.
Customers/Partners/Regulators
AH - Armor Holdings. The Sealy, Texas plant owned by Stewart & Stevenson before S&S was acquired by AH builds military trucks.
BAE – British based defense contractor that is partner for ILAV. Formerly British Aerospace, but now has growing US presence due to acquisitions.
DoD – US Department of Defense
GD - General Dynamics. Lima Plant in Ohio builds several lines of armored vehicles.
MoD – British Ministry of Defense
SEC - Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC is the agency responsible for administering federal securities laws in the US.
Basic Stock Investing and message boards
DD - Due Diligence. Investigating and validating the real prospects of a company rather than just buying based on hype. What you are doing right now, if you are reading this message closely and following the links.
BB - Bulletin Board. Where FRPT is currently traded, but not for much longer.
EOM - end of message. Used at the end of subject line when entire message is subject and body is empty. Saves reader the time of opening message.
Note: If you find this article educational/useful for new investors, please click recommend to flag it for them.
&
B)
If you are asking: "what is FRPT's backlog?" - it's approx $400m.
Some potential contracts are:
* ILAV add-on - 600 vehicles with FRPT building 1/2; BAE building 1/2 paying $8k royalty per; FRPT receiving all ILS
* MMPV - $200m or so
* MRAP - worth up to approx $10b w/FRPT partnering with GD 50/50
* GSTAMIDs - worth up to approx $1b
Refer to FRPT_inv's post for a more comprehensive list:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=15394&pt=msg&mid=1033576
Couple things important to keep an eye one:
* Blast Manipulation Technology - are they making any progress in licensing this tech to others. This would be a "force multiplier in more ways than one
* Cheetah orders - could be a vehicle included in the MRAP but not positive that will be the case or if there will be opportunities outside of the MRAP. I calculate the Humvee replacement market (JLTV) to be a long term opportunity of about $45b. I'd expect FRPT to team with someone to pursue
* Production updates - with existing agreements (GD, AH, SPAR and Ultra) and internal production capability, ongoing production expansion is key. Naturally, the more vehicles produced, the more lives saved, the more revenue, the higher share price, the more long term ILS revenue, etc etc. The articles discussing the MRAP are calling for 300 vehicles / month in 2008. Assuming each goes for approx 750k and frpt is building 1/2 that is a annualized revenue run rate of $1.35B from this contract alone.
Happy trading in 2007 !!
cheers
Oliver
Applaud the pick, this was one of the greatest picks all year. Quite a run. :o
While many S.C.public companies celebrate growth, other are mired in investigations
By BEN WERNER
[email protected]The ball doesn't drop on 2006 until Sunday night, but the year has ended on Wall Street, and most of South Carolina's public companies saw their stock prices finish up from a year ago.
Many of the nation's major stock indexes finished 2006 with decent double-digit growth from the end of 2005 — a performance mirrored by South Carolina's 20 largest publicly traded companies.
As a whole, stock in these South Carolina-based firms finished 2006 13 percent higher than in 2005.
This year-over-year increase in stock prices was slightly better than the 12 percent growth reported for a similar list of companies at the end of 2005.
THE BIG WINNER
Ladson-based Force Protection has developed a product in high demand — armored vehicles favored by military for work in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Currently, the military is seeking bids on 4,000 armored vehicles that match specifications for Force Protection's Cougar vehicle.
The company also secured a private placement of 13 million shares of common stock, generating $152.75 million.
The day that private placement was announced, Force Protection's stock price jumped by $1 to close at $15.99 per share.
The cash is being used to expand Force Protection's Ladson manufacturing plant.link:
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/business/16346750.htm
News! CE Unterberg ups target - $17 to $25!
C.E. Unterberg Towbin Is Raising Force Protection Inc. 2007 Rev. Estimate To $392.9 million From $298.5 million
(RTTNews) - C.E. Unterberg Towbin Is Raising Force Protection Inc. (FRPT) 2007 Rev. Estimate To $392.9 million From $298.5 million
http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/MarketAnalysis/Calendars/UpgradesDowngra des.htm
nice start for 2007 IMO >:D >:D
New Armored Vehicle Saves Lives In Iraq, Protects From IED Blasts
Wednesday January 3, 7:00 pm ET
Kevin Harlin
The venerable Humvee wasn't designed to take the abuse dished out daily on the streets of Baghdad. Force Protection says its vehicles are.
The Ladson, S.C., company (OTC BB:FRPT.OB - News) says its patrol vehicles -- essentially armored bank trucks on steroids -- could save soldiers from one of the main threats they face today: devastating roadside bombs.
A few hundred of its Buffalo and Cougar vehicles are already deployed by U.S., British and Iraqi forces. In December, it partnered with General Dynamics (NYSE:GD - News) to bid on the U.S. military's latest call for a mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle, or MRAP in military jargon.
If Force Protection wins its more than $1 billion bid to provide up to 3,600 vehicles over 18 months, it will be a massive undertaking for a company that produced just 50 vehicles in December.
General Dynamics
By marrying Force Protection's trucks with General Dynamics' fabricating capacity, the companies together can deliver large numbers of "the strongest, most advanced blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles in the world," Force Protection's Gordon McGilton said in a written statement.
Humvees weren't designed to bear the brunt of an explosion, particularly from underneath. The military is retrofitting those workhorses with armor plating, but casualties continue to mount.
Unlike Humvees, all of Force Protection's vehicles have V-shaped hulls -- a design first pioneered in South Africa that deflects blasts up and around the crew compartment.
That shape, and the heavy armor -- the company considers the exact makeup of the protective skin a military secret -- increase the odds that soldiers inside will survive.
The military suffered its first fatalities inside a Force Protection vehicle in an attack in November. Neither the company nor the military would elaborate, citing security.
But in most attacks the injuries have been minor, and many of the damaged vehicles have been able to return to base under their own power.
"It's the gold standard in protection," said Michael Aldrich, a Force Protection vice president. "We've been hit over 2,000 times now. So the jury has come back in and announced that they like the design and they believe in it."
The U.S. Army took delivery of the first Buffalos in 2003. These massive, 45,000-pound trucks, with 30-foot remote arms, are used to spot and disable improvised explosive devices -- the dreaded IEDs.
The middle-duty vehicle, the 30,000-pound Cougar, first entered service with the Marines in Fallujah in 2004 and is also used for hunting IEDs.
In December, the company raised $152.8 million in a private placement that it said will allow it to ramp up production of its newest and smallest vehicle, the relatively nimble 14,000-pound Cheetah.
Aldrich says the Cheetah will offer the same blast protection and will be able to better maneuver along narrow urban corridors.
As of December, the U.S. Marines already had 69 Force Protection trucks -- four Buffalos and 65 Cougars -- and funding approved for 805 more, Marine Corps Systems Command spokesman Bill Johnson-Miles says.
Johnson-Miles says accounts from Marines who survived blasts in them are a testament to the trucks' durability.
Force Protection's Aldrich said the success in the field has led to calls from NATO nations and the militaries of Middle East countries.
Ultimately the military plans to retire the Humvee completely, Johnson-Miles says. It hasn't yet put out specifications for the next generation of durable multipurpose vehicle. But Force Protection hopes its trucks, or variations on them, will make the grade.
Potential Market
If so, that would open the company to a potential $10 billion market to deliver 20,500 vehicles.
But capacity would have to dramatically improve first.
With General Dynamics' plants in Ohio and elsewhere, Force Protection said it expects to be churning out 200 vehicles a month by the middle of 2007, and up to 300 a month in 2008.
With capacity at its Ladson plant nearly maxed out, the company is looking for a new facility to manufacture its Cheetahs.
C.E. Unterberg Towbin analyst James McIlree says the order prospects look good in 2007, though he cautioned in a research note that the company could hit snags as it tries to ramp up production. He also noted that since the bulk of the business comes from the U.S. military, the company would be in trouble if its trucks lost favor, or were beaten by offerings from better-financed competitors.
McIlree's firm underwrote the company's December private placement.
Joe Maxa, an analyst with Dougherty & Co., wrote in a November research note that the management team at the 10-year-old company had limited experience together.
Force Protection trades as a bulletin board stock, but it has applied for listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market. In December it appointed a retired U.S. Army lieutenant general to its board, giving it the required majority of independent directors.
The company posted earnings of 1 cent per share in the third quarter, on revenue of $42.2 million, up from an 11-cent loss a year ago on sales of $9.3 million. Analysts had expected 4 cents per share in the third quarter.
Maxa attributed most of the shortfall to a delivery timing issue at the end of the quarter, and a delay in Buffalo production due to a customer's design change.
Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial expect 7 cents per share in the fourth quarter, 11 cents for the year and 57 cents in 2007.
Force Protection, Inc. Marks Major '06 Milestones,
New Vehicle Production Record in December
Thursday January 4, 8:45 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Leading U.S. armored vehicle manufacturer Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT - News) continued to record substantial growth in contracts, vehicle deliveries, workforce, production capacity, and strategic partnerships during 2006, the company said today.
Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles marked more than three years in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past year. There are over 300 vehicles currently deployed, more than double the number at the beginning of 2006.
"It has been an important and remarkable year for the company," said CEO Gordon McGilton. "We continue to reap the rewards of restructuring efforts begun in 2003 to become a high-volume assembly-line manufacturer with the capacity to produce the world's best protected vehicles in the numbers needed."
"Built on the foundation of partnerships with other leading defense contractors such as General Dynamics Land Systems, BAE Systems, and Armor Holdings, and the exponential expansion of our workforce and manufacturing infrastructure, Force Protection is positioned to meet the increasing demands for our blast protection technology as never before," said Chairman Frank Kavanaugh.
Force Protection's workforce has increased to more than 700, up from 300 in January 2005. The company delivered more than 50 vehicles in December 2006 alone, a 300% increase from December 2005.
"Our records show that we produced more vehicles last month than in all of 2003 and 2004 combined," added McGilton.
Total contract awards for the year have also multiplied, due in large part to a $214 million contract award from the Marine Corps Systems Command for approximately 280 Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV) and Buffalo mine-protected clearance vehicles announced November 10, 2006.
Force Protection received a $180 million Foreign Military Sales contract from the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command to manufacture 378 Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles (ILAVs). Force Protection is acting as subcontractor, with BAE Systems as prime contractor on the award announced June 5, 2006.
The company also marked expansion into the international defense market during 2006, with a $63 million dollar contract award from the British Ministry of Defense (MOD) for more than 85 specially designed Cougars, known by the British military as Mastiff Protected Patrol Vehicles (Mastiff PPV). The first round of Mastiff PPVs were presented to the MOD ahead of schedule on November 16, 2006.
In December 2006, Force Protection and General Dynamics announced a joint venture company, Force Dynamics, which was formed to compete for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program managed by the U.S. Marine Corps. The MRAP competitive action for the first year's estimated requirement of 4,100 vehicles has an approximate value of $2 billion.
The company has continued to expand its integrated logistics support (ILS) department and anticipates that this will be a further source of revenue in 2007. ILS is responsible for order fulfillment on spare parts, contract services and maintenance and training, as well as the deployment of Force Protection field service representatives. ILS revenues are expected to exceed $42 million for 2006.
"By every measure, Force Protection is fulfilling its commitment to do all that is necessary to get these life-saving vehicles to those who need them most," noted McGilton. "From the military to the media to the federal government, our vehicles are recognized as a proven solution to the threat of improvised explosive devices, land mines, and road side bombs. No other vehicle lines match those of Force Protection for troop safety. It is because of their performance in the field that the company continues to experience such phenomenal growth."
"We look forward to continuing this vital work for our customers in 2007," said Kavanaugh. "We are also excited at the opportunities to expand our business model and provide the best possible return for our shareholders."
"Cheetah orders - could be a vehicle included in the MRAP but not positive that will be the case or if there will be opportunities outside of the MRAP. I calculate the Humvee replacement market (JLTV) to be a long term opportunity of about $45b. I'd expect FRPT to team with someone to pursue"
Why this has not been mentioned by the government? I believe there is a study which was used to provide requirements for the Hummer replacement. The military wished for something smaller, with fuel economy for range, than the Hummer. Not bigger with shorter range like the Cheetah.
I think the government is willing to give up a little fuel economy to save some soldiers from IEDs. I am not aware what the range of these monster trucks are, but I am betting they are less than a tank.
It is the IEDs which are taking so many lives in Iraq. Protecting the soldiers is the first priority.
I have kids. Sure I can shuttle them around in the Mini which gets 30mpg, but I am willing to sacrifice some economy for the security of the Tahoe.
And it is not only the heft of these vehicles, but the v shaped hull which deflects blasts. That is what makes this a superior vehicle and it looks like this is the current leader for the job. Teaming with AH and GD puts them in the best position.
"Cheetah orders - could be a vehicle included in the MRAP but not positive that will be the case or if there will be opportunities outside of the MRAP. I calculate the Humvee replacement market (JLTV) to be a long term opportunity of about $45b. I'd expect FRPT to team with someone to pursue"
That is not my point. I am all for their use in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was objecting to the speculation that FRPT would be in the running for the Humvee replacement or JLTV. None of FRPT's products were ever intended for the $45b JLTV program. And FRPT has made no statement of even working on one.
JLTV is a much bigger picture of replacing all Humvees making Humvees obsolete. Like the Humvee replaced the Jeep. Which has nothing to do with FRPT, Iraq, or Afghanistan.
@ Forbes:
Pentagon
Military Truck Maker Gets A Boost
Matthew Swibel, 01.10.07, 10:15 AM ET
WASHINGTON, D.C. -
Force Protection Industries, maker of ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles used by the U.S. military, plans to list on the Nasdaq Stock Market on Jan. 18, giving it better credibility from its current place trading in the pink sheets, and better chances of raising capital to fuel continued sales growth.
The company delivered more than 50 vehicles in December 2006 alone, a 300% increase from December 2005. Not a single serviceman has been killed riding in its 23-ton Buffalo vehicle or its 17-ton Cougar vehicle.
Whatever the criticism of President George W. Bush's plan for a troop build-up in Iraq by some Democrats, such as Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, Force Protection sees plenty of opportunity in the military's procurement plans for Iraq-style warfare. Last month, it announced a joint venture with General Dynamics to compete for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program managed by the U.S. Marine Corps. The service plans to spend at least $2 billion for 4,100 vehicles.
Once the contract is awarded, production could begin as early as April or May--as much as three months ahead of schedule. "The intent is to try and get a fairly large number of these fairly quickly," Delores Etter, the Navy's chief acquisition official, told Defense Daily, a military journal. "These are what the commanders would like to be using in Iraq right now."
Trucks are also due for major boosts in the Pentagon's recent $100 billion supplemental funding breakdown, with $1.2 billion partitioned for the service's Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles and $1.67 billion for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles. Another $1 billion is set aside for Humvees, while $500 million will be requested for the Mine-Resistant Armor-Protected Vehicle.
Over-the-counter shares of Force Protection inched 1.75% higher yesterday to $17.90, up from less than a buck a year ago.
&
IMPROVED ARMORED VEHICLES SENT TO IRAQ
IMPROVED ARMORED VEHICLES SENT TO IRAQ – British troops at a Basra air base in Iraq have received the first batch of Cougar blast-protected vehicles. The British government ordered 108 of the vehicles in August in a move partly aimed at reducing casualties among troops patrolling in lightly armored Snatch Land Rovers.
At the time the order was announced, the Ministry of Defense (MoD) committed to delivering the first vehicles by the end of the year. They just scraped in on that promise, with the vehicles arriving December 30.
About half of the Cougars - - known as the Mastiff in British Army service - - are destined for Afghanistan, where roadside bombs and attacks from other ordnance are becoming a great threat.
The British vehicles carry several modifications, including additional armor, electronic countermeasures equipment and a Bowman tactical communications system.
The Cougar was order by the British government as an urgent operational requirement at a time of mounting public and military criticism over the rising number of casualties from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Iraq.
In addition to the U.S.-built vehicle from Force Protection, the British also increased orders for Pinzgauer-built Vector armored vehicles and upgraded FV430 troop carriers to meet field commanders' requests for improved capabilities in the fight against terrorists in both hot spots. (Source: Defense News)
When does this become not a penny stock?
Suntrust Report:
Very interesting snippet from Suntrust report
Spare Parts, Services, and Upgrade Kits
In 2006, FPRT projected it would generate $42 million in revenue through its Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) business which is responsible for order fulfillment on spare parts, contract services and maintenance and training, and the deployment of field service representatives. As FRPT production rates increase, the ILS business should see strong growth since it is somewhat tied to the cumulative number of vehicles in use. Going forward, we forecast the ILS business will grow from $42 million in 2006 to $77 million in 2007 to more than $200 million in 2008. Our estimates do not include the potential impact of upgrade kits.As mentioned, the sophistication of the explosives used in IEDs continues to increase with more and more IEDs making use of shaped charges that are extremely effective at penetrating armor (shaped charges are used in anti-tank missiles, for example). As such, we see a strong opportunity for FRPT to use its expertise in blast mitigation technologies to develop and sell armor upgrade kits for its vehicles to more effectively counter the increasing sophistication of IEDs. Although we do not yet know what pricing could be for these kits, we note that the military has invested hundreds of millions of dollars for armor kits for Humvees, FMTVs, and heavy tactical trucks. We would not be surprised to see these kits generate $50 million to $100 million in revenue over the next two years.
Price target: 31 $ >:D >:D
Too much run for this stock, FRPT is the best run i've ever seen in the OTCBB exchange ;)
---- from 0.70 cents a year ago to today's high at 21.89, the stock is now gaining..
3,000%
3,000%
[size=08pt]Force Protection Rolls On
Force Protection (FRPT - commentary - Cramer's Take) knows how to treat its allies. Just look at the favor the maker of blast-resistant military trucks did for some of its investors last month.
Last month, the South Carolina-based defense contractor quietly inked a joint venture with heavyweight military supplier General Dynamics (GD - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating).
But just before announcing that key deal to the public, the company raised $153 million by selling stock at the sharply discounted price of $11.75 a share in a private placement.
Those 13 million shares, representing roughly one-quarter of the total outstanding, have already delivered phenomenal returns. At recent prices, private placement buyers are up more than 80% over four weeks.
But they aren't the only investors who have become avid fans of Force Protection. The company's stock has risen 30-fold over the last year as fans catch on to the promise of its heavy-duty gear amid the war in Iraq. The stock could soon get even more popular: Force Protection is due to move its listing to the Nasdaq from the over-the-counter bulletin board next week.
Some observers clearly believe the company has big things ahead of it.
"Within the next month, we expect to see the largest contract yet for [mine-resistant, ambush-protected] vehicles to be awarded by the U.S. Marine Corps," SunTrust analyst Chris Donaghey wrote. In starting coverage Friday with a buy rating and $31 price target, he said he believes the company can generate $1 billion in annual revenue under the deal.
But Massachusetts investment strategist Peter Cohan has his doubts. Last month, Cohan notes, Force Protection announced problems with its past financial statements. Normally, he says, the Nasdaq sends out delisting notices -- not listing approvals -- when companies face restatements.
Cohan questions the timing behind Force Protection's recent private placement as well. Quite simply, he wonders why Force Protection sold its last round of stock so cheaply when -- based on the obvious value of the General Dynamics deal -- it could have waited a bit and sold less stock at higher prices instead.
Both Force Protection and its underwriter indicated that the company needed swift financing to meet surging demand for its products.
But "the company left a huge amount of money on the table," insists Cohan, who has no position in the stock. "Why did they do that? To me, it seems unfair to the public shareholders." The stock was trading at around $14 when the private placement went through.
Shares were rising $1.42 Friday to $21.40.
Perfect Story
C.E. Unterberg Towbin handled that private placement.
James McIlree, an analyst at the firm, calls Force Protection his favorite company. He has a buy recommendation and a $25 price target on the company's stock.
With the General Dynamics deal and the fresh capital in place, McIlree feels, Force Protection is equipped to meet escalating demand for its products. Indeed, he says, the company has now positioned itself to "win a very, very large contract that is pending" at this time.
Force Protection has distinguished itself by claiming that no soldiers have died while riding in its blast-resistant vehicles. The company has seen its revenue -- and its stock price -- soar as a result.
So far, Donaghey estimates, Force Protection has delivered about 350 vehicles to the U.S. military. But that number could explode, he predicts, as the government follows through with plans to order thousands of MRAP vehicles going forward.
Donaghey believes that Force Protection's revenue, which more than quadrupled to $42.2 million in the third quarter, could rocket past $1 billion next year if that happens.
"It's not hard to sell that concept to investors," Cohan says. "Maybe the stock is going up so much just because of the story."
But Cohan recalls a similar situation that brought some pain to investors in the end. He highlights Taser International (TASR - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating) as an example.
After trading below $5 for years, Cohan says, Taser's stock suddenly took off as investors grew increasingly excited about the company's product. Taser makes electric stun guns that allow police offers to stop suspects without killing them.
Banking on huge demand for the guns, Cohan says, investors pushed Taser's stock above $30 a share a couple of years ago. However, he says, the story soon soured amid rising safety concerns over the weapons, and the stock lost most of that ground. The shares fetch around $8 now.
Force Protection Rolls On
Page 4
Cohan worries that Force Protection could turn into another Taser down the road.
History Lesson
To be sure, Force Protection carries plenty of risks.
Perhaps most notably, the company is relying on an increasingly unpopular war for much of its business. Growing crowds within Congress want to do more than shield troops in vehicles like those made by Force Protection. They want to bring those troops home instead, which would diminish the need for such vehicles.
Still, Force Protection has enjoyed quite a run in the meantime.
Force Protection started out as one of three shell companies, carrying the name Boulder Capital Opportunities, a decade ago. One of its sister companies would go on to become Stan Lee Media, an online venture involving the maker of Spiderman.
Stan Lee Media suffered a spectacular crash during the Internet bust, widely blamed on colorful co-founder Peter Paul. Paul, an ex-con who previously made millions tricking the Cuban government, allegedly orchestrated a stock-manipulation scheme that triggered the company's demise. He fled the country, winding up in a Brazilian dungeon, before returning home to face his accusers.
Paul pleaded guilty to securities violations in 2005, The Miami Herald reported, and could face up to 10 years when he is sentenced.
Still, to this day, Paul holds the Clintons responsible for the company's demise instead. Paul orchestrated a huge fund-raiser for Hillary Clinton during her first Senate campaign. In return, the media has reported, Paul expected the former president to join Stan Lee Media's board -- and raise the profile of the company -- but claims the Clintons sent securities fraud investigators after him instead.
Paul responded with a high-profile lawsuit against the Clintons. However, The New York Sun reported last year that a judge has since dropped Hillary Clinton from that case.
Force Protection's own history sounds rather mild in comparison. The company previously operated as Sonic Jet Performance, a boatmaker that hit rough waters in its early years. Frank Kavanaugh, a fund manager and current Force Protection chairman, reportedly stepped in at that time to protect his investment.
Kavanaugh has since pocketed millions by selling loads of Force Protection stock in recent months.
"Former management lied to him," says Marc Robins of Catalyst Financial Resources, hired by Force Protection to handle "investor awareness" for the company. "He took control, sold the assets, bought the truck company and ran it for five years. ... I would not be too concerned about what the company did before March 2005 -- when it became a real company."
But Cohan, for one, would have paid little attention to the company even then.
"I've never bought a company on the bulletin board; I don't track them," he says. "But for a company to go from the bulletin board to being a real company -- with a real stock -- seems very rare. I get the feeling that very few companies have managed to do what this company has apparently done.
"It's an interesting transformation, to say the least." [/size]
Force Protection Rolls On
By Melissa Davis
Senior Writer
1/12/2007 10:50 AM EST
Click here for more stories by Melissa Davis
Force Protection (FRPT - commentary - Cramer's Take) knows how to treat its allies. Just look at the favor the maker of blast-resistant military trucks did for some of its investors last month.
Last month, the South Carolina-based defense contractor quietly inked a joint venture with heavyweight military supplier General Dynamics (GD - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating).
But just before announcing that key deal to the public, the company raised $153 million by selling stock at the sharply discounted price of $11.75 a share in a private placement.
Those 13 million shares, representing roughly one-quarter of the total outstanding, have already delivered phenomenal returns. At recent prices, private placement buyers are up more than 80% over four weeks.
But they aren't the only investors who have become avid fans of Force Protection. The company's stock has risen 30-fold over the last year as fans catch on to the promise of its heavy-duty gear amid the war in Iraq. The stock could soon get even more popular: Force Protection is due to move its listing to the Nasdaq from the over the counter bulletin board next week.
Some observers clearly believe the company has big things ahead of it.
"Within the next month, we expect to see the largest contract yet for [mine-resistant, ambush-protected] vehicles to be awarded by the U.S. Marine Corps," SunTrust analyst Chris Donaghey wrote. In starting coverage Friday with a buy rating and $31 price target, he said he believes the company can generate $1 billion in annual revenue under the deal.
Friday, January 12, 2007
New Troops Will Lack Safer Humvees
The thousands of troops that President Bush is expected to order to Iraq will join the fight largely without the protection of the latest armored vehicles that withstand bomb blasts far better than the Humvees in wide use, military officers said. Vehicles such as the Cougar and the M1117 Armored Security Vehicle have proven ability to save lives, but production started late and relatively small numbers are in use in Iraq, mostly because of money shortages, industry officials said. More than 1,000 American troops have been killed by roadside bombs since the war began in March 2003. At present there are fewer than 1,000 of the new armored trucks in Iraq. At $500,000 to $700,000 each, they cost more than twice as much as a standard Humvee, but already they are proving their worth.
"They are expensive, but they are going to save lives," said Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps, during a recent trip to Iraq, where he reviewed the service's effort to get more of the vehicles.
Most American troops patrol in the 20,000 Humvees the Pentagon has sent to Iraq. Most of those vehicles have been layered with added armor plating as the Pentagon has struggled over the past three years to counter the increasingly powerful and sophisticated roadside bombs, or improvised explosive devices, planted by insurgents.
Two recent incidents illustrate the problem with the M1114 Humvee: The weight of added armor can make it unwieldy. And even with the extra armor, its flat bottom absorbs the full impact from bombs buried in the road, often buckling or breaking the chassis in half.
On Dec. 30, Army Sgt. John Michael Sullivan, 22, of Hixon, Tenn., was killed when his Humvee was struck by an IED in the Sadr City neighborhood of Baghdad. Four days earlier, Army Spc. Joseph A. Strong, 21, of Lebanon, Ind., and Spc. Douglas L. Tinsley, 21, of Chester, S.C., died when their Humvee rolled into a canal during a patrol in Baghdad.
The problem with the M1114s is, they are overloaded and flat-bottomed," said Major Gen. Richard C. Zilmer, the senior Marine commander in Iraq.
Today, the Marines are moving quickly to buy and deploy combat vehicles with a key design improvement over the Humvee: They are built with a V-shaped hull that deflects a blast up and outward, leaving passengers shaken, but alive.
Under a $125 million contract, the Marines are buying 100 Cougar and 44 Buffalo armored trucks, known collectively as MRAP, for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, made by Force Protection Inc., a small company in Ladson, S.C. The firm is producing 40 vehicles a month, said its vice president, Mike Aldrich, a retired Army officer educated at West Point.
Aldrich said the design grew out of a joint Army and Marine Corps request "designed to literally stop the bleeding from up-armored Humvees in some of the most dangerous areas in Iraq and Afghanistan."
The military services said last month that they need 4,060 of the MRAP vehicles, with 2,500 for the Army, 538 for the Navy and 1,022 for the Marines. The delivery schedule is uncertain. Meanwhile, a permanent replacement for the Humvee, incorporating the latest design and armor improvements, is years away, Pentagon officials said, and mired in technical and cost disputes.
Separately, the Army is buying the 15-ton M1117 armored vehicle for its military police. The V-hull vehicles were in production in the late 1990s but were canceled by the Army as unnecessary. In June 2004, the service decided that it needed them after all. The Army has said it needs 2,600.
Today, Textron Inc. is producing 48 per month at its New Orleans plant under a contract for 1,250 vehicles.
"That's all they had the money for," said Clay Moise, vice president for business development for Textron's Marine and Land division.
But a lack of money only partly explains why, four years into the war, there is a shortage of vehicles that can effectively survive an IED.
"The key reason it is taking so long is pretty simple: At each step along the way for the past four years, the key policymakers have assumed we were just months away from beginning to withdraw" from Iraq, said Loren B. Thompson, a national security analyst at the Lexington Institute, a nonpartisan think tank in Arlington, Va. "As a result, they never made long-term plans for occupying the country effectively."
... [t]he IED threat to Humvees is reflected in the Marines' hard-won experience in Anbar province.
"If you are hit by an IED, your chance of survival is four or five times greater in an MRAP than in a M1114," said a Marine commander, referring to the standard Humvee.
About half of the Marines' combat vehicles in Anbar are Humvees, and these are associated with 60% of the combat deaths and 65% of the wounded Marines, officers said. By comparison, attacks on V-hull armored vehicles have resulted in 2.1% of Marine combat deaths and 3.5% of the service's wounded.
A report released yesterday by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said the IED problem came about in large measure because there were not enough U.S. troops in Iraq after the 2003 invasion to secure Saddam Hussein's ammunition caches.
In the weeks after the invasion, vast amounts of anti-personnel and anti-tank mines, artillery shells and other explosives were stolen from unguarded Iraqi arsenals.
"IEDs made from looted explosives have caused about half of all U.S. combat fatalities and casualties in Iraq and have killed hundreds of Iraqis," the GAO said."
link:
http://www.drudge.com/news/89105/new-troops-lack-safer-humvees
U.S. Marine Corps Buys Additional Force Protection Vehicles
BusinessWire - January 16, 2007 8:56 AM ET
Because of increased capacity to rapidly produce its life-saving vehicles, Force Protection, Inc. (OTCBB:FRPT) said today it was able to respond to the U.S. Marine Corps' urgent operational need for 15 of the company's Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicles (JERRV). The contract for the vehicles, spare parts, and sustainment services is worth an approximate $9.4 million. All 15 vehicles will be delivered in January.
"We are pleased to be able to respond to this urgent need so quickly," said Force Protection Vice President for Program Management Damon Walsh. "Due to our ramp up efforts that include expanding production lines and improving manufacturing efficiencies, these vehicles are being produced and readied for presentation to the government in the same month the order was received.
"This is indicative of our increased capacity to produce these unmatched blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles with the required speed to support our soldiers in Iraq," he said. "Based on the strategic manufacturing partnerships we have formed recently, that capacity will only continue to expand."
Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar vehicles have logged more than 1.6 million hours of combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003. Known for the unmatched level of troop safety they provide, the Buffalo and Cougar are deployed by all branches of U.S. armed forces.
Are we ahead of, or behind the curve?
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=146
As the article states they are presently at 50 units per month.
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/fund.pl?symb=FRPT&page=news&mode=stock
With General Dynamics' plants in Ohio and elsewhere, Force Protection said it expects to be churning out 200 vehicles a month by the middle of 2007, and up to 300 a month in 2008.
With capacity at its Ladson plant nearly maxed out, the company is looking for a new facility to manufacture its Cheetahs.
pullback as expected ;)
please check attachted suntrust report >:D
Could see a tremendous move up if the big boys and M/M go diving in after the bell rings. I am sure we will see it close up tomorrow. JMHO
Back in the clutches of the FIBs. The big boys apparently could not explain the gap up above that.
Personally I think they are waiting to see how FRPT's management execution will turn into performance. Meaning Q4-2006 Report due out next month, or another contract announcement.
FRPT had a heavy selloff on its debut on the NASDAQ, but it looks to me like it found solid support at $18. I would like to see it stay above the ascnding trendline on a closing basis. They are anticipating hearing about the MRAP contract by the end of the month. That is what I believe will kick off the next big leg up, if they get a significant proportion of it.
Brief TV segment about FRPT on marketwatch:
http://www.marketwatch.com/tvradio/playerFull.asp?media=0&band=0&guid=%7B26ADF37E-2A98-43CA-8CFD-A0686375CC7C%7D&siteid=yhoo (http://www.marketwatch.com/tvradio/playerFull.asp?media=0&band=0&guid=%7B26ADF37E-2A98-43CA-8CFD-A0686375CC7C%7D&siteid=yhoo)
There you are Scottish Trader... Job done !
Thanks for the info... Trade em well... ;D
I went back in the thread and changed the Ticker Symbol
New Symbol "FRPT" Drop the .OB fellow traders..... ;D
Press Release Source: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. Moves to NASDAQ Capital Market
Friday January 19, 10:36 am ET
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT - News) officially listed its securities on the NASDAQ Capital Market yesterday, commemorating the Company's listing by opening the market at NASDAQ's MarketSite location in New York City.
"We are thrilled to be here today," said Force Protection Chairman Frank Kavanaugh. "We recognize and deeply appreciate the efforts of Force Protection's executive management team, its investors, and workforce who have supported our mission to produce vehicles that protect and save lives, and who have made this important opportunity possible. We especially dedicate this moment to the men and women of our armed forces for whom these vehicles are built."
Shareholders do not need to take any action as a result of the NASDAQ Capital Market listing. Company stock certificates will remain valid.
Popular with troops who credit the vehicles with saving lives, Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar blast- and ballistic-protected vehicles have an unmatched record for troop safety, protecting against attacks on vehicles led by improvised explosive devices and roadside bombs. Combined, the vehicles have logged more than 1.6 million hours of combat operations since their initial deployment with U.S. and Allied forces in 2003.
About Force Protection
Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles protect against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technologies are among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, S.C.
For more information on Force Protection and its vehicles, go to www.forceprotection.net.
This release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements concerning our business, future plans and objectives and the performance of our products. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that ultimately may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. The company cautions that these forward looking statements are further qualified by factors including, but not limited to, those set forth in the company's Form 10-KSB filing and other filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (available at http://www.sec.gov) and the company's public statements. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any statements in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Contact:
Policy Impact Strategic Communications
Jeff Child, 202-737-5339 (Media Contact)
[email protected]or
Force Protection, Inc.
Investor Relations, 843-740-7015
[email protected]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Force Protection, Inc.
This recent wave from 7 has reached the 300% equivalent seen in wave 1.I think it's correction mode for now
Nice opportunity...JMHO, of course... ;)
Buying opportunity after a two day sell-off. USMC "My old outfit"wants thousands of Cougars and Buffaloes in the field by year-end. I assume the Brits will be ramping up their Mastif version of the Cougar too.
A new buy rec out Wednesday.
C-Span Wednesday, major appropriation personnel there indicated some 4000 plus addition units needed this year. That doesn't include hummer replacement vehicles,service contracts, buffaloes, etc. all.
The listing on the Nasdaq.
Get ready for institutional buying. ;D ;)
I saw this stock a while ago but was to afraid to jump In then (congrats btw to all those that made a killing on this stock). Now that I see where its trading at now I am even more hesistant because the PPS has been so high, It reminds me of a TASR a little. Until I see a viable long term business plan other then focusing on making just anti mine vehicles, I will shy away. I dont think we will be in Iraq much longer, 3 years we should be fully packed up and out of iraq. Interesting enough talking about defense stocks, Cramer was recommending AVAV as a new IPO coming out next week. They have been doing very well with the drone aircraft that they make. Seeing that drone aircraft and land drone vehicles are the way to go in the future military, it has some nice long term potential.
FRPT is an incredible growth story, and I think that it has a lot more to go. Having done some reading, I think the long term story is that the military is realising that the current Iraq conflict has set the tone for the nature of future conflicts and they need to be prepared for insurgent operations, regardless of how long they stay in Iraq.
In the short term, there are major multibillion $ vehicles contracts that they have bid for and should be announced in the near term. If they get a significant portion of the MRAP contract it will have a big impact on the share price. The main concerns/risks are whether they can scale production to meet the requirements of such a contract, but their recent agreement with General Dynamics should allow them to do so.
FRPT is very hot right now, and as setravis said, their entry onto the NASDAQ should bring in insitutional investors. It is possible that the last couple days action was a concerted effort to allow some early accumulation. I'm very late to the party on this one, but am happy to give FRPT some leeway. I see a potential 50% return from these levels, and the chart is still looking very bullish. $18 is a clear support zone, so I think I will hang on for now unless it closes below there, or the chart starts to roll over. It closed friday right on $21.50 resistance and next resistance above that looks to be at $23, lets see what next week brings.
Well it cleared one hurdle, the NASDAQ listing. The next two hurdles of the 4Q 2006 report and the MRAP contract announcement.
About the MRAP. Is there a competitor? Or are we waiting for them to close the competition and declare FRPT the contract winner? Since this is a competitive contract bidding process.
I once owned this stock at 40 cents. :o That was before a 10-1 reverse split. ;) A lot of people say a reverse split is always bad but FRPT was obviously an exception to the rule!
I once owned this one too before the 1:12 reverse split, bought @ 0.2740 cents & back then still trading at the symbol FRCP.ob, I sold it @ the symbol FRPT.ob at $3.00 just after the reverse split.... I played FRPT again a year ago, I caught it the beginning of the upside rally at $1.00 but failed to hold it, not so happy with my profit after seeing the stock now @ $20.00 :( :(
Edit:
My record says I bought FRCP.ob @ 0.2270 not 0.2740 so I actually made a profit there. ;)
---- The 0.27400 was my first buy of FRCP.ob & sold it at 0.24200 so that was a loss for me. :(
Quote from: Lucas Scott on January 24, 2007, 02:02:56 AM
That was before a 10-1 reverse split
10-1 is a forward split, right? I think FRPT.ob did a 1-12 reverse split. ;)
Quote from: Terliso on January 24, 2007, 02:33:01 AM
Quote from: Lucas Scott on January 24, 2007, 02:02:56 AM
That was before a 10-1 reverse split
10-1 is a forward split, right? I think FRPT.ob did a 1-12 reverse split. ;)
I checked my FRCP.ob past trading record & yes they did a 1:12 reverse split.
because I bought 31,500 shares of FRCP.ob before the RS & sold 2,625 shares after the reverse split....
Math:
Reverse split ----> 1 divided by 12 multiply to 31,500 = 2,625 shares
Well apparently the secret to FRPT's success is that along the way the Pentagon has bought every vehicle FRPT.OB could make until now.
Just a matter of, is it true with the MRAP contract which will run through 2007 and 2008? It will decide the continuation from here.
MRAP contracts should run through 2008, and as this article points out, it is pretty much a shoe-in for FRPT in two of the vehicle classes:
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2007/Febuary/Militaryservices.htm (http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2007/Febuary/Militaryservices.htm)
The question still remains as to whether they will also secure the class 1 part of the contract (for light vehicles, i.e. the cheetah), but by my guestimates, then second two classes of the contract should be worth almost $2B easily:
2570 Cougars @ ~ $690k each = $1.773B (previous order for 100 cougars cost $69M)
74 Buffalos @ $1.25M each = $92.5M (previous order for 44 Buffalos and 100 Cougars was $125M - $69M for the Cougars = $56M for 44 buffalos => ~$1.25M each).
The class 1 contract is for about 1400 vehicles which will probably run at least a (conservative) $560M - say $400k each.
Whilke their partnerships with GD and BAE suggest that FRPT won't get all of this pot, it does appear that they are very well positioned here, and with a current $1B market cap, a $2B+ order to be filled over the next 2 years would give the share price a serious lift. Not to mention they are getting oreders from other countries, including the UK.
It is clear that they have made the right contacts within the military and that the military sees the value of their vehicles. I think we are looking at the next standard in armored troop transports, and when this contract is announced, FRPTs stock will explode once again. There's no way I'm selling on this recent weakness.
FRPT: HERE IT IS, THE NEWS THAT ALL WAITING FOR
Contract for TWO, not 2000
Hammered AH.
Scuze.
26-Jan-07 17:55 ET
17:55 FRPT The Defense Department picks multiple winners for Marine combat vehicle - DJ (20.14 -0.65)
The Defense Department on Friday picked a big slate of companies to build new combat vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps and other military services. The Marines lead the procurement effort, worth up to $1 bln in 2007 for up to 4,100 vehicles and related equipment. Service officials said they wanted multiple companies involved in the project, to avoid problems with production capacity limits. Friday's announcement covers $35 mln in awards for up to 36 test vehicles, under an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract. Each winner will initially build two vehicles for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicle program. The program seeks about 1,500 "class I" vehicles and about 2,600 larger "class II" vehicles. The winners include General Dynamics (GD), Force Protection (FRPT), Armor Holdings (AH), Textron (TXT), BAE Systems (BAESY), Oshkosh Truck (OSK), Protected Vehicles, International Military and Government, and General Purpose Vehicles.
Found a more complete version. We shall see.
'I expect to be on contract with a large number before the end of this month,' said Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, head of Marine Corps Systems Command, in Jan. 16 congressional testimony.
http://www.beurs.nl/nieuws/artikel.php?id=196182&taal=US
Marines On Cusp Of Launching Big Buy Of Combat Vehicles
Vrijdag 26 Januari 2007 20:39
<![CDATA[By Rebecca Christie Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Marines are poised to pick contractors for a new generation of armored combat vehicles, kicking off billions of dollars in coming Pentagon purchases.
Contract announcements for the Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) vehicles could come as soon as Friday. The Marines are working with the Army and the Navy on the program, which aims to get about 4,100 new vehicles to troops by the end of this year.
'I expect to be on contract with a large number before the end of this month,' said Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, head of Marine Corps Systems Command, in Jan. 16 congressional testimony.
About $1 billion in 2007 funding is laid in for vehicles and related equipment. Over time, the program could lead to more big contracts and also give participants an edge in the Defense Department's upcoming search for a Humvee replacement.
Contractors are lining up for the project, which is almost certain to include multiple vendors.
General Dynamics Corp. (GD) has two entries, one by itself and one in partnership with Force Protection Inc. (FRPT). BAE Systems PLC (BAESY) is another contender. Other companies working on armored combat vehicles include Oshkosh Truck Corp. (OSK) and Textron Inc.'s (TXT) Textron Systems unit.
By picking multiple contractors, the Marines hope to avoid capacity problems that have plagued the Pentagon during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. For example, Armor Holdings Inc. (AH) and its partner AM General LLC had trouble keeping up with demand for up-armored Humvees.
Likewise, Force Protection drew criticism for its difficulty filling orders for its armored vehicles, which include the Buffalo minesweeper and the Cougar troop transport. Brogan said Force Protection has done a good job of overcoming its growing pains, but the Marines need more options.
'Our strategy will be to procure two vehicles from each vendor,' Brogan said. Each vehicle will be tested for its ability to resist blasts and handle combat maneuvers. Production contracts could follow by fall.
Lawmakers have supported Pentagon requests for earmarks and budget reprogramming to pay for these vehicles. Interest remains high, as shown in two House Armed Services Committee subcommittee hearings last week.
Initial plans call for the Marines to buy about 1,022 of the new vehicles. The Army seeks an initial buy of 2,500, and the Navy also has signed on. The Army is eyeing additional vehicles as part of a 'phase two' procurement.
'We will have to go onto maybe two, three, maybe four vendors depending on the types of systems,' said Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Sorenson, in a Jan. 18 congressional hearing. 'Ramping that production line up will probably be the next challenge.'
Analysts estimate the wheeled vehicle market could be worth $10 billion in coming years. The Army-led Humvee replacement program, known as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program, will take shape over the next 12 months.
That program will be a separate purchase, although it probably will incorporate technology from the mine-resistant vehicle program, said Marine Corps spokesman Capt. Jeff Landis.
Many of the same companies are likely to compete, along with other contenders like Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT), Armor Holdings Inc. and AM General, which has formed a joint venture with General Dynamics to compete for that project.
Man, FRPT Executives are darn rich now! ;)
"Although there was not a large volume order to FRPT -- as many investors have been expecting -- the MRAP vehicle contract is now in place, and we expect FRPT to be a primary beneficiary of this program," Donaghey wrote on Monday. Thus, "we would be aggressive buyers of the stock on any weakness associated with this announcement."
Force Protection's own CEO, Gordon McGilton, seems far less confident.
Indeed, McGilton has wasted no time cashing out his own stock in the company. Last year, as Force Protection's new leader, McGilton scored 1 million stock options with a strike price of just 72 cents a share. Then last week -- less than a month after those options vested -- McGilton sold his 1 million shares at prices ranging from $19.68 to $20.32. He pocketed nearly $20 million worth of profit in the process.
In recent months, Force Protection Chairman Frank Kavanaugh has been dumping huge chunks of company stock as well.
yeah I dumped my huge chunk of this stock too :P
Yesterday's action was pretty rough. I hink FRPT looks like it needs to close that gap at $16 and play with the 50MA before it will recover, despite todays more positive candle.
Additional chart ;)
Market aside, here is the statement from FRPT's contract management consulting firm.
http://catalystresearch.biz/files/CFR__FRPT_Note_01_29_07.pdf
FORCEPROTECTION INC. Disclosures: 1, 2, 4A, 5, 6, 10
(OTCBB: FRPT: $20.14,BUY)
INDUSTRY: DEFENSE
Force Protection: Covering Bases while Saving Face
Friday's announcement regarding the award of firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity multiple award contract for vehicles to fulfill the MRAP initiative essentially fulfills two facets of a sticky political situation for the Government. The military needs these trucks as early as yesterday...everyday it costs more USsoldier lives. On the other hand, how does a contract of this size and importance go to an operation that was nearly bankrupt a year ago and was the "red-headed stepchild" of the industry?
Today, Force Protection's vehicles possess the best design. The Company has hot lines up and running and they are increasing the rate of production with every passing month. The vehicles are fully tested and validated in the field and, the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan feel most comfortable in hostile lands with this equipment. Lastly, there is no doubt that the Cougar, Buffalo and within the next month, the Cheetah, are all manufactured in the USA.
The award delivered last week opens the door to all those manufacturers that feel they should be part of the supply process. It essentially closes the door on those that might have grievances about Force Protection being a pre-designated, primary supplier to the MRAP. So behind door #1, we have a way for the DOD not to lose face, to open the opportunity to those that believe they should participate, and to shut out the possibly of an award protest that would take considerable time and prolong the production and fulfillment ramp.
Behind door #2 is an opening for the military to buy essentially all the mine resistant and ambush protectedvehicles it needs. While the net is cast for other contenders, a flow of "urgent" trucks can be filled via the existing relationships.
Of course the market is disappointed in the Company not receiving a giant portion of the contract with Friday's announcement. We already were thinking that investors were betting too much on the complete winning of the contract by FRPT. But we do not take this action by the DOD as a real negative particularly since FRPT has an established record of its truck in the field and that they have already received initiating orders to start the flow of equipment.
What we feel as interesting is that Force Dynamics—the joint venture between Force Protection and General Dynamics—was not included in the list of manufacturers that were named in the contract. Could it be that the Cougar already has sufficient "testing data" and could be a back door supplier?
The only problem I see with this stock is it may go slightly higher this year. However but 2008 focus will be on ending the Iraq war and a new president. Once the war in Iraq winds down there is really no need for more anti mine vehicles since we will be planning an exit soon from Iraq. FRPT needs more diversification... like making drone vehicles that can fire weapons and defuse bombs and mines. This reminds me of TASR all to well, the FRPT chart looks good for a medium to long term short.
"Yesterday's action was pretty rough. I hink FRPT looks like it needs to close that gap at $16 and play with the 50MA before it will recover, despite todays more positive candle."
Well I am the rookie here. I guess I was too hopeful about support at 18. Woke up after the Santa Clause rally and the bust of 2007 as an up year. Now I only hope ScottishTrader is right. Wall Street and the NASDAQ did not like the fundamentals I guess.
thestreet.com was right all the easy money was made from 18 to 24, where I assume all the veterans jumped out.
Here is what I am believing. That the formality of the government must require an open competitive bidding period. During this period the government cannot show favoritism to ensure a fair process and decision. No conflict of interest and no unfair advantage.
So from 16 the recovery to 18 and nothing until the substantial contract announcement by fall? With increasing production FRPT could work through the backlog of orders in months. This could sag and slide for a while without good news.
Panic selling next?
Looks like a good short setup. Set a stop in the low 18s and ride FRPT down below 16 or below if it decides to show more weakness and move in that direction. This stock can have long term weakness if there is any signs of pulling out troops or troop reductions in Iraq.
Looks like good advice, if we are lucky. Sideways from here until it breaks up or down.
I understand the insider selling. The sellers have been in it from the beginning, they are not out to get rich by holding. They answered the question: How rich do I want to be?
With 17% institutional and 23% insider, with 77% float the rest of the insiders appear to be holding.
Quote from: nullzero on February 03, 2007, 06:12:27 AM
Looks like a good short setup.
Nullz,
Hmm-mm....concerns that I would have about shorting FRPT here:
1. It's "shorting into the hole." FRPT already has sold off 35.4% from the 24.30 high, to Friday's 15.70 low, which is quite a bit, and the trend still is bullish.
2. "Possible" Bullish Falling Wedge, in a bullish trend. The technical breakout for Monday is 17.41, but a print of 17.61, a penny above Friday's high, would be more convincing, and could bring in the breakout Momo Boys.
3. Friday's low violated the 50DMA, but FRPT managed a close above it.
4. Friday's low was very near the top of Kumo (Cloud) support.
5. Friday's candle was a Bullish Hammer. The tail was
exactly twice as long as the "real body" (the open and the close).
6. The close higher also was an upside reversal (needs to rally, for confirmation).
7. A stock that has been this bullish usually doesn't go down without a fight. A 35.4% selloff certainly was warranted, given the huge gains, but these stocks can have a good bounce after that kind of giveback.
8. 19.56 - 20.00 kind of "begs" for a re-test.
a. 19.56 was the low, prior to the failure at the 8-day Tenkan-sen (solid green).
b. 19.75 is an unfilled gap
c. 19.99 was a sell signal in the 34/55RSI, which sometimes gets re-tested
d. 20.00 is the 22-day Kijun-sen (solid red), which has rolled over and likely will be lower on Monday, but that's where it was on Friday.
All of that said, watch this thing crash on Monday! :o >:D
Good luck, whatever you decide!
I was about to post the same thing, but Melf beat me to it (and his comments are quite reasonable). The "smart money" has already been made on the short side. A good short would have been the gap down opening on the 29th Jan, but right now I think FRPT may have put in a bullish reversal candle and is ready to atempt a rally again. It managed to fill the open 21-22 Dec gap, pierce the 50MA and rally back to the upside. Also it nearly completed a 50% Fib retracement of the Nov-Jan run.
I would actually be inclined to go long here, looking for a breakout above 17.56-60 short term resistance, with a stop just below 16.80, which looks to be short-term support. Short term targets would be a rally through $18, $19 and up to the $19.32 gap down opening from the 29th. A break of $18 would confirm a breakout of Melf's possible falling wedge, and descending resistance from the recent downward move.
Quote from: ScottishTrader on February 04, 2007, 08:37:08 AM
right now I think FRPT may have put in a bullish reversal candle and is ready to atempt a rally again. It managed to fill the open 21-22 Dec gap, pierce the 50MA and rally back to the upside. Also it nearly completed a 50% Fib retracement of the Nov-Jan run.
Scotsman,
Yes, I forgot to mention that gap fill of 16.00.
Quote
I would actually be inclined to go long here, looking for a breakout above 17.56-60 short term resistance,
I'm thinking about a long postition, too.
Quote
with a stop just below 16.80, which looks to be short-term support.
16.80 - 16.81 actually
was short-term support, but it got broken Friday morning, then FRPT went
swoosh to the downside to 15.70, on heavy volume, which was at least a short-term "capitulation low" since the stock bounced back so quickly.
There was another heavy volume low (red arrow at the beginning of the chart) of 16.92 on January 30, but price didn' t spike down as hard as it did on the move down to
17.20 EDIT: 15.70, and the 18.48 high of that day wasn't taken out to the upside the next day. FRPT meandered sideways, then continued down.
Friday's Bullish Hammer (only bullish with upside confirmation) off the 50DMA and near the top of the Kumo (Cloud), as I mentioned, looks a bit more promising.
What would look really, really nice on Monday, would be for FRPT to begin the day down, re-establish 16.80 - 16.81 as support, then start climbing its way back to UNCH, then knock out 17.60, Friday's high, with a print of 17.61. That kind of action "should" bring in the Momo Boys at/near/above UNCH, and additional buying on the print of 17.61.
That scenario still could play out even if FRPT breaks 16.80 - 16.81 and goes a bit lower, then goes back to UNCH, but it's much more convincing when broken support gets re-established as support.
It sure would be interesting to know what the short interest has been during this selloff. Picture if all of us had entered short at the 19.99 sell signal, basis the 34/55RSI, or at the gap down opening to 19.32 on January 29, as you suggested.
We'd have a very nice gain, well over 10%, depending upon where we shorted, but wouldn't we be a bit nervous holding short, given the bounce off the 50, the Bullish Hammer, and the bullish reversal close?
FRPT certainly could go down and take out Friday's 15.70 low, but I would have had a very difficult time justifying remaining short Friday's bullish-looking candle.
For Monday, if FRPT heads down early, then rebounds to UNCH, I'll buy it with a stop below whatever low gets put in.
I know what you mean shorting into the hole (even if the fundamentals say otherwise the stock can rally just because its been massively oversold.) Homebuilders are a good example of this... massively oversold fundamentals very weak and are not showing a turn around yet but the stock has rebounded quite a bit. True of the 50dma bounce as well melf. I guess we will have to wait and see the bearish case would be with the insiders cashing out and with a lack of news this stock has a good chance of move lower.
Quote from: nullzero on February 04, 2007, 01:23:16 PM
I know what you mean shorting into the hole (even if the fundamentals say otherwise the stock can rally just because its been massively oversold.) Homebuilders are a good example of this... massively oversold fundamentals very weak and are not showing a turn around yet but the stock has rebounded quite a bit. True of the 50dma bounce as well melf. I guess we will have to wait and see the bearish case would be with the insiders cashing out and with a lack of news this stock has a good chance of move lower.
Nullz,
Right. You've got the idea there.
FRPT "could" simply keep tanking to the downside from here, but what you've described is more usual behavior, especially in a stock that has been this strong. A technical bounce of some sort would seem to be in the offing soon, even if it isn't a very good one.
Now, if FRPT had completed the kind of top here that NTRI did on January 18, that's a
ver-ry nice place to short. NTRI broke the Bear Flag (blue)
and broke the neckline of the H&S Top in the same session.
Shorting it any time after those two breakdowns during the next five sessions, got handsomely rewarded.
If NTRI had been lying to us, we would have covered the short above the Right Shoulder, which was 68.25. Nice risk: reward on that trade like that. About 1:3.
Too bad we missed it. :'(
But, shorting NTRI here is "shorting into the hole." It already is down 44.2% from the high thus far, so while it still could go a lot lower, a lot of the gain on the downside already has been made.
Essentially, we missed the short trade in NTRI.
"Sell and/or sell short at technical breakdowns."
"Sell short on re-tests of breakdowns" (like shorting NTRI on the little re-tests, in the five days after the H&S Top broke down).
It makes me drool to think about shorting NTRI back there (we need a Slobbering Face on the toolbar).
Shorting FRPT here "could" work out, but as we discussed at the weekend, there are a number of things that suggest a "bounce," as you mentioned.
We'll see, huh? ???
FRPT currnetly is indicated at BID 17.96...ASK 17.99, well above Friday's 17.20 close, the 17.41 technical breakout of the Bullish Falling Wedge, and the 17.61 takeout of Friday's 17.60 high.
I won't chase that.
CURSES!! >:( >:D
I'd buy somewhere 17.41 to 17.65 if it pulls back, though.
fyi:
Force Protection, Inc. Announces New Production and Delivery Records in January
Monday February 5, 8:45 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT - News) today announced that its vehicle production and delivery numbers again reached record highs in January. The leading armored vehicle manufacturer delivered more than 60 vehicles to the U.S. government last month alone.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicle (JERRV) and Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle (ILAV) programs led production numbers. U.S. armed forces have used the Cougar JERRV in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2004. The Cougar ILAV, which is produced with BAE Systems as prime contractor and Force Protection as subcontractor, was first delivered in 2006.
"Our January deliveries are reflective of aggressive ramp up efforts," said Force Protection Vice President for Program Management Damon Walsh. "We also look forward to our first MRAP deliveries to the government early in February, as we add this vitally important product line and continue to expand deliveries."
Force Protection's Buffalo and Cougar mine-protected vehicles have been deployed in the global war on terror since 2003, and have an unmatched record for safety, mobility, and sustainability over more than 2 million hours of heavy combat operations.
"The uniformed war fighter is our most important customer," said COO Raymond Pollard. "He has asked for the life-saving blast protection technology incorporated in our vehicles. We are clearly demonstrating the ability to provide this solution through Force Protection's efforts and the efficient use of our production partners."
still holding long and strong ;)
cheers
O.
Bought FRPT at 17.52. Stop: 16.69. Risk: a loss of 4.7%
I'm with you - filled at 17.58
Volatility aside. Going sideways until confirming we are at a bottom.
Next milestone. 2006 Q4 report is always approximately six weeks or mid February. It always rallies on good news, or the waiting for execution to turn into performance.
Looks neck and neck about the stock market reality and the management reality.
Also long.
Quote from: Melf Elf on February 05, 2007, 09:40:03 AM
Bought FRPT at 17.52. Stop: 16.69. Risk: a loss of 4.7%
Sold FRPT at 16.90. Loss: 3.5%.
My plan after our weekend discussion was to buy FRPT 16.80 - 17.00 on an early selloff, then look for a takeout of Friday's 17.60 high.
Instead, we did the reverse. Opened high, and sank.
Friday's 15.70 low probably is good, but I don't like the way that this trade went. We could get a test of the 50DMA tomorrow, below my 16.69 stop, or even lower.
16.80 - 16.81 "could" get re-established as support here, but I don't like the trade well enough at this point to hold it.
I threw it in.
Corrections can take time..
The problem with the market reality and management reality is the speculative risk, raising the risk to reward ratio.
The risk is expansion, 50 vehicles in December, 60 vehicles in January, some money and vehicles under MRAP in February. Force Protection said it expects to be churning out 200 vehicles a month by the middle of 2007, and up to 300 a month in 2008.
The reward would be the MRAP contract to go along with the risk of expansion.
So the fundamental dilemma is do you believe in the risk, reward, or somewhere in between.
It is a typical Aerospace Feast or Famine contract announcement, another incremental MRAP order, or execution and performance reflected in the 2006 Q4 report.
Pre-NASDAQ any of those three would a guaranteed bull rally. Or did the rules change with the NASDAQ listing?
Or the risk of famine?
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=146
Force Protection, Inc. Marks Major '06 Milestones, New Vehicle Production Record in December
Publisher: Force Protection, Inc.
Date: 01/04/2007
Force Protection's workforce has increased to more than 700, up from 300 in January 2005. The company delivered more than 50 vehicles in December 2006 alone, a 300% increase from December 2005.
http://www.forceprotection.net/news/news_article.html?id=153
Force Protection, Inc. Announces New Production and Delivery Records in January
Publisher: Force Protection, Inc.
Date: 02/05/2007
Ladson, SC – Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ: FRPT) today announced that its vehicle production and delivery numbers again reached record highs in January. The leading armored vehicle manufacturer delivered more than 60 vehicles to the U.S. government last month alone.
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/fund.pl?symb=FRPT&page=news&mode=stock
But capacity would have to dramatically improve first. With General Dynamics' plants in Ohio and elsewhere, Force Protection said it expects to be churning out 200 vehicles a month by the middle of 2007, and up to 300 a month in 2008.
With capacity at its Ladson plant nearly maxed out, the company is looking for a new facility to manufacture its Cheetahs.
Yeah tricky one Melf, I really thought first thing we'd get that reversal, but it looks pretty ugly right now. I'm going to stick to the plan though and look for 16.80 support to hold. I will set me stop a little lower though, as it will probably be choppy with it in the morning. Still, if it breaks down again, Nullz may be onto the right idea on this one.
With one or two weeks (sometimes longer) for the 2006 Q4 report I do not doubt the below 16 sag. Just when the report is coming to the rescue. If Nullz is right. Sliding and sagging until good news has been my observation, and I have been following it since the reverse split.
I have one big let it ride.
Nullz the group in Congress voting for withdrawal or reduction is small, but you are right the market does not believe that yet.
When we get closer to the 2008 presidential election and if the situation in Iraq doesnt get better and there is more public disapporval of the war this stock will suffer more. Boeing suffered greatly after the end of the first gulf war and they are much more diversified then other defense related companies. Below is an interesting article on the financial troubles Boeing encountered after the end of the first engagement in Iraq and after 9/11.
quick quote from the article
"The "last time" was the industry downturn that came after the 1991 Gulf War, when Boeing slashed production and laid off thousands."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/42812_boeing15.shtml
Granted the article is more geared toward the slow down in airplane orders after 9/11 but it has historical data on the last slow down from the gulf war. its known
Some commentary I posted on a politic/current event forum.
/////
It is widely known that wars create short term economic stimulus. Government prints more money and gives money to soliders and business which in turn comes back to the U.S. and spurs consumer spending in the short term. Once the war in Iraq ends the slowdown in the sectors related to the war will be huge. Take a look at just BOEING and how many jobs they layed off after the first gulf war and do the math yourself.
"When Boeing did that the last time, in 1996 and 1997, after the Gulf War downturn, its assembly lines became so snarled that the company lost money for the first time in nearly a half century.
A clearer picture of what may be in store for the commercial business will emerge Thursday, when Boeing announces third-quarter earnings and for the first time provides more specifics about airplane deliveries in 2003. Boeing has said it hopes to deliver about 500 planes this year and around 400 next year, though those numbers could change. Boeing has not made any predictions about 2003. But many analysts are forecasting that Boeing will deliver only about 300 planes that year, perhaps fewer.
Last week, Boeing began notifying the first 9,000 of what could be as many as 30,000 workers who will likely lose their jobs by the end of 2002 because of the current downturn. Many of those laid off work in the Puget Sound region.
During the last downturn, Boeing's employment fell steadily for five years, from 161,000 to 105,000 by the end of 1995."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/42812_boeing15.shtml
Thats over a *35%* reduction in work force after the gulf war slow down for Boeing.... Next down turn is going to be much worse because the engagement is much bigger and longer with much more resources not to mention engineering and construction companies will see layoffs due to the pull out from Iraq.
Here some numbers to ponder, number of employees in some of the top U.S. defense related companies publicly traded.
120,000 NOC
153,000 BA
140,000 LMT
81,000 GD
80,000 RTN
5,100 AH
18,600 COL
59,500 LLL
116,00 HON
222,200 UTX
300,000 GE
106,000 HAL
Over 1.4million people employed just in the publicly traded defense and Iraq reconstruction related companies. Add in the private sector and others that I failed to list we are easily talking about +2 million people that have job security directed tied to the War in Iraq. A 50% reduction would be 1 million high paying jobs lost if we were to assume a massive layoff and slow down across the defense industry from the pullout of Iraq... I doubt we would lose that many but for the sake of things I will be conservative and say 25% of those workers get layed off from slow down in business (end of Iraq War). Thats still 500,000 people layed off and it can have a big effect across the nation not to mention jobs being lost in the Auto and Construction industries.
The storm is brewing just wait and see., the real estate slow down will just make matters worse. Also take into account the massive amount of people that will soon be retiring and taking rather then giving into the system, we have some major economic problems to deal with. ///////
To sum things up FRPT is not diversified to stomach a end of the Iraq War, at least thats what I see from my viewpoint. Almost all the contracts that add significantly to most of FRPTs profit and bottom line are contracts for anti-mine vehicles. A democratic president elected in 2008 will just seal the coffin for the big profits in defenese related stocks. FRPT I believe has peaked from my newbie point of view.
Also like to add that FRPT has a foward PE of 28.58 which is on the high side for this company. GD has a foward PE of 15 and is much more stable defense play with more diversification. I think FRPT is going to be a sell the news stock for the upcoming months and quarters, it may see a pop every once in a while but I believe the fundamental trend is down from here. The continued insider selling doesnt help either its telling me that Insiders think its time to get out.
Just trying to speculate on future events and what they would hold for FRPT and the market, im no pro but I dont believe the market has came to a decision and reality on how the War in Iraq will end. I believe the chances for a withdraw from Iraq in 2 years from now is very likely, and the end result will be a disaster in Iraq and a financial troubles for us after the fall out.
I am a skeptic at this feast also, but the trend went past 18 and left a hanging man back there, which means nothing right now.
The fundamentals and the market professionals have been skeptics since 10, but new contracts, and increased production have gone hand in hand until now. People are sobering after this feast so far, myself included.
My plan was to ride this through the Santa Clause rally, the NASDAQ listing, positive earnings, the end of production expansion, and a positive outlook on contracts and future contracts. All that in 2007. So yes I am also a skeptic at the feast.
This has been a wild ride. One expansion plan after another, with the Pentagon buying or contracting for every vehicle they can build. Which is true now with a backlog of a few months. I am seeing the peak when the contract for this final expansion comes through.
I am not so arrogant as not to see the famine, but the feast is promising one more course. I am an Aerospace enthusiast.
We all agree this is looking for a bottom. I think the next peak will be Bears pumping to dump and get out. The market skeptics are sobering the bulls, but there has been a bull rally every time good news comes out.
The market reality is this could keep going down and a few things could cause it.
amstocks82 update:
FPI, Ramping Up To MRAP
FPI (Force Protection, Inc.) began the process of increasing their internal production by 300% back in June of 2006. They began with 1 production line and production pods for Buffalos. The goal was to build 3 lines with the capacity of building 25 Cougars per month per line with one shift.
FPI's planned to add the additional two lines, and then to go back and rebuild their original production line with new equipment and processes to speed production. My timeline based on comments from the company in the past for getting all three lines finished and upgraded was December/early January. After that, they would require a month or two to get to their targeted production speed.
With three lines running, FPI can build 75 Cougars per month with one shift. FPI employment advertisements have been for workers willing to work various shifts. Once FPI has additional shifts running, they will be able to build more than 75 per month.
The Joint Venture with GDLS (General Dynamics Land System) and the agreement with AH (Armored Holdings) added even more capacity allowing FPI to build even more than is possible with their 3 production lines. One of FPI's main issues with the ramp-up has always been getting qualified welders. GDLS and AH already have a large number of welders and are able to more easily add welders to their staff than can FPI.
The Joint Venture with GDLS created a new company called Force Dynamics. The agreement creates a company that is 50% owned by GDLS and 50% owned by FPI. Under the terms of the agreement, GDLS and FPI agree to divide the work and benefits equally and they shall whenever possible act as the exclusive subcontractors:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1032863/000110465906083305/a06-26313_28k.htm
The agreement does not preclude FD (Force Dynamics) from naming other subcontractors to do work that is not practical for either party to do in the time given.
The new process for splitting the work to manufacture MRAP Cougars has not been announced. In my opinion, the fastest ramp up would be a process where GDLS gets the shells, preps them with some initial welding doing the bulk welding that needs to be done. From there, the prepared shell gets shipped to Spartan and they do the Chassis work and then it gets shipped to FPI's facility for final assembly and preparation before delivering them to the military. If they get more work than either party can do, then part of the work may get sub-contracted out to Armored Holdings to do final assembly and automotive integration.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1032863/000110465906076576/a06-24231_38k.htm
With the work split between General Dynamics and Force Protection as the main subcontractors, FPI's existing lines will be finishing vehicles that are already partly complete. Instead of a line manufacturing 25 vehicles per month, they will be able to manufacture 50 or more per month.
FPI has existing orders for ILAV and for Mastiff Cougars for the British military. I expect that FPI will leave one line dedicated to the ILAV and probably complete the British order prior to getting the MRAP contract. This will allow FPI to dedicate two lines for the MRAP contract. If FPI is doing mainly the final assembly and preparation work, they will able to ramp up much more quickly. FPI can hire and train assemblers and painters much more quickly than they can welders. With two lines dedicated to the MRAP working two shifts, FD can deliver 200 vehicles per month to the military. But that is not the end of the production ramp-up. It is likely that FPI has already started the work necessary to expand further their manufacturing capacity. In another three or four months, they could have a forth or even fifth line up and running.
It took more than a year to design the HEV Cougar. Since then, FPI has created other versions of the Cougar such as the ILAV Cougar, the Mastiff Cougar and the JERRV Cougar. FPI has been adding changes requested by the military and has replaced parts that were not holding up well in the field with more reliable parts. They analyzed blast damage and added additional protection where required. Other vendors without a battle tested vehicle are years behind FPI.
The two main criteria for Vendor selection for the MRAP contracts are:
1) The Contractor or Contractors vehicle systems that demonstrate the best overall performance in PVT testing (with survivability being the highest priority)
2) The Contractor or Contractors that demonstrate the greatest capability to produce and deliver vehicles with the shortest ramp up time and greatest maximum production capacity, in order to meet the urgent delivery requirements for these vehicles
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1032863/000110465907007291/a07-3406_2ex10d1.htm
FPI's vehicles have demonstrated in combat that they are the most survivable vehicles. FPI has already been ramping up for more than a year to build Cougars. The joint venture with the GDLS the largest Defense contractor gives FPI additional advantages. They are simply able to ramp-up faster than any other vendor.
The Government has already ordered the first two vehicles from FD for testing. However, the Cougar is battle tested. The government previously reserved the right not to test proven vehicles. They also stated, "Due to the urgency of the requirement, the Government need not wait for all test vehicles to be delivered and tested before deciding to execute additional delivery orders." This means new production orders could come anytime in the next few weeks or even tomorrow.
&
Today's 8-K: "There's good news tonight"
As TTT says very clearly, this statement by the company re; MRAP Cat. II is very significant...
"we are the only contractor among those selected that has an existing production line for vehicles with a demonstrated record of performance in combat conditions."
This is an official SEC filing folks.
This company never blows a hollow horn.
"Only Contractor" means only. No other.
"Existing production line" now, not yet to be built, not planned, will be...but Now.
"Demonstrated record of performance in combat conditions" means just that.
Cat. II = 2600 vehicles and ~$1.2 bil. of orders.
Then there is ILS and 600 Buffalos.
And it is likely FRPT will get some of Cat. I as well.
Quote from: ScottishTrader on February 05, 2007, 05:27:54 PM
Yeah tricky one Melf, I really thought first thing we'd get that reversal, but it looks pretty ugly right now.
Scotsman,
Ver-ry tricky.
When I pay up for a stock like that, I don't want to see it tank all day, like it did. As it turns out, my stop at 16.69 would have been hit this morning anyway, so that just plain didn't go well.
If FRPT had started down yesterday morning, I would have been fine, entering at 16.80 - 17.00, and using something a little below the 50DMA as a stop.
That's the way it goes sometimes, though.
CURSES!! ;D >:D
Quote
I'm going to stick to the plan though and look for 16.80 support to hold. I will set me stop a little lower though, as it will probably be choppy with it in the morning. Still, if it breaks down again, Nullz may be onto the right idea on this one.
I'm glad to see that it came back this afternoon for you guys. Good luck!
Well when I was updating my trades after the close yesterday I was putting in my stop for FRPT (at 16.60 as it so happens) and inadvertently put in a limit order instead o a stop order! Fortunately it filled immediately at 17.15 (and not 16.60) but that was that. Oh well.
I've been pretty busy and not around for the open lately so its hard to catch these things when I want to. but as far as FRPT, 17.60 is still immediate resistance. I may try a re-entry if it gets above there, but I'm also looking to close out most of my trades this week and next (going on holday and don't want to be thinking about bloody STOCKS!!), so its foolish to be jumping in without a clear indicator of the short term direction. It does look like it has found some support at 16.60-16.80, but now too far away to happily use that 16.60 low as a stop agian.
Nice rebound today, sorry about your loss on FRPT Melf. FRPT is looking good maybe near the end of the week for a short if it rebounds into the 18s and stalls at resistance.
Aargh >:D >:D >:D I'm such a sucker!! Immediately after I wrote the last reply I had a look and FRPT had made a textbook bull flag and continuation breakout above 17.60. I just couldn't help my self so bought some at 17.75. FRPT was acting real strong this afternoon, and I think we should see it trading in the $18 range tomorrow.
"The Government has already ordered the first two vehicles from FD for testing. However, the Cougar is battle tested. The government previously reserved the right not to test proven vehicles. They also stated, "Due to the urgency of the requirement, the Government need not wait for all test vehicles to be delivered and tested before deciding to execute additional delivery orders." This means new production orders could come anytime in the next few weeks or even tomorrow. "
Okay I have figured out the linear production planning problem. The DOD RFP calls for deliveries to begin in September, but the DOD reserved the right to make orders early if the vendor (FRPT) was deemed qualified. Suntrust investment says that can accelerates orders and deliveries by three months or June. And DOD has already contracted for MRAP contract production in February at FRPT.
So the next good news would be bridge gapping contracts for increased production until June-September deliveries.
Stalling because of the Full and Open Competion requirements of government contracting will be casting a shadow on contracts and future contracts until the official Notional RFP estimate of Delivery Orders in May. Part of the shadow being other qualified vendors other than FRPT.
Back to waiting for a contract to come over from DOD to FRPT.
Just trying to speculate on future events and what they would hold for FRPT and the market, I'm no pro but I don't believe the market has came to a decision and reality on how the War in Iraq will end. I believe the chances for a withdraw from Iraq in 2 years from now is very likely, and the end result will be a disaster in Iraq and a financial troubles for us after the fall out.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2007, 07:46:05 PM by nullzero »
What is see is two years of the Bush presidency and congress still in line to see IRAQ through for the rest of his term. Then in 2009 the budget and the next President in charge will inherit Iraq with basically.........I do not want to speculate the next president in 2009.
Quote from: nullzero on February 06, 2007, 03:57:53 PM
Nice rebound today, sorry about your loss on FRPT Melf. FRPT is looking good maybe near the end of the week for a short if it rebounds into the 18s and stalls at resistance.
Thanks, Nullz. Just a tad frustrating, the way that played out.
My target zone was the 19.56 - 20.00 on the chart, and given yesterday's constructively bullish action, it looks like that has a decent chance:
1. The open was just about smack on the top of the Bullish Falling Wedge.
2. It went down to a low of 16.56, which was just two cents below the 50DMA, at 16.5798, then it got a nice bang off there, stablilized for most of the day near 17.00, then came on strong into the close.
3. The open of 16.90 only was four cents higher than Monday's close, so that's "close enough" for the candle to qualify as a Bullish Engulfer. On the heels of Friday's nice Bullish Hammer and everything else that we all discussed at the weekend, yesterday's candle looks nice.
Good luck everyone!
Underberg quotation:
Outlook and Valuation
For 2007 we assume the company delivers 478 Cougars and 88 Buffalos. Given current capacity of 40 Cougars per month the former is likely (assuming demand holds) particularly given the company's intent to at least double capacity at its facility by mid-year. Buffalo production is currently 5 per month, but should double with an additional shift and we believe the entire production line will be revamped to increase production well beyond 10 per month.
By contract we assume 186 Cougars for ILAV, 108 Mastiff, 160 JERRV and 24 GSTAMIDS. All but 64 of these are under contract already. For the Buffalo we assume 18 from the Army related to the Q2 06 order, 46 from the Marine letter contract of November last and 24 from GSTAMIDS.
Only GSTAMIDS has yet to be awarded. We save MRAP for 2008.
For 2008 we assume revenue of $854 million, $93 million from service/spares and the remaining $761 million from vehicle sales. A little over $600 million of this related to MRAP, and $519 million of that related to Category I and II. For both categories we have assumed the current Force receives half of the revenue, as the terms of the JV dictate, but the JV wins a sole source
engagement. While this could be aggressive, we have pushed the MRAP award out by six months, offsetting that aggressiveness. In addition, we have nothing in our numbers for Cheetah, nor for potential wins with the UN, the UK or other NATO allies. Cougar capacity is not taxed until Q4, but by then we believe the company will have greater capacity from either another shift and/or another
facility. Margins will be the big question. We have operating margin of 7.5% in 2007 increasing to 12% in 2008. There could be great variability in this depending on the amount of outsourcing Force is required to undertake.
The shares are trading at a significant premium to its peer group as well as a premium to the recent multiples at which it has been trading. However, the volume of business is massive and the numbers keep rising. Given that, we believe the premium is justified, particularly looking to 2008, when the
company's revenues could approach $1 billion.
more info please check & download attachment >:D
cheers
O.
thanks for that La-Onda, very interesting read.
On a side note, where do you get all these reports?
Thanks for the report la-onda.
I did not calculate the 390 Cougar backlog of contracts. At current production of 60 per month it seems FRPT will be busy for a while. Making the gap until the MRAP announcement look more possible to manage.
Nice going it looks like the bulls in FRPT are on a roll 8).
I've been watching FRPT ever since FOUSC sold it in his portfolio. It looks good technically, IMHO. Can any of you gurus including David, comment on the soundness of its fundamentals? Thank you all!
sold my position at 19.40, decided to keep this one short term and there is significant upside resistance around 19.75 (where I would have planned to sell).
May be a good time to enter a short showing strong selling after the high of 19.58.
Quote from: Melf Elf on February 07, 2007, 12:37:05 AM
My target zone was the 19.56 - 20.00 on the chart, and given yesterday's constructively bullish action, it looks like that has a decent chance:
The low end of my target zone MADE at 19.58.
Quote from: ScottishTrader on February 07, 2007, 02:08:49 PM
sold my position at 19.40, decided to keep this one short term and there is significant upside resistance around 19.75 (where I would have planned to sell)
Nice going, Scotsman!
I believe you hit the entry point and exit point. This stock though volatile still follows the predictions. I notice the fibs more often because I was an engineer but the other indicators are there just which one to believe and when.
Still doing my stock education before I try to be a bear, though I have seen them make lots of profits.
Like I did not doubt a dip below 16, I now do not doubt a test of the 52 week high of 24 when the quarterly report results. My first opinion is it will gap upward on report release day. But how far?
Here are two negative reports and the latest from FRPTs management consulting firm Catalyst.
My guess is the entry point is now 17.58, or 17.40 to 17.60.
Should of played FRPT short at +19.00 :-\. Im sure will get the chance again sometime soon. Its always better to short and be in the money by a good degree after a few days in the trade.
awesome news out >:D >:D
last statement is important for future contracts
cheers
O.
Force Dynamics Announces $67 Million U.S. Marine Corps Contract
Wednesday February 14, 8:45 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Dynamics, LLC--a joint venture between Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ: FRPT - News) and General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics Corporation (NYSE:GD - News)--today announced it has received a $67.4 million contract award from the U.S. Marine Corps to produce 125 vehicles for its Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program.
Under this latest delivery order, Force Dynamics will produce 65 Category I and 60 Category II MRAP vehicles that will be used by all branches of the armed forces. Force Dynamics also announced it will deliver the vehicles within the next 120 days. The MRAP competitive action for the first year's estimated requirement for 4,100 vehicles has an approximate value of $2 billion.
"This is a huge development for Force Dynamics," said Force Protection COO Raymond Pollard. "This joint venture was formed precisely for this purpose: to mobilize quickly on any action item announced by the Marines as the MRAP program moves forward. With advanced proprietary vehicle designs and significant manufacturing capacity, Force Dynamics has the capability to make an immediate and strategically important impact on the war on terror while establishing itself as a leader in the U.S. defense industry. We look forward to further supporting this program as it issues future contracts."
"Our team is committed to the rapid delivery and fielding of Mine Resistant Armor Protected vehicles to the Marine Corps," said General Dynamics Land Systems' Ground Combat Systems Senior Vice President Mark Roualet. "The joint venture management team is in place; our processes are established and tested; we look forward to supporting this critical effort."
Force Protection's Cougar and Buffalo vehicles have been deployed with U.S. and Allied forces in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003. The vehicles have withstood more than 2,000 IED and mine attacks, and are credited by soldiers with saving lives.
"These vehicles are a highly effective, proven solution to counter IEDs and other explosive threats," said Marine Corps Systems Command Captain Jeff Landis. "No other vehicle has matched those of Force Protection for troop safety in the field."
It has begun. Below is the (notional estimate from Suntrust) ramp for monthly production of CAT 1 and CAT 2 vehicles in 2007 for MRAP. This contract increment puts them on track with 30 vehicles per month. Half way to initial production of 60 per month by September.
Sep-07 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07
60 90 90 180 *Total vehicles per month.
Powerful statement.
It seems we are going to be ahead of schedule. And appears DOD is still buying every vehicle FRPT can produce.
Nineteen
"Yesterday's action was pretty rough. I hink FRPT looks like it needs to close that gap at $16 and play with the 50MA before it will recover, despite todays more positive candle."
ScottishTrader
"Should of played FRPT short at +19.00 . Im sure will get the chance again sometime soon. Its always better to short and be in the money by a good degree after a few days in the trade."
Nullzero
Took your advice and shorted at 19 when it peaked. I do not believe battleground 18 is over yet
Nice I missed this one today. Im going to see about entering a position monday. I need to sell off some positions in other stocks to gather the funds.
Still being a long and strong bull on this. But this news shook me a lot at first.
The MRAP program was outlined for 2007 and 2008. Though funds for MRAP are locked in for 2007, the budget for 2008 just circulated congress and the president without MRAP funding budgeted.
The Marines who are coordinating MRAP for all of the services went straight back to congress and resubmitted it with a list of other equipment. Kerry made it a political issue by speaking about it.
So for 2008 we are at seeking congressional support to place it in the 2008 budget, 2008 emergency budget, or 2008 supplemental budget. The shadow gets even more negative.
Here is the required reading.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/02/2008_budget_short_on_mrap_fund.asp
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5311http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5311
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=36120&printerfriendlyVers=1&
Quote from: TerryG on February 16, 2007, 08:43:56 PM
Still being a long and strong bull on this. But this news shook me a lot at first.
The MRAP program was outlined for 2007 and 2008. Though funds for MRAP are locked in for 2007, the budget for 2008 just circulated congress and the president without MRAP funding budgeted.
The Marines who are coordinating MRAP for all of the services went straight back to congress and resubmitted it with a list of other equipment. Kerry made it a political issue by speaking about it.
So for 2008 we are at seeking congressional support to place it in the 2008 budget, 2008 emergency budget, or 2008 supplemental budget. The shadow gets even more negative.
Here is the required reading.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/02/2008_budget_short_on_mrap_fund.asp
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5311http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5311
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=36120&printerfriendlyVers=1&
Hopefully the congress supports our troops and gives them the stuff they need. I am worried though that the country is getting impatient and warry of the war in Iraq. I dont think we are planned to be in the country very long after 2008.
I think they know they have reached their limit. It reminds me of the suggestion of the draft. A few congressmen mention it, then no one is willing to risk running with it. So yes they do not want to risk running from 2007 to 2008 with it.
It is a fundamental. Leadership looking for its following, and the following looking for its leadership. They must divine their meeting point and turning point.
Or it could be a business decision. That congress did not believe the MRAP proposal was defined or mature enough and needed more work before it was included. We just do not know where the proposal was stalled or stopped.
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE07/W56HZV07R0343/SynopsisP.html
THE U.S. ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE AND ARMAMENTS COMMAND (TACOM-LCMC) IS PLANNING TO AWARD A SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT TO FORCE PROTECTION INDUSTRIES, INC. FOR APPROXIMATELY 180 EACH BUFFALO MINE PROTECTED CLEARANCE VEHICLES (MPCVS), TECHNICAL MANUAL UPDATES, TRAINING, INITIAL REPAIR/SPARE PARTS, AND FIELD SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORT. A FIRM-FIXED PRICE CONTRACT IS ANTICIPATED.
>:D >:D >:D
My paper FRPT short trade would of been knocked out with a 4%-5 loss. Congrats to longs holding FRPT.
A short position on this one is advisable anyway. Though volatile, its bearish phases are always trailing.
The Suntrust report rings home again.
Ground Standoff Mine Detection System
.................FRPT's Buffalo vehicle is already the sole-source system for the Mine Protected Clearance Vehicle (MPCV) in the GSTAMIDS program. ............Under the GSTAMIDS program, the Army buys 36 Buffalos per year ................
Figure 4. GSTAMIDS Funding, FY07E-FY11E (in millions)
FY07E FY08E FY09E FY10E FY11E
GSTAMIDS Funding $197.7 $272.1 $226.1 $219.9 $304.1
Source: DoD budget documents
Qualified vendor number two for the MRAP program, second in size to FRPT.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=abdcexuG.eS4&refer=uk#
BAE Systems Wins U.S. Blast-Resistant Truck Order (Update3) By Edmond LococoFeb. 15 (Bloomberg) -- BAE Systems Plc, Europe's largest defense company, won a $55.4 million order from the U.S. Marine Corps to make blast-resistant trucks as the military ramps up efforts to get the armored vehicles to troops in Iraq.
BAE will make 90 trucks under the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program, Marine Corps spokesman Bill Johnson- Miles said in an interview today. The vehicles will be delivered within 120 days.
The Marine Corps needs new trucks which can better protect troops from mine blasts and improvised explosives in Iraq, and may buy as many as 4,100 vehicles valued at $2 billion. Nine companies, including BAE, were asked to deliver truck prototypes three weeks ago and today's award is the second given to a team which has already shown it can meet program requirements, Johnson-Miles said.
``The time constraints are weighing heavily on the Marines for this,'' said Dean Lockwood, a military vehicle market analyst at Newtown, Connecticut-based Forecast International. ``This is for here and now. They are looking for something as quickly as they can get it in the field.''
The award to London-based BAE follows yesterday's $67.4 million contract to a joint venture between Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics Corp. and Force Protection Inc., Johnson-Miles said.
``All nine of those companies are still in the running,'' Johnson-Miles said. ``There could be more orders to any of them. This is just what we've issued so far.''
Prototype Shares of BAE rose 11.25 pence, or 2.5 percent, to 454 pence in London. They climbed 12 percent last year. Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection fell 20 cents to $18 at 4 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. General Dynamics dropped 14 cents to $79.49 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.
BAE will supply four-wheeled and six-wheeled versions of the company's RG33 family of vehicles, BAE spokesman Doug Coffey said in a phone interview.
The company spent seven months last year to build a prototype and produce the first vehicle in the series at facilities in Santa Clara, California, and Benoni, South Africa, Coffey said. The first vehicle, the six-wheel RG33L, was unveiled last October at the Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting and Exhibition in Washington, he said.
Other companies which received prototype awards for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle last month include Oshkosh Truck Corp. of Oshkosh, Wisconsin; Protected Vehicles Inc. in North Charleston, South Carolina; Armor Holdings Inc. in Jacksonville, Florida; Textron Inc. in Providence, Rhode Island; General Purpose Vehicles LLC in New Haven, Michigan, and International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Illinois.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] . Last Updated: February 15, 2007 16:32 EST
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Trademarks
Your earlier estimate may be true. The sentiment and negativity seem to be taking its toll. The NASDAQ is wary of the fundamentals.
It still responds to good news though. The announcement of the first increment of the MRAP contract sent it above resistance to a 4 week high of 21.18. So I am looking forward to two pieces of good news for the next two rallies.
Firstly a favorable quarterly report.....any day would be nice.
Secondly news of how they are going to divide the MRAP funds that are locked in for 2007. Meaning how many of all the vehicles FRPT can produce before October will the Marines buy. Meaning earnings for the next few quarters.
Quote from: nullzero on February 05, 2007, 06:40:38 PM
Also like to add that FRPT has a foward PE of 28.58 which is on the high side for this company. GD has a foward PE of 15 and is much more stable defense play with more diversification. I think FRPT is going to be a sell the news stock for the upcoming months and quarters, it may see a pop every once in a while but I believe the fundamental trend is down from here. The continued insider selling doesnt help either its telling me that Insiders think its time to get out.
Just trying to speculate on future events and what they would hold for FRPT and the market, im no pro but I dont believe the market has came to a decision and reality on how the War in Iraq will end. I believe the chances for a withdraw from Iraq in 2 years from now is very likely, and the end result will be a disaster in Iraq and a financial troubles for us after the fall out.
So we have beaten upside resistance and broke across 20. Recovery, or a price channel downward? I think we are in for a slide until good news sparks a rally.
If I had to guess I would say we would get a neutral to slight uptrend heading into earnings. After earnings are released I would expect a sell on the news situation to occur. I may short it depending if their arent better plays out there. I would say a short position in the 20-21s would be relatively safe with a cover target around 17-18s.
And now there are five vendors. It will take a while to digest this one. But FRPT still thinks they are going to get the lion's share of the contract.
I shorted at 20. I guess this explains the after hours trading down to 19.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aGvBh5B.CkZQ&refer=home#
With five vendors, 38% (399 of 1049) of the 2007 budget contracted for the next three months. That leaves 52% or 650 vehicles remaining to be contracted for the four final months of this fiscal year. Leaving the 2008 fiscal budget, which must still come by October. It's a long shadow but it may work yet.
Here is the breakdown.
1049 MRAP vehicles budgeted or requested for fiscal 2007. Including 36 test vehicles and contracts of 395 brings total contracts to 431 of 1049 vehicles. Leaving 618 vehicles left to be contracted for 2007.
Of the 395 vehicles, 205 were Category I and 190 Category II. All to be delivered in three to four months. Leaving 618 vehicles to be contracted this year.
The mix is different. FRPT is splitting the Category II contract: FRPT 60, BAE 75, PV 60, and GD 10. So it is a production horse race with FRPT, BAE, and PV. FRPT and PV have announced their production expansion plans. BAE and GD have not.
The plot thickens when you add Category I vehicles. OSH 100, BAE 15, FRPT 65, and GD 10. The good news is that FRPT got a Category I contract it did not anticipate. Also OSH has no Category II contract, and PV does not have a Category I contract. And BAE and GD contracts for Category I are small in comparison.
So it is a squeeze to maximize production, get them to IRAQ and get results. This is so thick only the Marines will know what they are going to do next.
The good news FRPT is still the largest share in addition previous production backlog of several hundred vehicles. I think FRPT is going to have to rethink their production plan of 100, 200, and 300 vehicles per month. Maybe return some of that expansion money and not issue more shares for it.
How FRPT will manage the risk of expansion costs and the remaining, uncontracted vehicles of 618 for this year.
It will be interesting to see FRPT's production plan for the rest of the year.
An even wider range of possabilities. I hope it gets clearer.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/printarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20070226&id=6535868
In January, the Defense Department named a slate of companies awarded contracts for up to 4,100 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles for the Marines and other military services.
C.E. Unterberg Towbin analyst James McIlree said Force is seeing greater risk amid greater competition.
"Clearly the Marines continue to keep their options open, as well as pressuring all vendors to quickly bring up capacity," McIlree wrote in a client note.
But McIlree kept a "Buy" rating on Force, saying that the company will gain from the Marine's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program, which has expanded from 1,200 vehicles to at least 6,700 vehicles for the Marines, Army and Navy.
Nice on the short at 20! I didnt get in I kept saying I was but had my money tied up in some other stocks. Bought some more MSI and got into some dry bulk shipper stocks.
FRPT: MRAP Update (From CEUT)
We reiterate our Buy recommendation and $25 price target on
Force Protection and continue to believe the company will be a
significant winner of the MRAP program. MRAP has expanded from a 1,200 vehicle program a few months ago and according to Marine sources is now expected to include over 6,700 vehicles for the Marines, Army and Navy. We have increased our revenue estimates for 2007 and 2008 to account for the
greater scale of the program. While the number of participants in the program is greater than we anticipated we continue to believe ultimately two or three vendors, with field-proven vehicles and productive capacity, like Force Protection, will end up with the majority of the task orders.
• We had originally anticipated limited deliveries of MRAP in 2007. For 2008 we had looked for the FRPT/GD JV to produce 720 Category 1 vehicles, 1,500 category II vehicles and 110 Category III vehicles. But this was on a program of 4,100 total vehicles. The program now is over 6,700 vehicles and on time,
which is very rare for any program of this size. And that still remains FRPT's competitive advantage. Our old estimates did not put too fine a pencil to market share since in our opinion, the program was in tremendous flux, likely to be increased and likely to be accelerated, all of which turned out to be true. We
have increased our 2007 estimates to reflect the delivery of the 125 vehicles awarded earlier this month and an additional 125 vehicles in Q4, which have not been awarded. In 2008 we are looking for 776 Category I vehicles and 1,569 Category II, about 50% market share of the total vehicles we expect awarded for each.
• The risks certainly are higher since the Marines have now awarded five vendors LRIP (limited rate initial production) orders. These orders are for "lower risk" bids in advance of testing in order to accelerate production.
• Our price target assumes a P/E of almost 25x on our 2008 EPS estimate of $1.05. Given the company's rapid growth rate, large addressable market and leading technological position, we believe both our multiple and EPS estimate could be low. Risks to achieving our target include a slow-down in spending for
Iraq, advancements by competitors and its ability to deliver on a significant increase in expected revenues and earnings.
Bad day for a long, congrats for all shorts made some money today 8)
I will hold my shares...
cheers
O.
Took my own advice and started a short position. My long position, I am keeping it also, it has paid for itself. I can take the pain, I have been here since the reverse split. 20 to 25 looks like a comfortable place to wait for.
Looks like enough volatility to make a short postion pay for itself while we wait. Considering up from 17 or a dip into 16. The 15.50 retracement would be the market selling for no reason. But who knows?
Quote from: TerryG on February 23, 2007, 11:46:32 PM
I shorted at 20.
Terry,
You nailed that short entry in FRPT! Applause.
I haven't watched this one recently (wish that I had), but I want to follow up on the discussion that several of us had about shorting FRPT when it put in the 15.70 low back in early February.
Shorting FRPT there was "shorting into the hole," meaning that a lot of the gain on the downside already had been made, the short trade, essentially, had been missed. That would have been a weak entry, short, because there was too much risk on the
upside (it turned out to be a rally of more that 20%).
From that 15.70 low at Purple #1, we got the initial rally to 19.56 - 20.00 first resistance that we all discussed and expected, at Purple #2. The high there was 19.58.
Then we got a selloff, to Purple #3, and then a rally to Purple #4.
At Purple #4, we had a "possible" Bearish Rising Wedge completed.
That's where we want to consider shorting a stock, depending on the overall chart and the technicals, and that's where you, in fact, did short it.
Very nice! ;)
"Short rallies, back to resistance."
The 34/55RSIs also failed right there, at Bearish Synchronicity. That's a technical indication that the short trade has a good chance of succeeding. 20.08 was the sell pivot. The print of 20.07 was the sell signal. I'll post that chart next.
Another nice place to have shorted FRPT was the gap down break of the Bearish Rising Wedge (pattern in purple), below 19.34, on Monday. That was confirmation that the rally and the pattern had failed. The open was 19.00, and that was the high on the day, so it might have been difficult to get short there because of the Uptick Rule, but that was another good entry short, if anyone could get it.
"Short pattern breaks, and breaks of support."
That break of the Bearish Rising Wedge put 15.70 IN PLAY (the bottom of the wedge) and 10.34 IN PLAY (measured move off the break).
FWIW, I take at least some profits when targets get MADE, and yesterday's 15.80 is "close enough" to the 15.70 IN PLAY.
Yesterday was another gap down, then an
exact gap fill to the prior day's 17.00 close, then another selloff to the "possible" Bullish Doji Star Hammer close.
That's an "indecision" candle: are we going to put in a Double Bottom at 15.70 and 15.80 and rally, or are we going lower? That's why I like to take some off the table at those junctures because I can't answer that question any more than the other players can.
A print of 17.01 today, a penny above yesterday's "possible" Bullish Doji Star Hammer, at least would hint at the fact that the bulls aren't out it yet, and that FRPT might rally a bit, but there's more resistance now than there was on the rally off the 15.70 low.
In addition to all of the candles since the 15.70 low, that now represent more resistance, the Kumo (Cloud), which is represented by the vertical lines, now is overhead resistance, beginning at 17.34. At the 15.70 low on February 2, we can see that the Kumo (Cloud) was support, so that makes a rally more difficult this time.
Bulls still have a chance, though, but 15.70 - 15.80 looks to be important support here, that needs to hold.
Nice play, Terry, and good luck! I'll post the 34/55RSI chart next.
34/55 RSIs. The failure at Bearish Synchronicity and the break of the Bear Flag in this chart was technical confirmation of the failure, and break, of the Bearish Rising Wedge in the price chart.
Thanks for the market reality Melf it looks like it is going to hang on.
Because with the management reality we are at before FRPT's expansion announcement with GD, exactly. With the split of the MRAP contract we are somewhere between before and after the announcement. So how many contracted vehicles and how much expansion will dictate upward again.
1. As always a favorable Q4 report.
2. The MRAP contract award was not as favorable as the optomistic view for which we have paid.
3. We have seven months to see the Fiscal 2008 budget and how much funding for vehicles it has.
So with a match in market and management reality we may be safe from this concurrent market sell off and economic slip.
I am still optomistic I was back in at 16 yesterday. Looks like the market wants to rethink 20, 50, 100 days, backward and forward.
Well the Marines at Congress give me hope. Now if Congress will get on board.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/iraq/bal-te.armor15feb15,1,637349,print.story?coll=bal-home-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true
The decision to replace Humvees means the Marine Corps will increase its purchase of MRAP vehicles to 3,700 from the 1,022 it had said only last month that it needed.
Back out at 16.10. Or it could be trying to bottom until sometime next week.
Market Edge - Second Opinion: Not a short candidate. If you are long, keep. But do not add any new positions.
I know money is money, but in this case, you are shorting a company buiding vehicles that are saving the lives of our troops. There are plenty other good short canidates out there besides a young company who figured out how to defeat the IED. Shame on 3 stocks on fire. Sure, it looks like a good short on the chart, but one major contract announced will blow you guys out of the water and I hope that happens!!
And they will continue building those fine vehicles whether 3SoF or anyone else is short or long their stock.
Trading a companies stock has nothing whatsoever to do with how noble or otherwise their end product is.
if you take your argument to it's logical extreme FRPT are profiting from death and war, how un American can that be? If there were no war and death there would be no market for their product.
Mrmarket using your example it would be unethical for insiders to sell out there shares until the war in Iraq is over.
Selling shares that were giving for their hard earned time and cash is different than someone shorting the company based on a chart pattern. Look, I just don't like seeing an American Company who is doing something noble and good being shorted. That is my opinion. I think if you were over in Bagdad and they gave you a choice of riding in a hummer or Cougar across town which one do you think you would choose? They same as our soldiers are begging for. Why don't you visit the emergecy room where you will see our gives legs and arms being blown off from these IED's? Investing is more than a bad chart!
Thanks for the post. Fundamentally speaking I think this is a good candidate for shorting because:
1) it has a history of increasing net loss http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=FRPT&annual (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=FRPT&annual) DURING WAR TIME. What would happens once the troop pull out? I doubt the war will last much longer (by next election at the longest as the British are already talking for a pullout) so if this company can't make money now, it definitely won't make money during peace time.
2) Very very, extremely unattractive balance sheet http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=FRPT&annual (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=FRPT&annual)
Press Release Source: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. to Release Fourth Quarter 2006 Results
Friday March 2, 5:43 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Armored vehicle manufacturer Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT - News) today announced that it will report its fourth quarter 2006 results on Friday, March 16, 2007, after the close of markets.
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. manufactures ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles through its wholly owned subsidiary. These specialty vehicles are protected against landmines, hostile fire, and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection's mine and ballistic protection technology is among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, S.C.
For more information, go to www.forceprotection.net.
This release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements concerning our business, future plans and objectives and the performance of our products. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that ultimately may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Technical complications may arise that could prevent the prompt implementation of the strategic plan outlined above. The company cautions that these forward looking statements are further qualified by other factors including, but not limited to, those set forth in the company's Form 10-KSB filing and other filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (available at http://www.sec.gov). The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any statements in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Contact:
At Financial Relations Board
Leslie Wolf-Creutzfeldt or Julie Tu
(843) 740-7015 x200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Force Protection, Inc.
I bought more today ;)
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/dod-may-cut-list-armored/story.aspx?guid=%7B13646ECB%2D8395%2D4706%2D9F84%2D68592C78690A%7D&dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN
Another doubt clearing up.
http://www.cleveland.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/1173182160301100.xml&coll=2
The modified request was being finalized Monday, said administration and congressional aides. In addition to the money for increased troop strength, the White House will press for more dollars to battle the Taliban's resurgence in Afghanistan and get mine-resistant vehicles.
The request probably will come to about $2 billion. It will be accompanied by equal reductions elsewhere in the larger request, which contained money for two next-generation Joint Strike Fighters and a V-22 tilt rotor aircraft.
new contract:
Force Protection Industries, Inc., Ladson, S.C., is being awarded a $16,260,713 firm-fixed-priced delivery order 0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5006) for 19 Buffalo vehicles and 19 90-day On-board Consumables Block (OCB). The Buffalo are mine-resistant, route clearance-type vehicle that is needed in convoy operations. The OCB are consumable parts which include fuses, fan belts, filters, bulbs, etc., to be packed and carried on each vehicle to cover 90 days operation. Work will be performed in Ladson, S.C., and work is expected to be completed by September 2007. Contract funds in the amount of $16,260,713 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.
nice contract summarization from IV :
"The following is frpt_bull's info in an understandable format by using with..."
Cat I Cat II Cat III Vehicles Contract
FRPT Nov-07 0 200 80 280 $214.1M
FRPT Jan-07 0 15 0 15 $9.4M
FD 65 60 0 125 $67.4M
FRPT Mar-07 0 0 19 19 $16.3M
Total FRPT 65 275 99 420 $307.2M
Cat I Cat II Cat III Vehicles Contract
BAE 15 75 0 90 $55.0M
PVI 0 60 0 60 $37.0M
OSK 100 0 0 100 $30.6M
GD 10 10 0 20 $11.0M
Total others 125 145 0 270 $133.6M
Cat I Cat II Cat III Vehicles Contract
Total total 190 420 99 690 $440.8M
FRPT Share 65 275 99 420 $307.2M
FRPT share% 34.2% 65.5% 100.0% 60.9% 69.7%
&
Force Protection, Inc. Announces Review of Financial Statements; Restatement of Previously Filed Financial Statements Will Be Made
Tuesday March 6, 6:33 pm ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (the "Company") (FRPT) announced today that management of the Company has completed a review of its prior financial filings. In that review, the Company has discovered items which require restatement. The Company will restate the financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005. The Company did not give a timetable as to when the restatement would be completed.
The Company believes the areas requiring restatement relate to its accounting for preferred stock and warrants issued to investors. The Company has reviewed applicable Financial Accounting Standards Board Statements and Emerging Issue Task Force Statements (EITFs) including EITF 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company's Own Stocks. As a result, the Company believes that the accounting method it applied to the warrants of its Series D Preferred Stock equity issuance did not include a complete analysis of the mandatory redeemable feature as required.
The Company believes that it will need to restate its financial results for the year ended December 31, 2005 to reflect a realized gain on derivative instruments in the range of $2 to $4 million due to changes in the "fair value" of the warrants, however, this adjustment is still an estimate and it may be higher or lower once the Company completes the final accounting and independent audit of its conclusions. The Company believes that the restatement will not materially impact its 2006 financial results. The Company's management and audit committee have discussed the subject matter giving rise to this conclusion with Jaspers + Hall, PC, its independent accounting firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005.
We have seven months of Fiscal 2007 left, with three months of production spoken for and a backlog. I think FRPT will start going back up when contracts and future contracts for the final four months of Fiscal 2007come through.
Congress did have a discussion about why the money was going to Joint Strike Fighters and not Iraq and MRAP. DOD's comment was it was to replace equipment they were wearing out prematurely in Iraq. They have since shifted the money back to Iraq and MRAP. It is currently in Congresss as an Emergency Spending bill to cover the remainder of Fiscal 2007.
So keep your fingers crossed. Budgetary approval and then the contracts for the remaining four of seven months of Fiscal 2007. Then we can look for the 2008 budget.
The Fibs suggest we may see a move to 13.50 on this pullback (which would be a pullback to the 61.8% retracement level of the most recent major move) however, I see some support kicking in at 14.50 both horizontally, and from what could be a falling wedge developing. FRPT really needs to put in a positive candle, or at least a doji, to give some indication that this pullback is running out of steam, and that there is at least some price support. Even if it does rally from here, it may have some trouble getting through 16.80 resistance.
Armor Holdings, Inc. Awarded $40.7 Million Cougar Production Contract by Force Protection Industries, Inc.
PR Newswire - March 08, 2007 9:12 AM ET
Armor Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: AH), a leading manufacturer and distributor of military vehicles, vehicle armor systems and life safety and survivability systems serving military, law enforcement, homeland security and commercial markets, announced today the receipt of a contract from Force Protection Industries, Inc. to produce Cougar armored vehicles for delivery to the U.S. Marine Corps. The contract value is $40.7 million and includes production of vehicles and technical support. The Company advised that the award is made under an existing agreement with Force Protection that engages Armor Holdings to manufacture and assemble Cougar vehicles in support of the U.S. Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program. Armor Holdings and Force Protection are continuing discussions for follow-on Cougar production should Force Protection receive additional U.S. Marine Corps MRAP orders. Work will be performed in 2007 by the Armor Holdings Aerospace & Defense Group at its facilities located in Sealy, Texas.
Robert Schiller, President of Armor Holdings, stated, "We are pleased to have this opportunity to work with Force Protection on such an important program for the U.S. Marine Corps. It is gratifying that our capabilities will contribute to early delivery in higher volumes of this proven vehicle, which is saving lives in the field today. We look forward to additional opportunities to work with Force Protection in support of the MRAP program."
Your prediction rings true ScottishTrader, done in two days. But all that downside support becoming upside resistance makes me think this is going to be a battleground to 19-20.
My FRPT predictions say FRPT will announce its vehicle production has hit their target of 100 vehicles per month. They will then set a 200 vehicle per month goal when their new production facility opens in May. They have broken ground and were laying the foundation for their new facility near their present production facility a few weeks ago. I hear it is the talk of the town.
The Fibs suggest we may see a move to 13.50 on this pullback (which would be a pullback to the 61.8% retracement level of the most recent major move) however, I see some support kicking in at 14.50 both horizontally, and from what could be a falling wedge developing. FRPT really needs to put in a positive candle, or at least a doji, to give some indication that this pullback is running out of steam, and that there is at least some price support. Even if it does rally from here, it may have some trouble getting through 16.80 resistance.ScottishTrader
AP
Force Protection Gets $16.2M Marine Deal
Friday March 9, 2:34 pm ET
Force Protection Gets $16.2 Million Marine Deal for 19 Mine-Protected Vehicles
LADSON, S.C. (AP) -- Force Protection Inc. said Friday it received a $16.2 million delivery order from the U.S. Marine Corps for an additional 19 mine-protected vehicles.
In November 2006, the manufacturer of ballistic- and mine-protected vehicles received an initial order by the Marine Corps System Command for 19 vehicles to be delivered by December 2007.
The armored vehicles were first deployed in 2003 in Iraq to detect and remove suspected explosive threats by military engineers.
On Tuesday, the company said it will refile its results for the period ended Dec. 31, 2005, to reflect changes in its accounting for preferred stock and warrants issued to investors. The company did not specify when it would refile, but expects a gain on derivative instruments in the range of $2 million to $4 million.
Shares of Force Protection gained $1.00, or 6.19%, to $17.15 to close in afternoon trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
We are definitely in Bear territory for now. Trying to stay neutral but this slide is reminding me of when they thought FRPT production was maxed out waiting for Fiscal 2007 contracts. If this slides until May when the new production facility opens (50 to 100 days from now) the bears will rule here for a while. To be rescued by the new plant and Fiscal 2008 contracts.
Was the advice: Market Edge - Second Opinion: Not a short candidate. If you are long, keep. But do not add any new positions.
As of 3/5/2007: Market Edge - Second Opinion: Avoid the stock. Stock is Not a Short Sale Candidate. If you are long, close position or monitor stock closely.
Comment:
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bearish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Weak Downward Trend.
Relative Strength is Neutral.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Distribution.
The 50 day Moving Average is falling which is Bearish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
Watch for resistance at 19.62
Sounds like they want us to wait on the side lines to be safe.
We definitely need to be saved. If it is under distribution, who will enter the market? And if we have a long hold for good news they are going to want a lower price not a higher price. It does make sense 100 days backward and forward to the new production plant. Being held up by trailing bulls at 50 and 100 day EMA and MACD. The trailing bulls have been able to pull off some good rallies, but that was before the NASDAQ listing
A strategic upper management change. The Street.com indicated two things. That there is competition from a company made of former FRPT called Protected Vehicles. Secondly that OSH is offering a Category I vehicle for 300K versus 500K from FRPT. I just got the damage. OSH and PV have formed a partnership and OSH is co-producing PV's Category I vehicle. So they have a very big squeeze play in Cat I vehicles. OSH and PV sounds as good as FRPT and GD/BAE. It appears GD/BAE get the best of both worlds. As FRPT takes the speculative risk for production expansion. As GD/BAE get to put their existing plants to work.
And for Cat II it is split with FRPT, BAE, and PV with a similar number of contracted vehicles. So it is not only a question of how many vehicles can they produce in the next 90 days, but also how many vehicles they can produce in the final four months, it is a horse race.
This competion got really intense, but this is war.
FRPT is going to have to answer criticism rather than give the same confident answer that FRPT will get a major portion of the MRAP contract. We know where FRPT will be in 90 days, but where will the competition be in 90 days?
la-onda, prepare for the full 100 day hold this is going to come clear hard and fast after the Emergency budget for the remainder of fiscal 2007 gets approved. The DOD has been good at handing out contracts soon after the budget gets approved.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=93403&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=966930&highlight=
The Category I vehicle proposed by Oshkosh Truck is designed by Protected Vehicles, Inc. (PVI) of North Charleston, South Carolina. Over the past year, Oshkosh and PVI have forged a relationship that takes advantage of the experience, strengths and expertise of both companies. PVI will provide Oshkosh with armored hulls outfitted with their advanced armor technology, and Oshkosh will take advantage of its production capability and engineering expertise to provide completed vehicles with the performance, reliability, and quality standards that have become synonymous with Oshkosh Truck tactical wheeled vehicles.
The vehicle, dubbed the Alpha, is a 13-ton, 4x4 armored vehicle with room for eight occupants. It has a v-shaped hull and is designed to meet or exceed all ballistic and mine protection capabilities specified under the MRAP requirement. The vehicle is also fully air-transportable, making it simpler to re-deploy once in theater. The MRAP program is expected to greatly increase the safety of Marines and soldiers in the field.
Chart update:
Agreed Terry, I think we will see a slide in FRPT, at least over the short term. Market isn't gonna help either. I had a read of the article, and a few things rang really true to me. First, that the military will use whatever means it has to get as many vehicles as soon as it can once the funds are in place to do so. So we may see more contracts to other vendors, but if FRPT's short term capacity is maxed out, don't expect any new orders for near term contracts. This also means that the realisation that FRPT may get a lot less of the total contract will weigh heavily on the stock.
Second, the part about PV and OSH having a price edge on FRPT rings alarm bells. As they mentioned, the military will do whatever it can (barring compromising troops' safety) to get the best deal it can. FRPT might have to bend over a barrel here to get more orders and cut into margins to remain competetive, particularly in the CAT I competition. Their net profit margins are already stretched as it is, and everyone is waiting to see how revenues and profits stack up for this quarter. They have been profitable the last 2 quarters, but only just. If revenue jumps but net profit lags, the stock will get a real haircut. Current estimates are for eps of .06 on revs of $61M, 45% up on last Q, which equates to a net income of $3.18M, 5x what they earned last Q. I'm not sure when they will be reporting, but assume it will be soon.
Technically, the stock is in a clear down channel, with lower highs and lower lows. I see a break of $16 signalling a move to $14. Over the medium term, I could see it pulling back to $12 before it finds support and starts new uptrend. Obviously, all of this is highly dependent on their numbers. If they beat by a significant margin, which is possible given their ramp in production, we should see a nice pop. However, it needs to be accompanied by solid eps numbers as well, as there are definitely concerns about their profitability, and I think that profit margins are going to get worse, not better, over the medium term.
Thanks for the analysis and opinion ScottishTrader.
FRPT is being more professional in their public relations. They have announced that the Q4 2006 report will be available after the close of market on Friday, probably at their website www.forceprotection.net I will play this last card on Friday before deciding to go short.
Bullish and long is still fine. But leaving myself without a choice is not.
Must have been good news. Up two points upon release. 2006 EPS 39 cents.
See attachment.
http://www.forceprotection.net/investors/sec.html
Glad I have the weekend.
TGIF.
It was better than I thought. They appear to be ahead of their 2007 EPS. The year to year Congressional budget approval of contract funds is still short term, which detracts from a stable business picture.
I was making one mistake that the report did clear up. I assumed that the new construction was a new production facility. It is instead a bigger replacement for a smaller support warehouse. And it was a big mistake on my part.
I assumed that the new construction was for a new production facility to double production. One that they could not afford. Which leaves me asking, how does FRPT increase production from 100 to 200 and 300 vehicles per month? Their present facility has a quoted full capacity of 100 vehicles per month. With subcontract work by GD and AH brings that up to 100 plus.
A conflict in management estimates but it seems they did not over expand, which is why I was going to short the stock.
Good news for the year. 2006 and Q4 report with earnings on track. The rally was straight up and straight down. Before the NASDAQ listing the rally would last 3 to 5 days. Is it the NASDAQ, FRPT out of favor, or both?
Next good news for the year will be FRPT reaching production ramped to 100 plus vehicles per month. Or Congress approves Emergency budget for remaining fiscal 2007 which approves additional funds in addition to the 600 vehicles already approved for the remaining 2007.
Next management moves. Second production plant proposal. And Fiscal 2008 budget with funds for vehicles budgeted.
Still thinking of shorting. Not wanting to be contrarian if this stock remains out of favor. Going long looks like a long seven months waiting for Congress to approve funds for vehicles, then DOD dividing the contracts for them.
Wednesday rally? Probably. One more card to play.
Force Protection will host a conference call to discuss results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2006 on Wednesday, March 21 at 11:00 am EDT. The call can be heard live by dialing 800-257-1836 (domestic) or 303-262-2211 (international), or via the Internet at http://www.forceprotection.net. For those who cannot listen to the live broadcast, the audio replay will be available until Tuesday, March 27th by dialing 800-405-2236 (domestic) or 303-590-3000 (international) and entering the replay passcode of 11086707.
Well the bears are definitly here, leaving only trailing bulls looking for room to run.
This is where I think the market reality is:
« Reply #243 on: February 16, 2007, 04:12:55 PM »
Nineteen
"Yesterday's action was pretty rough. I hink FRPT looks like it needs to close that gap at $16 and play with the 50MA before it will recover, despite todays more positive candle."
ScottishTrader
"Should of played FRPT short at +19.00 . Im sure will get the chance again sometime soon. Its always better to short and be in the money by a good degree after a few days in the trade."
Nullzero
ScottishTrader is right on target it is not only tracking the 50MA sideways the Bollinger Bands have collapsed it into a narrow trading range. Nullzero is right in that the short position is keeping it floating from what I hear along with a possible short squeeze pushing it higher.
Back to the management reality. This narrow trading range and downtrending 50MA are exactly the same as the September, October, and November slide of 2006. Identical maxed out production with a backlog. With the budget still in the air and hoping for additional contracts. It did not break upward until the 2007 budget cleared late and contracts came over from DOD.
Meaning they do not expect earnings to increase unless production with matching contracts appear after the budget approval.
With the bad news that most of Q4 earnings was a deferred tax benefit, not earnings on revenues. More bad news is that the 2007 Emergency spending bill with funds for additional production and contracts are likely to be vetoed. There are two versions a House and Senate version and both are likely to be vetoed.
So between whether spare funds being found and a Congressional budget approval this could be a long slide until Fiscal 2008 or 2007 Emergency budget approval. Seven or eight months instead of three.
Hey Terry,
Lost track of FRPT a little, but I think the chart still doesn't look like its gonna have much upside in the near future. I think there could be a reasonably low risk short trade here, with clear upside resistance at 17.25 and 17.40. Next real support is at 15.70-15.80. Note on the chart how in the pullback since the January highs, we have seen 2 rising wedges develop, which are classic within a downtrend. The first broke down sharply, while the second only just broke down on Monday. Since then, FRPT has rallied a bit but failed to get back above the lower rail of that wedge.
If you took the more conservative stop on the short, i.e. above 17.40, the current risk (as of yesterday's close) would be less than 2%, for a potential 7.5% gain on a move to next support at 15.80. If it does break down from here, I could see it going below $15 though. The risk:reward profile of the trade is appealing, plus it is going with the current trend. Also as you mentioned, the BBs are narrowing, suggesting we will likely see a near term move in one direction or another. Barring a big new contract win or some other information, my guess is that it will be down.
ScottishTrader,
Thanks for pointing out the second rising wedge. With the narrowing Bollinger bands the likely break downward looks clearer than the break upward in price. About the break upward I heard it mentioned that there may be a large short position which still needs to cover itself which may move the price vertical to 18.50. Now I understand that rumor and why he said the possibility was riskier than normal, it would be against the trends.
The one management reality that scares me the most is the risk/reward of expansion. They have just announced a new 120K sq./ft facility which will move their production from 100 plus to 400 by years end. Backed by 152 M stock issue the risk/reward looks steep.
Especially with the growing budget issue in Congress. Is congress going to fund enough to pay for this expansion? This is a real aerospace feast or famine proposition again.
Good news is that FRPT is still a likely sole source for an additional 180 vehicle contract, plus a short list share of the remaining MRAP contract funds for the year. That will tide them over until the Congressional budget breakthroughs which are dragging right now.
So I do not worry about the lapse to 15, just the good news that will send it back up again, the bears have been winning these duals for a while.
And being a contrarian, a possible feast/famine, high risk/reward, and seven months to fiscal 2008 in October, where it will all be forced to a conclusion.
Hey Terry,
reversed my position on FRPT this morning when it broke 17.25 resistance. Looks like it was a good call. With tight BBs expanding, I think we may see a leg up here. Resistance @ 18, 19.
ScottishTrader,
Be careful it might just be short covering. My target is 18.50.
"About the break upward I heard it mentioned that there may be a large short position which still needs to cover itself which may move the price vertical to 18.50. Now I understand that rumor and why he said the possibility was riskier than normal, it would be against the trends."
ScottishTrader,
This is where the opinion came from.
http://alphatrends.blogspot.com/2007/03/video-stock-market-trading-ideas-for_25.html
Partial out at 18.10
David thinks it is way over valued. Do a search on FRPT or look at the stocks covered thread. I haven't looked at it recently but you might take a look at what the current margins are. their sales have been good, but If I remember correctly, they did not talk about margins in any of there forward looking announcements.
FRPT broke the $18 resistance and the upper trend line today. Is this going to hold?
Hey Terry,
Yes I follow alphatrends as well from time to time - he's pretty god in his analyses. As for FRPT, I'm real glad I got on the right side of the trade and reversed my position. Today was a lot more than I was expecting and we got a solid breakout from the falling wedge consolidation of the last few months on nice volume. As we have mentioned before, the BBs wers contracting, suggesting an upcoming move, and I anticipate we should (hopefully) see some continuation here. The expansion of the BBs on both sides makes me think this move could be significant. Provided FRPT doesn't get smacked at $19, I could see it pushing $21 again, given momentum. Personally to me this looks like more than a relief rally (I think it was fueled by the senate passing the emergency military funding bill?).
I think I will be conservative and hold my stop just below 17.40 for now, but hopefully $18-18.30 resistance band will now become support.
Have to say, I'm glad I'm wrong - I always prefer to be long a stock rather than short it ;)
Glad it was happy hunting today.
My market reality and management reality picture fit is pessimistic though.
Firstly when it made its bull run past 20 to 25 it was FRPT as a sole source of the MRAP proposal fueling it. In fact FRPT management has stated their entire production and expansion plan is based on a 4800 vehicle contract proposal. That has changed. FRPT is on a short list for a share of over 6000 vehicles.
So I am pessimistic that we can make a bull run to 25 and may bounce off 20. Because it has crossed 20 twice and come straight back down twice. Ever since the NASDAQ listing the bears have weighed more heavily than the bulls.
Good news there are prospects for contracts on other than MRAP (See Attachment).
The senate passage was quite literally a boomerang. An opinion it was passed with the confidence it would be vetoed and sent back. So they passed it rather than waste time arguing now. Pessimism as after the veto it will be back to square one in the budget approval loop. Both houses and the president.
So I split the difference at 18.50. Finished selling a position at 18.50. Leaving me with one last long position in case this goes vertical again. Then I will decide how much I believe this expansion plan will pay for itself before moving back in. I really regret not bailing with the smart money at 24.
One thing that is pre-NASDAQ and post-NASDAQ. Be prepared to the wrestle bears at the end.
To me this was a normal surprise. The bulls were beaten down by the bears until there was only a trailing bull defending the lows of this stock (50 MA). The trailing bulls only choice was to let it fall to the 100 MA.
Whether the bulls are really going to run? Or is it short bears covering?
In support of my 20 to 25 price point. The target range of 25 to 31 was before they decided to split the 4800 vehicle MRAP contract proposal. The proposal has since been increased to more than 6000.
Next good news. Remaining funded MRAP vehicle contracts to be awarded this quarter (April, May,June). And an additional 180 vehicle contract to be awarded in June or July.
Most of the rest of the good news is waiting for the 2007 Emergency Budget and 2008 Fiscal Budget approval.
Welcome to War, Business, and Politics.
Another pattern for FRPT is a rally on Friday if there is a fair reason.
Have not looked closely yet. Was there a bearish or bullish confirmation today?
Another pattern I notice is upward rallies tend to follow the Japanese Candlestick rule of three days. Whether it is in the Candlesticks?
Force Protection "buy," target price raised
Tuesday, March 20, 2007 0:37:08 AM ET
Dougherty & Company
NEW YORK, March 20 (newratings.com) - In a research note published yesterday, analysts at Dougherty & Company reiterate their "buy" rating on Force Protection (ticker: FRPT). The target price has been raised from $19 to $23.
in @ 18.5$ again
(let me quote fous TTT chart ;D ;) )
(http://**********.net/forum/index.php?topic=222.msg3137#new)
Thanks for the advice and opinion.
I am a new investor still doing my reading and studying. All the pointers help. Thanks again.
I have a degree in manufacturing is how I picked up this stock. Started at 2.15 and kicked myself when I saw it bounce off .50 liked I kicked myself when it hit 24.
I will spend more time looking for the signs.
Quote from: la-onda on March 31, 2007, 04:42:50 AM
in @ 18.5$ again
(let me quote fous TTT chart ;D ;) )
(http://**********.net/forum/index.php?topic=222.msg3137#new)
Fridays closing Chart analysis :)
news update:
Force Protection Gets $6.9M Navy Deal
Tuesday April 3, 7:38 pm ET
Force Protection Gets $6.9 Million Navy Deal for MRAP Vehicles
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Navy on Tuesday awarded a $6.9 million contract to Force Protection Inc. to begin low rate production of mine resistant ambush protected vehicles.
The company will perform the work in Ladson, S.C. through April 2008.
Shares of Force Protection fell 15 cents to $18.65 in aftermarket trading after falling 11 cents to close at $18.80 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
chart update:
The Navy? The Marines should be coordinating, but it does give them an excuse to use extra money not previously allocated to MRAP in the 2007 budget. If nothing else it is a good sign of support from the Navy, though the Congress is the one making the decision first.
I am thinking of a slide or dip before going long again. believing in Business and Politics. I shorted not believing the War and Politics argument that was going on. Still in though, just looking for a sign to go all in again.
Pre-NASDAQ last year I would believe this 100 percent. Post NASDAQ I am taking a grain of salt having little experience in predicting the NASDAQ. But here it is.
http://transport.seekingalpha.com/article/31493?source=feed
Force Protection Inc. Likely To See More Upside Following Conference Presentation
Posted on Apr 4th, 2007 with stocks: FRPT
Ant & Sons submits: In early January, we highlighted shares of Force Protection Inc. (FRPT), a protective vehicle manufacturer after the company made the move from the Over the Counter Bulletin Board to being listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market. The key ingredient to making such a move was the company's success story, benefiting from nearly four years of combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The highlight of Force Protection's rise from obscurity came late last year when the company was awarded a $214 million from the Marine Corps Systems Command for approximately 280 mine-protected clearance vehicles.
Moving along in time, Force Protection reported fourth quarter and fiscal year results in March that included some impressive numbers. For the year ended 2006, the company's net sales totaled $196.0 million. Net income was $18.2 million or $0.39 per diluted share. In the fourth quarter alone, the company's net sales totaled $62.9 million, with net income of $17.0 million or $0.32 per diluted share during the fourth quarter of 2006. To ensure continued growth, the company recently announced it would increase its production level to more than 400 vehicles per month by the end of 2007, compared to the 50 vehicles per month that were being produced at the end of 2006. Force Protection also has invested in a building to keep up with its research and laboratory testing of its armored vehicle technology.
Although Force Protection shares have already seen a dramatic increase in price, the company could likely get a major boost ahead of its presentation at the SunTrust Robinson Humphrey 36th Annual Institutional Conference on April 10. Being a recent addition to the NASDAQ Capital Market, the company is likely still trying to attract larger institutions and further analyst coverage. If the presentation is positive, it would especially not be surprising to see an update from analysts at Sun Trust Robinson Humphrey who initiated Force Protection shares with a "buy" rating earlier this year, or others who could initiate coverage and spur additional demand for the stock.
Well we are at a psychological barrier or 20. This would be the fourth or fifth run with two successes. The trailing bulls must be done by now. Who or what is going to carry the rally now?
The only good news I see is the 2007 Emergency budget which may get a positive reception after the veto. Even with a contract split I see 23 where it was 25 to 31.
MINE RESISTANT AMBUSH PROTECTED (MRAP) VEHICLE
The Committee commends the fast action of the military services in using an innovative approach to acquire the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) family of vehicles. MRAP vehicles are urgently needed in the theater of operations, and will ultimately save the lives of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines by augmenting the current level of mine and Improvised Explosive Devises (IED) protection provided by the up-armored HMMWV. The MRAP has a new V-shaped hull, a raised chassis, and various other force protection assets.
While the Committee acknowledges the tremendous joint efforts of the services to address this urgent need, it is dismayed by the shortfall of funding requested by the Department of Defense in its supplemental request. The Committee strongly encourages the Defense Department to work with Congress to fully resource the requirements as they are further defined.
In an effort to address the shortfall, the Committee includes $1,411,000,000 for the MRAP in this recommendation, an increase of $311,000,000 above the request. When combined with appropriations provided in Title IX of the fiscal year 2007 Defense Appropriations Act, the Department will have a total of $2,071,000,000 available to purchase MRAP vehicles. Based on information provided by DoD, the Committee believes this funding amount to be sufficient to procure all MRAP vehicles that can be manufactured in fiscal year 2007, using reasonable production rate assumptions. As such, the Committee has fully funded the maximum production capacity through the end of the fiscal year for the Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) contracts that are currently issued by the joint program office.
Should production capacity expand to levels beyond those assumed by the Committee recommendation, the Committee has made funds available for MRAPs in the Strategic Readiness Reserve Fund.
The funding provided in this Act is as follows:
[in thousands of dollars]
Other Procurement,
Army: 129 Ground Standoff Mine Detection System $500,000
Other Procurement,
Navy: 124 Tactical Vehicles 180,000
124 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Outfitting (above the request) 51,600
Procurement,
Defense-Wide: 70 EOD Systems 420,000
70A Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (above the request) 259,000
Terry, chart looks positive, I will continue to hold my FRPT shares
quotation from blog:
Right now FRPT is testing the overhead resistence of the February 26, 2007 gap between $19 & $19.50. If FRPT can get through this there remains two major overhead points of resistence:
- The February 21, 2007 high of $21.18
- The January 17, 2007 all time high of $24.30
So it looks like FRPT might be starting to build a base. Whether FRPT builds that base or just launches is dependent upon the news cycle which is finally working in FRPT's favor:
- The Robinson Humphrey conference is next week
- FRPT's maufacturing capacity is ramping up rapidly
- The big MRAP orders are about to be handed out
- Despite the battle over the Iraq war budget, both sides of the aisle want our troops to be protected in MRAP vehicles.
fyi >:D :
DoD Armored Vehicle Plan Expands, Aims At Short-Term Needs
Apr 6, 2007 07:31:30 (ET)
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The Defense Department's new armored vehicle program has nearly doubled in size but is still aimed at short-term combat needs, U.S. Marine Corps officials said Thursday. Over the next 18 months, the Marines and the Army want to buy 7,774 Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicles, which they expect will cost $8.4 billion. The Marines have the lead on the acquisition program, which previously had estimated a 4,000-vehicle, one-year effort. Funding looks certain, said Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, head of Marine Corps Systems Command. He said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., has already submitted amendments to Pentagon budget legislation, augmenting existing plans to fund the MRAP program as needed. "Given that amount of money, I won't have financial restrictions on how fast we can produce the vehicles," Brogan said. "I will need industry to deliver on the promises." The Marines will buy vehicles from any company that can meet their blastproof standards, Brogan said. Already, many companies are on contract to provide test vehicles, and some have received extra orders based on existing information. Big contracts will come soon, once the evaluations wrap up. Long-term maintenance isn't a big worry, Brogan said. In the short run, the Marines plan to hire contractors for maintenance and spare parts. If the vehicles stay in the arsenal, the Marines will work with the contractors to keep spare parts and trained mechanics on hand. Brogan said the vehicles share many common components, such as engines and suspensions.
"Fundamentally, these are trucks," Brogan said.
The MRAP vehicles could have a life span of up to 10 years if they survive their deployment, Brogan said. That means they'll phase out as the Pentagon's next-generation all-purpose vehicle phases in, Brogan said. That next project is called the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle; a contractor has not yet been selected. Companies with MRAP contracts so far include General Dynamics Corp. (GD), Force Protection Inc. (FRPT), Armor Holdings Inc. (AH), Textron Inc. (TXT), BAE Systems PLC (BAESY), Oshkosh Truck Corp. (OSK), Protected Vehicles Inc., Navistar International Corp.'s (NAVZ) International Military and Government LLC, and General Purpose Vehicles LLC. The MRAP program will face more oversight as it expands. Defense Department Under Secretary Kenneth Krieg, the Pentagon's chief weapons buyer, is preparing to convert MRAP into the top tier of acquisition programs, invoking additional senior supervision.
Capacity has been one of the biggest limitations on the MRAP program. U.S. industry had little capacity for churning out heavily armored vehicles because it was considered a "boutique" item, Brogan said. One company making the sought-after vehicles has turned to outsourcing and new joint ventures to boost capacity. South Carolina-based Force Protection has new agreements with General Dynamics Corp. and Armor Holdings Inc. to help the company increase its production.
Force Protection is the sole provider in the MRAP category three, with its heavily armored Buffalo mine clearer. It also has contracts for the smaller Cougar models in categories one and two, along with the other MRAP contenders.
Added a short position at 19 and 19.39 last week, so I am in looking for it to break 20 to begin with. Watching it break and hold 18.50 reversed my position.
anyone listen to the conference today?
it was very good compared to their last one, a lot of positives i saw out of it and gobbled up 1000 shares today, i suggest giving it a listen, even mentioned buyout possibility and growth of cheetah should start in fall and be tremendous and gave 600-700 millions consensus saying that would not be arms reach, i think the street consensus is 550 mill
I listened. He did confidently confirm all the previous news. He was rightfully cautious. He did confirm he was confident because of his relationship and previous contracts with DOD. I am confident management has done all they can do for the DOD. Somewhere he has gotten assurances off the record from DOD. So he is cautious until the words are official and on the record.
The uncertainty now becomes congress passing the budget. And the DOD doing linear production planning to match funding. Ultimately how they are doing the contract split based on what FRPT and the others are doing about their production plans.
The good news that fell into line for me was the Cheetah for Category I of the MRAP. FRPT was criticised for the Category I Cougar being more expensive than PVIs Category I MRAP. I can only hope that the Cheetah will answer the price point problem against the competition.
One last point to clear up. The 7700 MRAP vehicles are for the remaining 2007 fiscal year and the 2008 fiscal year. Not the remaining 2007 calender year. So yes if the budgets go through they will have plenty of work until Fiscal 2009 in October of 2008. Welcome to government budgeting.
i love these small increments up everyday, i like this steady movement up much rather then crazy movement with crazy volume, i think we are setting up very nicely this stocks after a bouncy transition to the nasdaq is finally looking very nice, holding a good portion and not selling for less then 30 which i think we will get there by the end of this year
Force Protection (FRPT - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr - Rating) has been upgraded to a hold from a sell. The company makes blast-protected vehicles that have been used to support U.S. military forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other locations around the globe. Force Protection's revenues jumped 287.3% in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006 compared with the same quarter a year earlier.
This growth appears to have trickled down to the bottom line. The company earned 32 cents per share in this latest quarter after losing 23 cents per share in the third quarter of fiscal 2005. FRPT had been rated a sell since January 2007.
Another Reversal.
Market Edge - Second Opinion
Opinion NEUTRAL FROM AVOID
Report Date: 04/16/07
Recommendation
Stock shows Strongly Improving Conditions. SCORE = 4
If you are Short this stock, consider covering or monitor stock closely.
Stock is an Early Entry Buy Candidate if stock closes above 18.14
Comments
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bullish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Possible Trend Reversal.
Relative Strength is Bullish.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Accumulation.
The 50 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
Look for Support at 17.89
Stochastics indicate stock is Overbought.
Was the advice: Market Edge - Second Opinion: Not a short candidate. If you are long, keep. But do not add any new positions.
As of 3/5/2007: Market Edge - Second Opinion: Avoid the stock. Stock is Not a Short Sale Candidate. If you are long, close position or monitor stock closely.
Comment:
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bearish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Weak Downward Trend.
Relative Strength is Neutral.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Distribution.
The 50 day Moving Average is falling which is Bearish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
;) >:D
British Buying Additional Armored Vehicles from Force Protection
(2007-03-14)
By: Copyright Business Wire 2007 , Business Wire
Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT) today announced that it recently received a contract modification from the British Ministry of Defence for 22 additional Cougar Mastiff Protected Patrol Vehicles (Mastiff PPV). The order will bring the total number of vehicles produced for the British government to 108 at an approximate value of $70.1 million.
Under the contract awarded in August 2006, Force Protection expects to deliver the vehicles by the end of June 2007.
"Force Protection has worked hard to get its lifesaving armored vehicles to U.S. armed forces and their allies throughout the world," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "We are gratified by this contract modification which is indicative of the vital role these vehicles play in increasing troop safety, and are pleased to provide these vehicles to the British military."
The Mastiff PPV is based on Force Protection's Cougar Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) vehicle, which has been deployed with combat engineers and first response teams in Iraq and Afghanistan for more than three years. The first deliveries of the Mastiff PPV were shipped ahead of schedule in November 2006.
http://www.epicos.com/epicos/portal/media-type/html/user/anon/page/default.psml/js_panename/News+Information+Article+View;jsessionid=0209115D3DB2BDCB4C9B9E8A1F080CD7.tomcat6?articleid=74237&showfull=false
One more analyst coverage.
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/04/17/analyst-initiations-4-17-07-cc-dhi-and-grmn-initiated-today/
Thomas Weisel started Force Protection Inc (NASDAQ: FRPT) with an Overweight rating, as the firm believes the mine-resistant vehicle market is real and has staying power.
Found the reports for the new anaylyst coverage.
See Attachments
Force Protection Gets $481.3M Navy Deal
Monday April 23, 6:53 pm ET
Force Protection Gets $481.3 Million Deal to Deliver MRAP Vehicles to Iraq
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Navy on Monday awarded a $481.4 million delivery order to Force Protection Industries Inc. to provide an additional 1,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles.
MRAP vehicles protect U.S. soldiers from mines, rocket-propelled grenades and improvised explosive devises and are currently used in operations in Iraq. A joint military program led by the U.S. Marine Corps is seeking to double the size of its new armored vehicle program to meet short-term combat needs. The Marines and Army want to buy 7,774 MRAP vehicles expected to cost $8.4 million.
Under the contract, the government will buy 300 category I vehicles and 700 category II vehicles. Work will be performed in Ladson, S.C. through May 2008.
Shares of Force Protection rose $2.50, or 11.3 percent, to $24.65 in aftermarket trading, after rising 97 cents, or 4.6 percent, to close at $22.15 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
More budgeted funds shifted to MRAP. Looks like FRPT's production ramp schedule is full steam ahead. Next stop 200 vehicles per month.
Was the budget:
"With five vendors, 38% (399 of 1049) of the 2007 budget contracted for the next three months. That leaves 52% or 650 vehicles remaining to be contracted for the four final months of this fiscal year. Leaving the 2008 fiscal budget, which must still come by October. It's a long shadow but it may work yet."
TerryG
AH 25$ >:D >:D
haha yessssss we got themmmmmmm gap up tomorrow, man wait till we get orders for the cheetah, this is amazing buyout no buyout this is 40 dollars stock and thats a conservative pps!
Force Protection "buy," target price raised
Tuesday, April 24, 2007 2:18:04 PM ET
Dougherty & Company
NEW YORK, April 24 (newratings.com) - Analysts at Dougherty & Company reiterate their "buy" rating on Force Protection Inc (ticker: FRPT). The target price has been raised from $23 to $29.
&
FRPT: Short Interest DN 3.4% to 9.1M in Apr 2007
Tuesday , April 24, 2007 16:17ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) DECREASED 3.4% to 9,055,524 shares for the month ended mid-April, 2007.
SYMBOL MARCH APRIL CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 9,378,900 9,055,524 -323,376 -3.45% 10
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 945,485, it would require approximately 10 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
Two double edge swords of good news or bad news.
First the Q1 report in May and now June. In June they expect to complete testing of the other vendor's vehicles and issue additional MRAP contracts. Also known as the contract split that will translate to FRPTs final price.
More US Marine Corp vehicle contracts seen in June
Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:06 PM ET
By Andrea Shalal-Esa
WASHINGTON, April 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy said on Tuesday it expects to award contracts for thousands of additional armored Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in June after completing tests on seven more models.
Lawmakers have been clamoring for more MRAP vehicles to be delivered to Iraq to protect U.S. soldiers from mines and improvised explosive devices.
The Marine Corps, whose acquisitions are overseen by the Navy, awarded a $481 million contract on Monday for 1,000 MRAP vehicles to Force Protection Inc.<FRPT.O>, which has formed a joint venture with General Dynamics Corp. <GD.N>, to produce the vehicles even faster.
Buoyed by the news, Force Protection shares rose over eight percent to close at $23.97 on the Nasdaq on Tuesday.
On Tuesday, Navy acquisition chief Delores Etter told a congressional hearing that Force Protection finished its tests first, which allowed it to grab the first big contract since the program had been structured as "first come, first served."
But she said U.S. Army personnel were working three shifts six days a week testing the remaining seven vehicles and those tests should be completed by the end of May, paving the way for additional contracts "shortly thereafter."
Lt. Gen. Emerson Gardner, deputy commandant of the Marine Corps, said the program to design, develop and produce vehicles that could survive mines and improvised explosive devices (IED) in Iraq and Afghanistan, was a "success story."
He said Congress had included $3 billion for the vehicles in the latest emergency spending bill, but an additional $4.8 billion would be needed in fiscal 2008 to pay for all 7,700 vehicles the U.S. military wants to buy.
Gardner told the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee that the first 10 of 630 vehicles ordered in November 2006 had already been delivered and by fall, deliveries would increase to hundreds per month.
The vehicles offer a V-shaped hull and raised chassis, helping deflect the impact of any roadside bombs.
Gardner said the program was first born of a joint urgent needs statement from the military command that oversees operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but demand was increasing rapidly in the wake of worsening IED attacks.
Etter told the committee: "We are using every acquisition streamlining action possible, employing unique and flexible contracting methods and tailoring testing and evaluation to focus on the most critical operational requirements."
Other vehicle makers, including BAE Systems Plc <BA.L> Oshkosh Truck Corp.<OSK.N>, General Dynamics-Canada and Textron Inc. <TXT.N> have been asked to deliver MRAP test vehicles.
Etter said eight companies had delivered vehicles for testing, while one company opted out. She did not identify the companies.
________________________________________
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.
Big New Order Tests Force Protection Plan To Outsource Mfg
Apr 25, 2007 18:57:03 (ET)
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Force Protection Inc.'s (FRPT) plan to outsource its way to manufacturing success faces a big test over the next year, thanks to a $481 million, 1,000-vehicle order this week from the U.S. military.
Force Protection won the first major production contract in the Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicle program, a new $8.4 billion program that aims to buy more than 7,700 new MRAP vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Army and other ground forces.
It will be a huge challenge for the South Carolina-based company. Force Protection built just 300 vehicles in all of 2006 and historically has struggled to add capacity. To succeed, the company will have to integrate a broad new team of suppliers and partners into its production lines for Cougar and Buffalo vehicles.
Analysts said the company has a tough road ahead. Delays and cost overruns are common in programs this ambitious, said Lexington Institute defense analyst Loren Thompson.
"The record of fast reaction production for forces in Iraq is spotty at best, in terms of industrial capability," Thompson said. "There are going to be some manufacturing issues that people haven't anticipated."
Force Protection's team includes major defense contractors such as General Dynamics Corp. (GD) and Armor Holdings Inc. (AH). As these partners begin operations, Force Protection plans to expand from its current production rate of 70 to 80 vehicles per month to 200 vehicles per month, over a six-month span.
"It's kind of like a relay race, where we start running a while in anticipation that the baton is going to come to us," said Mike Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president for marketing and government relations, in a Wednesday telephone interview. He said Force Protection's partners will bring key support not only for manufacturing, but also for setting up the extensive logistics chain that these vehicles will require once they are deployed.
Force Protection's new vehicles will be built in Michigan, North Carolina, Texas and Ohio, as well as in South Carolina. The new contract calls for all vehicles to be delivered by May 2008.
If Force Protection wins more big orders, it could expand its supplier team further. "Frankly, we could add others, like BAE Systems, to increase the production flow if we were asked to. We'll give the design to anybody to try to get the vehicles out the door," Aldrich said.
BAE Systems has worked with Force Protection in the past, on light armored vehicles for the Iraqi government. But the two companies have not yet announced any new alliances.
Force Protection is one of nine companies that the Marines selected in February for MRAP testing. General Dynamics and Armor Holdings also made the list, along with Textron Inc. (TXT), BAE Systems PLC (BA.LN), Oshkosh Truck Corp. (OSK), Protected Vehicles Inc., Navistar International Corp.'s (NAVZ) International Military and Government LLC, and General Purpose Vehicles LLC.
Each company is on contract for four test vehicles - two "category one" and two "category two" vehicles. Seven companies have delivered test vehicles so far, the Marines said.
Force Protection is the only company to complete testing so far, the Marines said. But because the military has such an urgent demand for the new vehicles, the Marines already placed interim orders for 639 vehicles with five of the selected companies.
The Marines said they do not have a uniform plan for how the MRAP program will take shape as testing proceeds. "Each company is different," said Marine Corps Systems Command spokesman Bill Johnson-Miles.
Despite the big challenge of filling the MRAP order, Force Protection hasn't shied away from other new business prospects. The company is mulling a new manufacturing location in the Southeastern U.S. for its proposed Cheetah commercial armored vehicle.
The company also has proposed an upgrade to the 600 or so Buffalo and Cougar vehicles it has delivered to the U.S. military so far. This upgrade, which would cost $100,000 to $200,000 per vehicle, would provide better protection against a particularly deadly type of roadside bomb, Aldrich said. If the military accepts the proposal, the upgrade also could be adapted for the General Dynamics-made Bradley Fighting Vehicles and other U.S. military equipment, he said.
Something to watch for in June.
That is unlikely given the amount of partisan bickering that has transpired during the past several weeks. If the president follows through on his pledge to veto the bill because of provisions that call for the withdraw of troops from Iraq, another could be passed by June 1, Reid said.
This does work in FRPT's favor in the short term. But it does place a real squeeze at the DoD for currently budgeted funds. When FRPT won that 1000 vehicle contract that took all the previously allocated funds for 650 vehicles plus a like amount of unalloocated funds for 350 vehicles. Which I believe depletes the unallocated funds they found in the budget so far. Re-adjusting line items of budgeted funds for Iraq because the Emergency Supplemental budget is delayed, may leave MRAP a loser until the Emergency Supplemental 2007 budget passes. With the budget delayed they will have to change the currently budgeted funds to pay for Iraq before considering more MRAP funds.
Meaning the squeeze on the other vendors in June. There may not be funds for additional contracts in June like DoD wants. FRPT has a 152M cash pool to complete its production ramp. The other vendors will have to complete their production ramp plans without DoD contracts up front. And all contracts FRPT has had they are paid upon delivery of vehicles with no money up front from DoD. Meaning other qualified vendors may opt out rather than pursue MRAP with their own funds like FRPT has.
FRPT will be in a position to fill additional contracts at increased production capacity, with other vendors stuck with the LRIP contracts they already have.
Congressional support and funding has been the change of fortune for FRPT ever since their stock was 21 cents.
defense daily
27 april 07
Senate Passes Supplemental, Adding Funds For Five C-130J Aircraft
By Jen DiMascio
The Senate yesterday voted 51-46 to pass a supplemental spending bill that would provide $95.5 billion for the Defense Department's operations in Iraq and Afghanistan-- including additional funding to purchase five C-130J aircraft.
"We ask the president to read and to sign this bill," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters yesterday.
That is unlikely given the amount of partisan bickering that has transpired during the past several weeks. If the president follows through on his pledge to veto the bill because of provisions that call for the withdraw of troops from Iraq, another could be passed by June 1, Reid said.
House Appropriations defense subcommittee Chairman John Murtha told reporters yesterday that he is considering two possible paths forward--one that would cover expenses through the end of the fiscal year and one that would last two months and require a revisit.
Murtha added that two defense spending bills for FY '08 may be considered separately.
The Defense Department in February submitted requests for $481.4 billion for FY '08 and an additional request for $141.7 billion in supplemental war funding for the fiscal year (Defense Daily, Feb. 6).
According to a congressional aide, the timeline for FY '08 spending bills could work something like this: The House would mark up the FY '08 defense appropriations bill in June but not mark up its accompanying supplemental until September or October, when lawmakers could make a better assessment of what the Pentagon needs. It is typical that the base budget bill would be returning to the House for a vote on its conference report at that time, so both bills could be joined together, the aide said.
The eventual FY '07 supplemental spending bill was wide-ranging, including money for hurricane relief, education and homeland security.
In terms of money for Defense Department procurement, the conference report arrived at $25.6 billion, close to a midpoint between the House and Senate versions.
According to the conference report, conferees added five C-130J aircraft to replace combat losses, even though the Pentagon did not request funding. The bill also provides funding for one CV-22 Osprey. House and Senate versions of the bill both pledged to increase funding for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle by $1.2 billion, lifting the total to about $3 billion, according to the appropriations committees.
The Senate's request for nine UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters stood, as did its request for four CH-47 Chinooks. The bill being sent to President Bush supports the House bill's allotment of $178.5 million to buy three F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets. Regarding the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles, the conference report pledges to provide $1.5 billion, splitting the difference between previous bills.
According to the conference report, the conferees cut funding requested by the president by $75 million for Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems, citing concerns about industrial capacity.
Conferees are also mandating that the Army submit a report on the service's strategy for leveraging industrial capacity and an evaluation of off-the-shelf needs before it can receive $175 million of the $459 million provided by the bill. The conference report said it fully resources a fund for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization.
The conferees did not restore the president's request for F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, which the Pentagon pulled from its request and did not appear in either the House or Senate versions of the bill.
Here is the background story on why June and July are going to be critical budget problems because of the delayed supplemental budget. It is a rerun of last year.
Army could cover costs until June, CRS says
Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
04/25/2007, page 23
Michael Fabey
The U.S. Army could fund its operational needs until June or even July by shifting funds from other sources, according to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service.
"CRS estimates that the Army could cover its operational costs until about June or July 2007 by using war funds in the FY2007 'bridge' fund provided in Title IX of the FY2007 appropriations bill, by temporarily transferring procurement funds to operations, and by tapping monies in its baseline budget that would not be needed until the end of the fiscal year," the government research group said in its March 28 report, "FY2007 Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Other Purposes."
The Army still would have some challenges, CRS reports. "This does not mean, however, that the Army would not face disruptions if funding is delayed," the report said.
"In order to ensure that funding is available for the later months of the year, the Army may very well decide that it must slow down its operations before money would run out by, for example, limiting facility maintenance and repairs, slowing equipment overhauls, limiting travel and meetings, and, perhaps, slowing down training."
The Army has been warning of a fund crunch, CRS pointed out.
Burn rate
"The Army estimates that it is now spending operation and maintenance (O&M) funds at a rate of about $6.3 billion per month both for combat and for everyday operation of the force. To date, Congress has appropriated a total of $52.6 billion for Army O&M in FY2007, of which $24.2 billion was provided in the FY2007 base budget and $28.4 billion was provided in the FY2007 'bridge' fund for war costs. At an overall combat and noncombat 'burn rate' of $6.3 billion per month, the Army has enough money, therefore, to operate at the current pace for just over eight months - that is, though the end of May and into June."
Last year, when the supplemental was not passed until June and when there was less money in the bridge fund, Army officials say that restrictions on operations were quite damaging, the CRS reported. "This year, they say, they are especially pressed because they do not want to delay programs to absorb additional personnel into the force."
The effect of a delay in passing the supplemental has now become a major issue.
For example, CRS cited a report that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told members of Congress in a March 22 meeting that the Army would have to slow training beginning in mid-April, and that delays beyond the middle of May might lead the Army to extend the deployment term of units already in Iraq rather than send new units without full training.
- Michael Fabey ([email protected])
It is a replay of last year when the stock price slid. But this time FRPT has a bigger contract backlog. And they were right about June and July.
Although the Pentagon is shifting money around to cover war costs until the spending bill is signed, the Army said dollars already approved and in the pipeline for the vehicles will not be affected.
Additional orders cannot be placed until the disagreement over the war spending legislation is settled.
Deadlocked Bill May Halt Troop Carriers
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer
Saturday, April 28, 2007
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2007/04/28/international/i093538D30.DTL
(04-28) 10:17 PDT CAMP FALLUJAH, Iraq (AP) --
The armored carrier has a grim black slash across its side, burn marks on the door and a web of cracks along the window.
Like most of the Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in Anbar province, this one has been hit as many as three times by enemy fire and bomb blasts. Yet, to date, no American troops have died while riding in one.
But efforts to buy thousands more carriers — each costing about $1 million — could be delayed if the White House and Congress do not resolve their deadlock over a $124.2 billion war spending bill.
About $3 billion for the vehicles is tied up in the legislation. The spending plan has stalled because of a dispute over provisions that would set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
At a hearing last month, lawmakers urged the Army to get more of the carriers to the battlefront as quickly as possible. The vehicles, with their unique V-shaped hull that deflects blasts outward and away from passengers, are considered lifesavers against the No. 1 killer in Iraq — roadside bombs.
Military leaders say the carriers have reduced roadside bomb casualties in Iraq by as much as two-thirds. But they are not effective against the enemy's latest weapon — explosively formed penetrators, which hurl a fist-sized lump of molten copper capable of piercing armored vehicles.
Right now, there are at least 1,100 of the armored carriers on the battlefront in Iraq, including the 100 or so that rumble through Anbar province carrying troops and clearing roads of explosives.
The Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and Special Operations forces want thousands more. The goal is more than 7,700, at a cost of about $8.4 billion.
The Army wants 2,500, at a cost of about $2.7 billion. The Marines are planning to buy 3,700 and would send about 3,000 to Iraq. There will be 525 in the country by the end of the year, said Brig. Gen. Mark Gurganus, ground combat commander for U.S. forces in western Iraq.
As the Pentagon scrapes to find the money to run the war in the midst of the budget impasse, the Pentagon says there is not enough cash to buy as many as commanders say they need.
"We can build what we can get the funds to build. It's strictly an issue of money," Gen. Peter Schoomaker, former Army chief of staff, told a Senate committee last month.
At the time, he said the Army had an unfunded requirement of about $2 billion. Lawmakers added some additional money to the bill, so that number would now be about $1.5 billion.
He said the Army believes "that not only do we need the MRAP immediately to give us better protection, but that we need to stay on a path to get an even better vehicle than the MRAP for the long haul, because the enemy is going to continue to adapt."
Senators pressed for more. "We're buying far too few of them," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. "If we have that capability, why would we not do everything to mobilize, to move as many of them into the field as is possible?
In January, the military approved contracts to buy 4,100 of the armored carriers, using nine different companies to fill the order. Although the Pentagon is shifting money around to cover war costs until the spending bill is signed, the Army said dollars already approved and in the pipeline for the vehicles will not be affected.
Additional orders cannot be placed until the disagreement over the war spending legislation is settled. That bill would give the Army ($1.2 billion), the Marines ($1.25 billion), the Navy ($154 million), the Air Force ($139 million) and special operations forces ($259 million) money to buy their own versions of the carriers, according to Bill Johnson-Miles, spokesman for the Marine Corps Systems Command.
The Defense Department has requested about $4.4 billion in the 2008 budget to buy more of the vehicles.
Out on the dusty roads in Anbar province, Marines say the carriers have proved their worth.
This month, Marine Staff Sgt. Tim Kessler said, Marines were riding in one and took a hit from a small roadside bomb. The blast blew a tire, and it took them more than 90 minutes to limp back to base, but no one was hurt. Days earlier, a carrier with six Marines was hit by two blasts; two Marines had broken bones, but they all survived.
"It's an extremely survivable vehicle. I guarantee it saves lives," said Kessler. Pointing to the scars on the side of the MRAP, he added that had they been riding in a Humvee or something else, "they would all be dead."
___
On the Net:
Background on the armored carriers:
http://tinyurl.com/yohu6u
fyi: 8)
General Dynamics Receives $245 Million for Mine-Protected Vehicle Work
Monday April 30, 4:45 pm ET
Joint venture with Force Protection, Inc., shares $490 million program award
STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich., April 30 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD - News), has received a work order for $244.5 million of a $490 million contract awarded to Force Protection, Inc. (Nasdaq: FRPT - News) on April 24 to produce 1,000 vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program.
Force Protection and General Dynamics have formed a joint venture, Force Dynamics, to share in the production and program management of the MRAP contact.
This latest MRAP delivery order purchases Force Protection's category I 4X4 and category II 6X6 Cougar vehicles. Manufacturing will be performed in Anniston, Alabama; Charlotte, Michigan; Ladson, South Carolina; Lima, Ohio; Kings Point, North Carolina; and Sealy, Texas.
&
"...with the existing backlog..."
Backlog
From 10Q page 4 - The following chart illustrates our product deliveries in the last two calendar years and our backlog as of December 31, 2006 (check ATTACHMENT9
Additional backlog since Dec 31,2006 (refer to 10Q page 16):
Cougar JERRV: 15
Cougar MRAP: 125 (1/2 of which is FPIs as part of FD JV) + 1000 (1/2 of which is FPIs as part of FD JV): 562.5
Cougar Mastiff: 22
Buffalo: 19 http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070309/apfn_force_protection_marine_contract.html?.v=1
Cougar MRAP: 4 Test vehicles
Anticipated additional orders that are working their way thru the Govt:
Cougar ILAV: approx 600 (300 being FRPT's share) from original contract that is yet to be awarded. Refer to the following for further detail:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=46553&pt=msg&mid=1633022
Buffalo: 180 (refer to the following as provided by mrzippy: http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE07/W56HZV07R0343/SynopsisP.html
Total current backlog + anticipated:
Buffalo: 59 + 19+ 180 = 258
Cougar JERRV: 8 + 15 = 23
Cougar MRAP: 200 + 62.5 (half of 125 order as part of FD JV) + 4 = 766.5
Cougar ILAV: 102 + approx 300 (1/2 of anticipated 600 order) = 402
Cougar Mastiff: 55 + 22 = 77
Total Actual and Anticipated near term backlog: 1046 Actual + 480 Anticipated = 1526
Notes:
1. The Buffalo order (180) and ILAV order (1/2 of 600 or 300) while highly likely are not guaranteed since not yet official.
2. Some of the above were delivered in Jan, Feb, Mar and Apr
3. As FRPT works thru this backlog and demonstrates increased production capability its likely that more and more sizeable MRAP orders will occur. This will also somewhat depend on the passing of the Supplemental funding bill by Congress. Again, not guaranteed but highly probable.
Well that brings us to a bottom line metric of Profitability or its ability to generate profits.
We have revenues, contracts, and future contracts.
We have expansion costs which must pay for themselves.
Royalties and partnership costs.
Competition with LRIP contracts to pursue the future MRAP contracts. Namely BAE and OSH/PVI. FRPT got there early and got lucky and were able to capture the remaining production contracts in the 2007 budget. But until the competition shows their production plan to capture a percentage of future contracts. FRPT's future MRAP contracts are shadowed by what is the competition going to do?
One stategic note. Will the competition pursue MRAP with their own funds like FRPT? Or will FRPT maintain its lead position to capture future contracts of increasing numbers. How will the competition pay for production expansion/increases without additional contracts until June or July when the 2007 Emergency budget may pass? Or will it stall their plans to capture larger contracts?
Terry; it´s just you and me updating the thread and being invested in FRPT
>:D >:D
LOL
cheers
O.
;)
Its okay, thinking out loud is normal for me.
This is the third time it has roured past 20 towards 25.
I think it is a triple top until future contracts come in to cover the expansion.
I am going to hang in until the Q1 report this month.
We are stuck argueing the continuation.
:-\
;) nice end of the day...
A very nice homing pigeon.
Waiting to see the tale of the bears and the bulls develop and reveal itself.
what I really don´t linke:
Force Protection Chairman Sells Shares
Associated Press 04.27.07, 11:43 AM ET
The chairman of Force Protection Inc., which makes blast-protected vehicles, sold 750,000 shares of common stock under a prearranged trading plan, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday.
In a Form 4 filed with the SEC, Frank Kavanaugh reported he sold the shares Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday for $23.13 to $24.04 apiece.
The stock sale was conducted under a prearranged 10b5-1 trading plan which allows a company insider to set up a program in advance for such transactions and proceed with them even if he or she comes into possession of material nonpublic information.
Insiders file Form 4s with the SEC to report transactions in their companies' shares. Open market purchases and sales must be reported within two business days of the transaction.
Force Protection is based in Ladson, S.C.
I will closely monitor FRPT the next days,,,
a little bit too much insider selling imho
cheers
O.
Since I am new here. How did this happen and what is it trying to tell us?
Fib Analysis Fibonacci analysis evaluates the short term (30 days) intermediate term (60 days) and long term trends (120 days) and retracements. Stocks that retrace 38.2% or less of a trend will usually continue the trend. Retracements exceeding 61.8% indicate a reversal. Alerts will include ABC's up/down (multiple 38% retracements) and various reversal signals.
Time Frame Trend 38.2% 50% 61.8%
Long 12.49 to 24.11 21.7 (20.74%) . .
Intermediate 14.81 to 24.11 21.7 (25.91%) . .
Short 16.83 to 24.11 21.7 (33.10%) . .
And my answer about the Chairman? It was good enough for him, thinking about it.
wow, from IV board ;D
Army Eyeing Replacement of All Humvees in Iraq with New Armored Vehicle
May 2, 2007 -- The Army is considering a request from commanders in Iraq to replace every humvee there with a Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, a move that -- if approved -- could more than triple the size of the MRAP program, which today carries an $8.4 billion price tag. This proposal comes as the new-start MRAP effort -- which aims to rapidly build and field a large armored vehicle fleet -- elbowed its way on to the agenda of the most senior Pentagon officials this week, including the defense secretary and Defense Department's high-level Joint Requirements Oversight Council. Army brass this spring advanced a requirement for 2,500 MRAP vehicles, which have v-shaped hulls designed to protect occupants from roadside bombs, as part of a Marine Corps-led effort to build a fleet of 7,774 MRAPs and field them to U.S. forces in Iraq over the next 18 months. Commanders in Iraq, however, now believe Army personnel -- which suffer daily attacks from improvised explosive devices -- require a significantly larger MRAP fleet.
"We've got a requirement from the field that's a larger number than [2,500] and we're going to take a long, hard look at that," Pete Geren, the acting Army secretary, told the Senate Armed Services airland subcommittee on April 25. "The number that came from the field was 17,000 -- total replacement of the humvee fleet."
Officials on the Army staff declined requests to discuss details of the services' MRAP requirement, which could produce a large unfunded wedge in the service's modernization portfolio. Estimated per-unit MRAP costs -- including the vehicle, communication gear, electronic warfare capabilities, and two years of contractor support -- range from $1 million to $1.3 million, depending on which of three different-sized MRAP variants is procured, sources familiar with program details said. Still, Geren suggested at the hearing that Army leaders are open to raising the MRAP requirement, noting he "was not confident" with the 2,500-vehicle goal. "Perhaps it should be more," he said.
In effect, the Army is considering a policy change similar to the Marine Corps' decision earlier this year to provide MRAP-level protection for all Marines in al Anbar province.
"Under this policy, limited use of Up-Armored [humvees] will be authorized in specific tactical situations where the operational characteristics of [humvee] are required," Gen. James Conway, Marine Corps commandant, wrote in a March 1 memo on the status of the MRAP program to Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
This Marine Corps policy change, validated by the service's brass on Feb. 6, propelled its requirement for MRAP vehicles from 1,022 to 3,700.
The Army's assessment of its total MRAP need comes as the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, the Pentagon's high-level panel that must approve all new-start weapons programs, was scheduled on May 2 to consider -- and possibly endorse -- the requirement for 7,774 MRAP vehicles. Even this figure represents recent growth spurred Air Force and U.S. Special Operations Command requirements. Yesterday, in another sign of the high profile MRAP enjoys in the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates received a program overview briefing, according to Marine Corps spokesman Bill Johnson-Miles. Meanwhile, support for the MRAP program continues to grow on Capitol Hill. The House Armed Services air and land subcommittee today announced it has added $4.1 billion to buy MRAPs in fiscal year 2008, an extraordinary sum -- even in the context of U.S. defense spending -- for an effort that is not a program of record and was not a priority only a year ago.
The House panel's action follows last week's commitment by Congress to provide $3 billion for MRAP purchases over the next six months. President Bush, however, vetoed the spending bill that contained the MRAP funds yesterday because of provisions regarding U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. So far, the MRAP program in fiscal year 2007 has spent all but $150 million of the $1.4 billion available to the Marine Corps through congressional appropriations and internal reprogramming actions, according to a Marine Corps spokeswoman.
Nearly $900 million has been used to place orders for 1,639 vehicles on contract, a handful of which are complete. The current impasse over the fiscal year 2007 emergency supplemental spending package is forcing the Marine Corps to search internally for additional resources for MRAP.
"We are investigating additional reprogramming and realignment funding options to make more funding available to the program before appropriation and receipt of the FY-07 supplemental funding," said Dedra Jone, spokeswoman for the MRAP program. "Other than orders already placed and planned with funds on hand, we cannot place additional orders until more funding is available."
Sources said the service is preparing a new reprogramming request worth nearly $500 million to ensure that it has funds on hand to award production contracts over the next four weeks. This would be a second reprogramming action designed to shift funds to the MRAP program this spring. In March, Pentagon Comptroller Tina Jonas approved a $498 million reprogramming for MRAP. The push to make MRAP funds available comes as the Marine Corps and Army in late May are scheduled to complete testing of prototypes from eight tactical vehicle manufacturers. A key element of the rapid acquisition strategy is to begin awarding contracts as soon as testing is complete. -- Jason Sherman
Looks great, up in afterhours. Can you give me a source?
Found the source, but I am unfamiliar with it.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/newsstand_main.asp
INSIDE THE PENTAGON
May 3, 2007 - Vol. 23, No. 18
ARMY EYEING REPLACEMENT OF ALL HUMVEES IN IRAQ WITH MRAP VEHICLES
The Army is considering a request from commanders in Iraq to replace every humvee there with a Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, a move that -- if approved -- could more than triple the size of the MRAP program, which today carries an $8.4 billion price tag.
Story length: 1,260 words.
Did not bother buying it since we have this copy.
Force Protection, Demand Rising Fast, Execution nearly Perfect
The US Military and the US government have realized that the best way to save lives in Iraq and Afghanistan are to provide the soldiers with Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. This realization was slow in coming but now that it has arrived, the demand for MRAP vehicles is for thousands of such vehicles each year.
Force Protection's Cougars and Buffalos are the safest and least expensive MRAP vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Force Protection's vehicles were exhaustively tested against competing vehicles by both the British and US Government in the past and the Cougar and Buffalo outperformed all other vehicles.
Force Protection's vehicles are built to be rapidly repaired in case of damage by mines or IEDs. They are built where possible with common truck parts from US manufactures so that spare parts are inexpensive and easily available.
Force Protection has been improving the blast resistant design based on what they have learned from thousands of mine and IED blasts on their vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan for several years.
Force Protection has licenses to the best anti-Mine and anti-IED technology available from South Africa. They have been adapting and improving the technology for several years and have developed new designs and technology. Force Protection's chief scientist, Dr. Vernon Joynt is the worlds leading expert on blast protection.
Force Protection has a new smaller vehicle called the Cheetah that is small enough to be a replacement for the Humvee. They developed the vehicle over several years and the military has been testing it. Now Force Protection is building the manufacturing capacity to build hundreds of these vehicles per month.
Force Protection will soon need the manufacturing capacity because the Army has recently announced that they would like to replace all Humvees used in combat areas with MRAP type vehicles. Therefore, the Army needs at least 17,000 Cougars and the smaller Cheetah. The Cheetah is closer in size to a Humvee and is less expensive than a Cougar. It is currently the best possible replacement for the Humvee.
Force Protection has revolutionary new add on armor to protect against the new IED threat called the Explosively Formed Projectile (EFP). This armor can be added to any Force Protection vehicle or other armored vehicle such as the Stryker or RG-31.
Force Protection is developing new blast manipulation technology that can be added to any wheeled vehicle such as the Humvee that is nearing completion.
The new armor and blast protection technology will be additional high margin products that Force Protection can sell to retrofit all types of vehicles.
Force Protection is expanding very quickly and they have forged new manufacturing agreements and alliances with the largest defense contractors in the world. The reason that the large defense contractors are working with Force Protection is because Force Protection has the best vehicles, the best technology and will be getting the most contracts from the military.
In short, Force Protection has the most advanced anti-Mine and anti-IED technology, they have the best vehicles and they are making the best political, technological and business decisions imaginable.
It looks real, I do not know the final number though.
defense daily
03 may 07
HASC Panel Cuts $867 Million From Army Future Combat System ...
The near term needs of the services prompted additions to the budget and the FY '08 supplemental request. Those include a $4.1 billion increase in funding for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles and a $500 million increase in funding for National Guard equipment. The mark adds $294 million to buy Stryker combat vehicles, money which is offset by a $228 million reduction to the Stryker Mobile Gun System, which is delayed as it waits for additional testing to be completed.
The smoke clears. Funds have passed committee to be included in the 2008 budget. The committee recommended 4.1 of 4.4 billion requested.
After the close yesterday and it has been going up ever since.
Closing in on 7700 vehicles or slightly less.
applaud for all the updates Terry ;D
Does not sound like bad news. But I wonder if it is going to change anything?
From the Wall Street Journal
Britain's BAE Is Set to Acquire Armor Holdings
BY DENNIS K. BERMAN AND JONATHAN KARP
Word Count: 585 | Companies Featured in This Article: BAE Systems, Armor Holdings, Force Protection, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics
British defense contractor BAE Systems PLC was last night in final negotiations for the $3.5 billion purchase of Armor Holdings Inc., a U.S. maker of military and heavy vehicles, Humvee armaments and soldier body armor.
Final preparations were being made last night, and it was still possible the transaction could fall apart, people familiar with the transaction said yesterday. The deal would award Armor shareholders about $88 a share, or a roughly 7% premium to the company's trading price Friday of $82.15 a share on the New York Stock Exchange. Armor shares climbed markedly late last week from its Wednesday ...
Hoping news from the Q1 report would save us...............has been delayed.
Form NT 10-Q
FORCE PROTECTION INC - FRPT
Filed: May 09, 2007 (period: March 31, 2007)
Notification that form type 10-Q will be submitted late
FRPT: Shares Trading Higher on Expected Army Orders
Thursday , May 10, 2007 10:58ET
Force Protection Inc (FRPT) shares, up 9%, are spiking following a CE Unterberg report highlighting a story in the Army Times that noted the Army was expected to ask for $9B for 9 thousand MRAP in 2008 and more money to buy 8.7K in 2009.
&
FRPT: New 52-Wk High @ $25.980 up 11.74%
Thursday , May 10, 2007 10:55ET
This is the 1st 52 WEEK HIGH alert for FRPT in the past 7 calendar days.
The share price for Force Protection, Inc (NASDAQ SC: FRPT) reached a new 52-week high today, trading at $25.980, up $2.730 (11.74%) from its previous close of $23.250.
The Company's previous 52-week high of $24.730 was set 16 days ago on April 24, 2007.
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $3.500. The price has climbed more than 642 percent since then. At the time of this alert, the stock had traded 958,900 shares via 2,640 trades, 33.25% below it's 20day average of 1,436,595 shares.
This new 52-week high currently puts the stock:
17.12% above its 20day Moving Average of $22.183
34.98% above its 50day Moving Average of $19.247
38.57% above its 100day Moving Average of $18.749
ON FIRE >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
cheers
Oliver
Great news. Could not have anticipated better news.
Thanks for finding it. Was ???
;)
nice chart, nice valuation, nice report >:D >:D >:D
please download the report
cheers
O.
Good report. First impressions are that hedging against MRAP fell with JLTV and MMPV. Two major projects they had to bump to fit MRAP. But that is okay.
There is one big issue that is brewing. How to replace all the equipment we are wearing out in Iraq and Afghanistan. The entire budget was based on a peace time military.
So JLTV and MMPV will be back when that issue develops, but that will be after Iraq and Afghanistan.
We will have to wait for Congress, then DoD to get the final numbers. Best news is that there will be a business plan after 2008, into 2009. Which adds to its strategic position and value. Something FRPT was short of. It had no future.
Update to one of my FRPT blogs:
The High Cost of Humvees (May 13, 2007)
The HMMWV (High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle - M1114) is the main utility vehicle used by the US military and allies and is commonly called the Humvee. It was designed to provide tactical mobility to the soldiers. It was not designed as a "fighting vehicle" and unless it is up-armored has very little ballistic or blast protection.
To address the problem of a lack of ballistic and blast protection, most Humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan have been up-armored. Although the additional armor increases the survivability of soldiers riding in the vehicle there are still frequent casualties. Humvees were not designed as armored vehicles and it is not possible to add enough armor to make them truly mine or IED resistant. The Humvee has a flat bottom which means that mines tend to flip the vehicle over and channel energy into the Humvee.
A Humvee normally costs almost $65,000 dollars. An up-armored Humvee cost around $140,000 dollars. Humvees are not designed for the additional weight from the armor. Therefore, the design life of a Humvee that has been up-armored is low -- less than half that of a normal Humvee. In addition, the motor, transmission and drive train were not designed for the additional armor and the vehicle requires more repair. Because up-armored Humvees last less than half as long as normal Humvees and require more maintenance, it is fair to more than double the price tag of the Humvee to $300,000 given that every one that is purchased will need to be replaced very quickly.
Up-armored Humvees are top heavy and roll over more often than Humvees that are not up-armored. Some reports indicate that more than 50 soldiers are killed and over 100 soldiers are wounded each year in Iraq and Afghanistan due to Humvee rollovers. Many of the rollovers would not have occurred if the vehicle were not top heavy due to the additional armor.
When Humvees are destroyed by mines or IEDs, soldiers riding in them are often wounded or killed. The price of losing any life is incalculable. The cost to taxpayers in dollars for these tragedies is huge. Each person wounded or killed needs to be replaced, insurance needs to be paid and the wounded often require long term disability or rehabilitation. The cost is huge.
The fact that Humvees are easily destroyed means that the vehicles must travel in large groups to provide safety in numbers. This is a very inefficient use of manpower and drastically reduces the area that can be patrolled.
Each time a soldier dies, the morale of civilians and soldiers is harmed and the morale of our enemies is helped. If our enemies are bolstered, this helps them recruit other terrorists.
Using Humvees reduces the militaries efficiency and increases the morale of our enemies by allowing them to have easy victories. These last two costs are more than we can afford.
The US military has recently recognized the problems with the Humvee and with using other un-armored transports in areas where there may be IEDs or mines and have created a new program called the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) program to acquire three categories of MRAP vehicles – CAT I, CAT II and CAT III. The numbers of vehicles needed for the MRAP program keeps increasing. The initial request was for 4100 vehicles and has now risen to over 25,000 vehicles.
There were nine companies bidding on MRAP contracts: Armored Holdings, BAE, Force Dynamics (the joint venture of Force Protection and General Dynamics Inc.), Force Protection Inc, General Dynamics, General Purpose Vehicles, International Military and Government, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Protected Vehicles, Inc, and Textron. Textron has since been eliminated. The criteria for awarding contracts are:
1) The Contractor or Contractors vehicle systems that demonstrate the best overall performance in PVT testing (with survivability being the highest priority)
2) The Contractor or Contractors that demonstrate the greatest capability to produce and deliver vehicles with the shortest ramp up time and greatest maximum production capacity, in order to meet the urgent delivery requirements for these vehicles
Force Protection's vehicles have proven to be the most survivable in combat. General Dynamics is bidding the RG-31 which has proven to be survivable and BAE has two new vehicles that appear similar to Force Protection Vehicles. Oshkosh, General Purpose Vehicles, Armored Holding and Protected Vehicles have no proven vehicle. Although BAE's new vehicles appear to be designed based on Force Protection's vehicles, they have not been proven in combat.
Purchasing large numbers of effective and proven vehicles for use in Iraq and Afghanistan will reduce the casualties and render IED and mine warfare ineffective. If IEDs and mines are not effective against military targets, then insurgents who wish mainly to kill Americans will have less reason to plant IEDs and mines.
The next step that needs to be taken is to drastically increase tactical maneuverability. Currently, the military must either patrol on foot in large groups, in mine protected vehicles or with large numbers of Humvees such that there are enough Humvees to offer strength in numbers. If Humvees don't patrol in large numbers, then they risk getting ambushed and the patrol wiped out and soldiers captured.
The problem is that there are simply not enough mine protected vehicles such that small numbers of soldiers can patrol in safety and most mine protected vehicles are large. The solution is to purchase a smaller, affordable mine protected vehicle that offers a large amount of ballistic, mine and IED protection but is small enough that small groups of soldiers can patrol in it. This would increase the amount of area that can be patrolled and increase the effectiveness of the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. There would be less reason to deploy more soldiers if the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan were more effective.
The Cheetah is another vehicle from Force Protection that can increase the militaries tactical maneuverability and effectiveness. The Cheetah has been under development for over 2 years and has been evaluated by the military. The Cheetah is small enough to be used as a utility vehicle. Its size is comparable to the Humvee but with many times the mine, IED and ballistic protection for the soldiers riding inside. The Cheetah is less expensive than the all current foreign competitor's vehicles and offers more protection than any of the competing vehicles. The Cheetah is fast – can travel up to 89 miles per hour (burst speed) if needed. Normally configured, it can seat up to six people but can be configured to seat eight if needed. It is possible to mount a remote fired machine gun on the roof and it may be equipped with firing ports. A patrol of two Cheetah vehicles would be difficult to ambush and destroy because of their high degree of ballistic and mine protection. The soldiers inside can fire at their attackers from protected positions inside the vehicle and from the remote fired machine gun. Attackers can't be sure that an IED or mine will disable the Cheetah which will complicate and make most ambushes unworkable.
Vehicles like the Cheetah will allow the military to mount smaller patrols increasing the efficiency of every soldier in Iraq. Patrols will be able to move faster and travel in more dangerous areas. More patrols will be able to be undertaken. The fact that they our soldiers are much more unlikely to be injured or killed by IEDs and mines will be a major boost to the moral of civilians and soldiers. The efforts of our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan will become much less effective.
Can the military afford to replace a significant number of Humvees with Cheetahs? The answer is that if all direct costs are compared (the cost of injuries, the cost of replacing vehicles, the cost of Humvee up-armor kits and the loss of efficiency), the direct cost of the Cheetah is less than the Humvee.
In war, the major consideration is not just the price but whether or not something will help achieve victory. The Cheetah is a vehicle that if purchased in large quantities for the troops will not only save lives but enable our soldiers to do their jobs in a much more efficient manner.
The main obstacle to deploying large numbers of MRAP vehicles is funding. The military needs funds from Congress. The new democrat leaders in Congress pledged to support the troops. For several weeks, Congress worked on the Defense supplemental bill to fund the troops and new MRAP vehicles. At the same time, Democrat leaders in congress said that they knew that the legislation that they were passing and would get vetoed and planned to pass something different after the veto that the President would sign. In short, the first bill was intended as a political gambit by Congressional leaders. The problem is that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan don't have time for gambits – they need the new safer vehicles as soon as possible. They need the funding and the support Congress promised to give them. If companies like Force Protection were to get much larger orders, they could ramp-up more quickly and provide the necessary vehicles quicker and in larger numbers.
[email protected]
Quarterly report on schedule. Released after close.
http://www.forceprotection.net/investors/sec.html
Still bullish.
See attachments.
One more bullish analyst.
Second Opinion® Weekly - FORCE PROTECTION (FRPT)
Close as of week ending
5/11/2007
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bullish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Strong Upward Trend.
Relative Strength is Bullish.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Accumulation.
The 50 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
Look for Support at 24.45
Stock broke Double Top (Bullish) Point & Figure Chart Formation Last Week
Force Protection "buy," target price raised
Wednesday, May 16, 2007 3:19:09 PM ET
Dougherty & Company
NEW YORK, May 16 (newratings.com) - Analysts at Dougherty & Company reiterate their "buy" rating on Force Protection Inc (ticker: FRPT). The target price has been raised from $29 to $32.
&
Military Seeks Bomb-Resistant Vehicle
CBN News
May 17, 2007
CBNNews.com - Insurgents using IEDs, or Improvised Explosive Devices, targeting poorly-armored Humvees have been all-too-common in Iraq.
In fact, these homemade bombs are responsible for 70 percent of the U.S. casualties in Iraq.
That's why the military wants to phase out the Humvee for a mine-resistant ambush protected vehicle -- an "M-RAP" for short -- or simply, a "Cougar."
These are specially designed to withstand explosions.
"I believe I have a moral imperative to provide these vehicles to our troops," said Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, Commander of the Marine Corps Systems Command. There are only a few hundred Cougars in Iraq now, but they're saving lives. Sgt. David Karr was in a Cougar when he drove over a landmine. "During the explosion, the front of the vehicle probably -- about five feet in the air and it sat back down. But when all was said and done, no one was injured. It was a good day. It was a pretty lucky day," he said. The reason the Cougar is safer is because it's heavier and higher.
And this V-shaped bottom helps displace the blast away from the truck -- and protects the troops inside. "You know, in Iraq, we're on the roads a lot," sad Sgt. Jake Wimer of the U.S. Marines Corps. "And that's when we expose ourselves mostly to IED attacks, is on the road. While you're inside one of these, it's not a problem at all."
So far, there have been hundreds of attacks on marine M-RAPs, and no fatalities. Only two army soldiers have died while in them.
"If we don't get as many of these vehicles as fast as possible, soldiers are going to die unnecessarily," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at Lexington Institute.
The military has farmed out contracts to at least nine different defense contractors.
They want to get 7,700 new Cougars and other M-RAPs into the field within 18 months. But after seeing how well these vehicles protect American servicemen, Defense Secretary Gates says the Pentagon could buy many more.
nice video:
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/159933.aspx
Here is more follow up from two sources.
inside defense.com
16 may 07
Army Eyes $10 Billion in Procurement Cuts to Fund Larger MRAP Fleet
By Jason Sherman
The Army is looking to slash as much as $10 billion from its procurement accounts to pay for a larger fleet of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, setting off a round of budget drills that could throw its modernization goals into chaos and trigger a wave of program terminations and delays, according to Defense Department officials.
In a bid to find between $8 billion and $10 billion for a down payment on as many as 15,000 additional MRAP vehicles requested by commanders in Iraq, the Army is considering options for financing a sizable portion of the new armored fleet program within its base budget, according to sources familiar with closely held spending deliberations.
"Everything else we had planned is now second priority," said a Pentagon official.
This hunt for new resources is sure to compound Army budget challenges and could test the viability of high-priority projects, such as an effort by Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, to accelerate the service's end strength increase -- an undertaking widely expected to produce a bill requiring billions of additional dollars.
"They are going to break the Army further to fund MRAP," said an industry official familiar with internal budget drills.
Until now, the quick-moving MRAP program was focused on procuring 7,774 vehicles -- 2,500 of which were for the Army -- largely through supplemental appropriations. Because MRAP is not a program of record and was regarded as a requirement unique to needs in Iraq, it was funded outside the service's base budget.
On May 2, however, Defense Secretary Robert Gates designated MRAP the Pentagon's highest priority acquisition program. Gates, in a memo to Pentagon leaders, also implicitly expressed concern that the Army was not buying enough of the vehicles.
"The earlier plan was 2,500 and that's not enough. I can't tell you the exact number at this point, but it's going to grow considerably," Pete Geren, the acting Army secretary, told reporters May 10.
That same day, Army leaders advanced a proposal for increasing its MRAP requirement from 2,500 to more than 8,000 vehicles. However, officials familiar with the situation say the service faced stiff political pressure to increase its requirement further.
Army leaders are now looking at options for funding the bulk of the more than 17,700 MRAP vehicles that commanders in Iraq, as first reported by InsideDefense.com, have requested inside the service's base budget, a move expected to siphon resources from other programs and delay funding for others.
"I don't know how the Army does that," the industry official said.
The MRAP budget drills are expected to affect the Army's fiscal year 2009 budget proposal, which is under construction, as well as the FY-08 supplemental spending request and the base budget proposal now before Congress. It may also affect the FY-07 budget, which is being executed.
The size of the bill ultimately depends on how many MRAP vehicles the Army decides to procure each year -- and those purchases may be limited by industry's ability to deliver the new fleet. An internal Pentagon industrial assessment pegs the maximum MRAP procurement rate at 977 a month by the end of this year.
In the hunt for funds to pay for MRAP, Army leaders are expected to fight to protect its top modernization priority, the Future Combat System, from cuts, Pentagon officials said.
Should the Army find funds to buy the entire 17,700 MRAPs now under consideration, the total MRAP program size would more than triple and drive the total price tag to more than $24 billion.
Army seeks $20B for MRAPs, but quick fielding has hurdles
By Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Army has asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to approve spending almost $20 billion for new armored vehicles, a week after Gates called deploying the vehicles the military's top hardware priority.
Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren asked Gates for as many as 17,770 mine resistant ambush protected vehicles (MRAPs), according to a memo dated May 15 and obtained by USA TODAY. The vehicles would be shipped to Iraq after production, reaching the goal in July 2009, according to Geren's memo.
Combined with orders by other services, the total cost of the new vehicles through July 2009 will be almost $25 billion, Pentagon records show. The Marines and Navy want 3,500 MRAPs, while the Air Force and special operations units are seeking another 1,000.
However, there may not be enough material and production capacity to field the MRAPs quickly, according to the memo and Pentagon officials.
No single company can provide more than 1,200 of the vehicles per month, which is the Marines' production goal, said Chris Isleib, a Pentagon spokesman.
Adequate supplies of steel for armor and rubber for tires are also concerns, Isleib said.
Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, criticized the Pentagon for moving too slowly on the MRAP program.
"By the time we field all the vehicles we could be on our way out of Iraq," Thompson said.
Thompson added, MRAPs may be needed elsewhere.
"Sadly, this vehicle will probably find plenty of uses in other places," Thompson said. "We've shown the world how to fight our army to a standstill."
The Army's rush to buy more MRAPs could affect how many other armored vehicles it buys now and in the future, according to the memo. The Army has sent officials to Iraq to determine how MRAPs will fit in with its existing fleet of armored vehicles, including tanks and armored personnel carriers.
The Army planned to spend $5.5 billion this year on its three main armored vehicles — the Abrams tank and Bradley and Stryker armored personnel carriers — Army budget documents show.
Gates and other Pentagon leaders like the MRAP, because its raised chassis and V-shaped hull of the vehicles help protect troops from roadside bombs, which are also called improvise explosive devices (IEDs). Roadside bombs cause 70% of U.S. casualties in Iraq.
Gates told all services on May 2 to determine how many MRAPs they need. The Army, until the May 15 memo, had sought 2,500 MRAPs. Senior Army officials said commanders in the field valued the maneuverability of the Humvee, the military's longtime workhorse vehicle, saying the MRAPs were often too large and unwieldy.
The number of MRAPs in Geren's memo matches the number of armored Humvees the Army operates in Iraq. The Marine Corps has already announced its intent to replace all its Humvees with MRAPs, saying the new armored vehicles are as much as four times safer.
Eight companies are competing for the contracts to build the vehicles, said Capt. Jeff Landis, a Marine Corps spokesman. The Marines are leading the Pentagon's development of the MRAPs, which are now being tested at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland.
Testing should be done by early June, said Brig. Gen. Charles Anderson, the Army's director of force development.
"It's round the clock," Anderson said of the testing. "It shows the sense of urgency."
BETTER PROTECTION
The Pentagon is looking at three types of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles:
Category 1
Category 2
Category 3
Passengers
6
10
12
Weight
14,000 pounds
38,000 pounds*
45,000 pounds
Wheels
4
up to 6
6
* - Weight for 6-wheel version.
Sources: U.S. Army. Photos from Force Protection Industries, Inc.
Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-17-army-mrap_N.htm
new 52 weeks high >:D >:D >:D >:D
long and strong 8)
nice Street.com video:
http://videoplayer.thestreet.com/?clipId=1373_10358557&channel=Market+Strategy&cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=&cm_ite=&puc=yahoo&ts=1179941367109&bt=NS&bp=WIN&bst=FF&biec=false&format=flash&bitrate=300
Conference Link:
Force Protection Inc.
May 24, 2007 - 12:00 PM Eastern
The Robins Group Emerging Opportunities Conference
http://www.vcall.com/IC/CEPage.asp?ID=117099&CID=
vcall shorted us. Just slides? I want the audio where they grill someone.
This looks like a tough customer. I did not see this competition from Navistar.
Check the attached jpg.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=25119
Navistar expects to see portion of military truck deal
(Crain's) — As the U.S. military's order for landmine-resistant trucks grows larger, executives at Navistar International Corp. are becoming more confident that they'll get to build at least some of the trucks.
The Warrenville-based truck and engine maker expects to hear within days whether the Department of Defense will give the company a piece of the 17,700 trucks requested by the Army and Marine Corps.
With a compromise at hand between President George W. Bush and Congress over funding the war in Iraq, Navistar predicts a portion of the estimated $18-billion price tag for the new trucks will be appropriated by Congress.
"That will turn on the spigot," said Archie Massicotte, president of International Military & Government LLC, Navistar's defense-industry subsidiary.
Other defense contractors competing for a truck-making contract include General Dynamics Corp., Britain's BAE Systems PLC, Wisconsin-based Oshkosh Truck Corp. and Force Protection Inc., a small South Carolina company that has already built a handful of trucks.
In combat in Iraq, Force Protection's trucks provided better protection from roadside bombs than the Humvee, the military's long-serving light-duty utility vehicle.
The Humvee has been particularly vulnerable to insurgent attacks. Land mines and other remote-activated explosives have accounted for the bulk of U.S. casualties in Iraq.
Nine companies were invited to submit versions of the truck, which features an armored crew compartment and a V-shaped bottom to deflect mine shrapnel away from the vehicle.
To expedite production, Mr. Massicotte expects the Department of Defense to authorize production of different versions of the truck with some common features.
The military recently wrapped up testing of Navistar's prototype truck, which is built on a dump-truck chassis. Mr. Massicotte says Navistar's model matches up well against Force Protection's truck.
"We survived the munitions and blast tests," Mr. Massicotte said. "We did extremely well on the automotive test side, too."
The number of trucks requested by the Army and Marines has grown steadily since early this year, when the military anticipated buying just a few thousand. But orders have increased steadily as word spreads through the ranks about the truck's blast survivability. The number of trucks requested by military recently jumped to 17,700 from 7,700.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week described production of the mine-resistant truck as one of the most important programs in the Department
fyi:
FRPT: Short Interest DN 4.0% to 8.7M in May 2007
Friday , May 25, 2007 01:04ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) DECREASED 4.0% to 8,695,554 shares for the month ended mid-May, 2007.
SYMBOL APRIL MAY CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 9,055,524 8,695,554 -359,970 -3.98% 6
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 1,700,260, it would require approximately 6 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
&
Force Protection gets $11.9M Navy deal
Thursday , May 24, 2007 19:28ET
By Staff Reporter
WASHINGTON, May 25, 2007 (AP via COMTEX) -- The U.S. Navy on Thursday awarded an $11.9 million deal to Force Protection Inc. to build and deliver 14 next-generation armored vehicles.
The Ladson, S.C.-based company last month won a $490 million contract for 1,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicles. The vehicle maker is partnering up with General Dynamics Corp. under a joint venture, dubbed 'Force Dynamics' to deliver the armored vehicles to the Army and Marines as quickly as possible.
The company will complete work on this contract by April 2008.
MRAP vehicles protect U.S. soldiers from mines, rocket-propelled grenades and improvised explosive devises and are currently used in operations in Iraq.
Shares of Force Protection rose 34 cents to $27.63 in extended trading, after shares dropped 36 cents to $27.29 in the regular trading session Thursday.
FRPT needs to ramp up production. ;)
http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=b92_1180175087
Expect the president to sign it and for the contracts to come over from DoD soon after in June. Let the chips fall where they may.
http://www.untdemocrats.org/2007_05_01_untdemocrats_archive.html
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Senate OKs war spending bill, sent to Bush for signature
Less than two hours after the House did so, the Senate voted to send the legislation to the president 80-14. Democratic Presidential hopefuls Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Christopher Dodd voted against it. Joe Biden voted in favor.
sweet and dandy ;D
1)
Force Protection Industries, Inc.,* Ladson, S.C., is being awarded $11,991,406 for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0006 under previously awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5006) for 14 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Category III Buffalo vehicles. The Buffalo is a mine-resistant, route clearance type vehicle that is needed in convoy operations. Work will be performed in Ladson, SC and work is expected to be completed by April 2008. Contract funds in the amount of $11,991,406 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.
2)
Why so few bomb-safe US military trucks in Iraq?
No one has ever been killed riding in the 31,000-pound 'Cougar.' But only a few hundred are in service.
By Gordon Lubold | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Washington
One senior officer calls it a "moral imperative," and others see it as a no-brainer, but four years into a deadly war, there are only some 350 blast-resistant trucks protecting US troops in Iraq. Officials inside and outside the military want to know why. When it comes to safeguarding troops against roadside bombs, the top killer in Iraq, the new must-have truck is an MRAP – a Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected vehicle. It's a hulking machine, at 31,000 pounds, with a 'V'-shaped hull that diverts blasts away from the carriage – and the troops riding inside. No one has ever been killed riding in one version of the vehicle, called a Cougar.
So why aren't thousands of the trucks, first available in 2003, in Iraq?
"How is it possible that with our nation at war, with more than 130,000 Americans in danger, with roadside bombs destroying a growing number of lives and limbs, we were so slow to act to protect our troops?" asked Sen. Joseph Biden (D) of Delaware in a letter Tuesday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
The answers to Senator Biden's question illustrate how hard it can be for the government – and the private sector – to respond to urgent battlefield needs while weighing legitimate concerns about how government contracts are awarded and production lines are cranked up. In the case of the MRAP, the process has been especially slow and tangled. In 2004, a year after the invasion of Iraq, the insurgency was mounting and roadside bombs were killing American troops. The conventional thinking about how to protect troops was to field "up-armored" Humvees. At the time, the insurgency didn't look as if it would go on much longer, so there was no need to invest in a new vehicle, and the Humvee already had an established industrial base. But the enemy was adapting, placing roadside bombs in such a way to cause blasts that ripped through the underside of vehicles, causing casualties.
At the same time, a small company in South Carolina called Force Protection Inc. was pushing a different solution. It had designed a truck with a steel undercarriage shaped like a 'V,' which diverted the force of blasts to the side of the vehicle.
But the company and those who supported the initiative couldn't provide enough data to prove the effectiveness of the MRAP design. And even if it had had the data to make the case to the Pentagon, the company was too small to mass-produce the vehicle. A year earlier, its 11-employee workforce had taken a month to produce just one truck.
"In the beginning, we really weren't good enough to mass produce enough to be a good, mainstream solution," says Mike Aldrich, the company's vice-president of marketing and government relations.
But Marines with the I Marine Expeditionary Force in Camp Pendleton, Calif., knew the design would save lives and made a request in February 2005 for more than 1,100 of the trucks. More than a year later, they made a second request. The Pentagon ultimately approved just 185 vehicles in mid-2006. Even as the Pentagon gears up to buy thousands more of the vehicles, Biden wants Secretary Gates to investigate the delay.
The Pentagon wants 21,000 of the vehicles and Congress is paying for 7,700 of them. The company is now producing each month about 100 Cougars – the version most wanted by the military – and it's preparing to go to a 200-per-month production rate, hiring 25 new employees a week. Aldrich says his company can make 10,000 vehicles by December – but that's if he gets an order from the US government by July 1.
"That will get a lot of people protected in a hurry," he says. "Now we're clearly putting the ball back in the government's court, we're saying 'place the order,' " he says.
But he declines to say how he can meet the surge in demand. At least eight other companies are also vying for MRAP contracts. The process by which the Pentagon awards contracts has long been slow. But the process moved quickly once the decision was made to move forward.
While there was interest in the MRAP, it was hard for the services initially to make a "strategic decision" to buy thousands of them, says a Washington, D.C., attorney familiar with the MRAP contracting issue. If the military put all its acquisition eggs all in one basket and then found it didn't need the truck a year or so later, that would be seen as poor judgment at best and a boondoggle at worst.
"The problem they had was more of strategy – where to you put your money, what makes the most sense – and not so much of the nuts and bolts of government acquisition," he says. "Once the decision was made at the strategic level to go with MRAP, they moved out pretty darn quick, warp speed."
Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway says the Corps is pushing the envelope when it comes to working through – and if necessary, around – contracting regulations that can delay such purchases.
"I could be wearing stripes [of enlisted men] when this is all over," General Conway joked during a Pentagon briefing recently, saying nevertheless that it is a "moral imperative" to get these vehicles to Iraq.
Some question why there's all the fuss about a vehicle that will not have a big impact protecting forces until thousands more can be fielded next year and the year after – about the same time that many Americans believe the bulk of US forces will have left Iraq. That's not the way Aldrich sees it. As long as roadside bombs are effective, enemies of the US will use them wherever they may be, he says.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0531/p01s02-usmi.htm
1)
Navistar Wins $623 Million Blast-Proof Truck Award (Update4)
2007-05-31 18:18 (New York)
(Adds comment from Marine Corps in second paragraph.)
By Edmond Lococo
May 31 (Bloomberg) -- Navistar International Corp. won a $623 million award from the U.S. Marine Corps to make blast-resistant trucks that better protect troops in Iraq. It's the largest contract for such trucks to date. The award covers production of 1,200 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, Marine Corps spokesman Bill Johnson-Miles said today in a statement. The trucks will be delivered by February 2008. These additional vehicles will help support the increasing requirement for MRAP vehicles in theater with their proven capability to save lives,'' Johnson-Miles said in the statement. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on May 9 quicker acquisition of blast-resistant vehicles to improve protection of U.S. troops in Iraq is the Pentagon's top procurement priority. American forces in May suffered their deadliest month in Iraq since November 2004, with at least 123 killed, according to Pentagon data. Homemade bombs have accounted for 61 percent of the 2,793 U.S. combat deaths in the conflict so far.
The Marine Corps has said the new trucks, which deflect explosive force with V-shaped hulls, are four times safer than flat-bottomed Humvee transports. The Marines are leading efforts
to buy the new vehicles and may spend $8.4 billion over two years for as many as 7,700 trucks. The U.S. Army said this month it may need 17,000 of them valued at $19.4 billion through 2009.
Assembly and Armor:
Navistar will do the assembly and armor plating at its International Truck and Engine Corp.
lant in West Point, Mississippi. U.S. Congressman Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, issued a statement announcing the award earlier today. The contract exceeds the $481.4 million order given to Force Protection Inc. for 1,000 vehicles in April and smaller awards to four other manufacturers. The Navistar vehicle is a new truck called the International MaxxPro. Roy Wiley, spokesman for Warrenville, Illinois-based Navistar, declined to provide details on the vehicle.
`While it's not battle-tested, it certainly has been field tested,'' Wiley said. `It came through all those tests with flying colors.''
Shares of Navistar rose $2.50, or 4 percent, to $64.89 at 4 p.m. New York time over-the-counter trading.
Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection dropped $1.80, or 6 percent, to $28.47 in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. "We were shocked the order went to a vehicle with no track record,'' said Force Protection Vice President Michael Aldrich. "We know the government intends to buy from multiple manufacturers. The size of that order, to that vehicle system,
is a bit surprising.'' The four other companies with awards include General Dynamics Corp. in Falls Church, Virginia; Oshkosh Truck Corp. in Oshkosh, Wisconsin; closely held Protected Vehicles Inc. in North Charleston, South Carolina, and London-based BAE Systems
Plc. For Navistar, the award is ``significant,'' said JB Groh, an analyst at D.A. Davidson & Co. in Lake Oswego, Oregon. Still, he said it's not enough to change his view on the company's
shares, which he rates underperform.'' He doesn't own the stock. Navistar was de-listed by the New York Stock Exchange in February for failing to file financial reports. The company
hasn't disclosed earnings or sales since the third quarter of 2005 because of problems in accounting for warranties and product-development programs at suppliers. The order for the mine-resistant vehicles and speculation by analysts that Navistar may be a takeover target are fueling gains in the company's shares, Groh said. The stock has jumped 94 percent this year.
In terms of the stock, it's way overheated,'' Groh said.
&
Navistar has mighty political guns fighting to win MRAP contracts
<INTERNATIONAL TRUCK WINS $623 MILLION MARINE CORPS CONTRACT
West Point facility will do assembly and plating for armored vehicles; 350 jobs expected
WASHINGTON, DC-The U.S. Marine Corps has awarded a $623 million contract to International Truck and Engine Company to build 1,200 mine-resistant ambush-protected armored vehicles (MRAP), federal lawmakers said Thursday. Assembly and armor plating will be done at International's West Point, Mississippi, facility.
U.S. Rep. Roger Wicker and Sens. Thad Cochran and Trent Lott said the contract specifies delivery of the vehicles to the Marine Corps by February 2008. International Truck is partnered with Griffin Armament at its West Point operation. The contract is expected to produce 350 jobs at the West Point plant. The MRAP is designed to provide better protection against mines and incendiary explosive devices, which have caused the greatest number of casualties for U.S. troops in Iraq.
"International Truck has a proven record of building and delivering armored vehicles to protect American service personnel," Rep. Wicker said. "This contract reflects the confidence the Marine Corps has in International's expertise. It is also good news for West Point, where International employees will have a hand in providing the safest and most dependable armored vehicles in the world."
Sen. Cochran said, "I am very pleased the Department of Defense has recognized the quality of the workforce in West Point. The Golden Triangle Region continues to demonstrate leadership as the State of Mississippi has grown into a major player in the automotive industry. This contract will help protect U.S. troops as well as provide our work force at home with good job opportunities."
Sen. Lott said, "I've worked with the Marine Corps to ensure this competition was a fair one which gave West Point's work force an opportunity to participate in this very important contract. With this announcement, the Golden Triangle area becomes home to a second truck manufacturing facility, creating good manufacturing jobs and giving Mississippi an even stronger presence in the growing Mid-South automotive production corridor. Yet, more important than any economic impact, this contract will provide our troops with a vehicle that better resists the deadly explosive devices so often used by America's terrorist foes."
The truck chassis will be built at the company's Garland, Texas, location and then transferred to the military integration facility in West Point for final assembly. International has already delivered more than 4,000 military vehicles over the past several years. An armored heavy haul tractor produced in West Point went to Iraq last year, and another vehicle is in service in Iraq and Afghanistan. International also builds vehicles for U.S. allies, including Israel. >"
FRPT Force Protection: Navistar awarded 1200 MRAP vehicles; would be buyers on weakness - CE Unterberg (26.75 -0.94) -Update-
CE Unterberg expects weakness in FRPT shares today after last night's announcement from the DoD that International Military and Government, a subsidiary of Navistar (NAVZ) was awarded a $623 mln contract to build 1,200 Category I MRAP vehicles. Although they had expected, and continue to expect, additional orders to other vendors, the firm had regarded IM&G as a less likely major participant in the program than BAE System, General Dynamics (GD) or Oshkosh Truck (OSK). Their ests assume the Force Dynamics JV wins 42% of the 23,000 MRAP program. They would be buyers on weakness, particularly aggressive in the mid-to-high $20 area. The firm thinks there are more orders coming, probably in the next 30 to 45 days as the F07 Supplemental funds are released, then deployed.
There is one major sticking point and that is that P/E should be based on the number of vehicles they can produce and deliver in Fiscal 2007, then future contracts. Because the budget authorization expires and cannot be used. So we have June, July, August, and September to account for.
So I guess we are open to a slide like last year waiting for the Fiscal 2008 budget and contracts.
Problem. Do they already have a backlog to account for all the vehicles they can produce this fiscal year?
la-onda ,
How current is the quote below? Or is it a reiteration of a previous report?
Their ests assume the Force Dynamics JV wins 42% of the 23,000 MRAP program. They would be buyers on weakness, particularly aggressive in the mid-to-high $20 area. The firm thinks there are more orders coming, probably in the next 30 to 45 days as the F07 Supplemental funds are released, then deployed
this was a briefing.com quotation, sorry no report available 8)
I am still holding FRPT
8)
You Can Win By Thinking Big
You Can Win By Thinking Big
by Timothy Lutts
June 4th, 2007
A week ago, on Memorial Day, I wrote about Force Protection (FRPT), the maker of armored vehicles that's grown very rapidly in recent quarters and expects continued growth as the government ramps up its program to replace Humvees in Iraq with vehicles that can better protect the troops.
Back then the stock was trading a shade above 28, and I wrote, "Ideally, you want to buy when the stock corrects to its 25-day moving average down around 25. That's also the level where the stock met resistance back in January, so it should act as a floor.
"And if the stock fails from there, you cut your loss short; nothing is guaranteed in this business. But if you manage your risk properly (buying at the right point is very important in this regard), stories like Force Protection can pay off very well."
In the four trading days that followed, the stock climbed to 30 and then fell - on big volume - back to 26, following the news that the Department of Defense had awarded Navistar a $623 million contract to build 1,200 armored vehicles.
Now, the novice looks at these developments and says, "This doesn't look good. A new competitor has snuck in to Force Protection's territory. And the stock is down from 30 to 24. Maybe I should sell now and get out before it gets worse."
The more experienced investor says, "It's hit 25, which Lutts said would be an ideal entry point. I think I'll put in my buy order."
The difference, you see, is that the novice investor bought immediately following my recommendation, while the experienced investor has been waiting to buy at the right time and the right price. In four days the novice has lost some money; the experienced investor hasn't. But what about the news? Well, it may mark a top for the stock, but I think it's more likely an excellent example of what we like to call "superficial bad news."
Remember, the DOD may award some $8 billion worth of contracts for new armored vehicles, and Force Protection has 81% of the market to date. Under the Army's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program, the government will order about 23,000 armored vehicles, so this award to Navistar is just 5% of that program. There's no doubt the Army wants to spread the awards out, so it can get its vehicles faster. Knowing that, the Navistar award is not unexpected. But Force Protection still has the inside track to receive a big chunk of the orders, so nothing has changed in the big picture.
So why is the stock down? One, because some traders sold on the news. And two, because the stock needed to come down. If you simply look at a chart, that is plain. In fact, on Friday, the stock nearly kissed its 25-day moving average, which had climbed to near 26, before it rebounded to top 27.
But there's that heavy volume to consider. When stocks sell off from their peaks on three times average volume, it sometimes marks the end of the advance . . . but there's no way to know until later.
So how to play it? If you haven't bought yet, you want to wait until the correction is over. The maxim for this situation is, "Don't try to catch a falling knife." Today, the stock fell to 24, a level that offered resistance in April and May. As the days go by the picture changes, and interpretation will change, too.
And if you bought high? Work hard to keep your loss small, and next time don't buy until you have a lower-risk setup.
Fibs look to stack up well with imprtant support and resistance levels for FRPT - having missed most of the last run I've been looking for a decent entry point. I thought I had that today, just below $24, when it looked like we were getting a nice trendline bounce, and with important resistance around $24. Having another look at the chart just now, I think there could be a bit more downside, possibly another dollar. We can't underestimate the strength of the sell-off over the last 3 days, and I think FRPT may want to come down and pierce the 50MA at $23.03 (today's low was 23.41), as well as hit the 50% Fib retracement, at $22.85. That seems like it would be more bullish for the stock. Still, it is hard to say, what the market gods will decide, but La-Onda's article echoes my thoughts here - just becaus Navistar got a big contract, it doesn't mean there is much less of the pie for FRPT, in fact it suggests the DoD is in order issuing mode, and we could hear about a major order for FRPT shortly. I think this could be a good area to reposition as the negative sentiment on FRPT will doubtfully last long.
This is becoming a all or nothing, blink and you miss, zig instead of zag. proposition. I say wait for the June contracts come.
But here is some recent news.
Associated press
June, 4, 2007
Analysts Expect More MRAP Contracts Soon
.......The Defense Department wants to buy 7,774 MRAP vehicles expected to cost $8.4 billion this fiscal year. If approved, the military may seek to get funding up to $20 billion in future years for as many as 18,000 MRAPs.......
http://www.forbes.com/markets/economy/2007/06/04/force-protection-udpate-markets-equity-cx_er_0604markets25.html
Market Scan
Competitive Concerns Sap Force Protection
Evelyn M. Rusli, 06.04.07, 7:58 PM ET
.....The outstanding 4,961 vehicle orders for 2007 will likely go to the five other major contractors who have not yet received a large order, she said. Three or four contracts of Navistar's size could be awarded in the next two weeks, Millard said. She also predicted that Force Protection's share of the contracts will eventually dip to 30%. .......
http://videoplayer.thestreet.com/?clipId=1373_10360996&channel=Market+Strategy&cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=&cm_ite=&puc=yahoo&ts=1181180605218
NOW PLAYING
Should You Buy It? Force Protection Fe ...
Competition for mine-resistant vehicle contracts put its momentum at risk. Plus, don't chase ValueClick, and Interactive Brokers shows the downside of M&A and t ..
50 MA here we come.
Jun-06-2007
Last Trade 5 day 13 day 20 day 50 day
24.12 25.51 26.40 26.11 23.81
TDD Analysis 26.77
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/analysis.pl?symb=FRPT&num1=1&cobrand=&mode=stock
First time I have seen 800 vehicles per month on the table.
Aldrich said today Force builds 90 vehicles a month, but will lift that to 200 by the end of this year. It expects to build 400 a month by early 2008 and ramp that up to 800 by the end of 2008. He said its joint venture with General Dynamics (NYSE:GD - News), called Force Dynamics, will help reach its production goal.
"Every time we increase capacity, the U.S. buys every vehicle," he said. "But to get above 400 a month, we need to get an additional order, which we might see in the third quarter."
Investor's Business Daily
Buffalo And Cougar Protect Troops From Blasts In Iraq
Wednesday June 6, 7:00 pm ET
Brad Kelly
The war in Iraq rages on. And so does the body count.
The Pentagon confirmed 110 fatalities in May, making it the third deadliest month since the campaign began.
Army Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, the senior American ground commander, said in a briefing, "What we're finding is the insurgents and the extremists use (improvised explosive devices) as their own little security. And some of them have been somewhat effective, which has raised our death toll."
Back home in the U.S., Force Protection (NasdaqCM:FRPT - News) is committed to providing vehicles that protect the troops.
The face of modern warfare has changed. Land mines, IEDs and rocket-propelled grenades are weapons of choice for terrorists and insurgents. In the war's first year, troops faced new threats with vehicles never intended to withstand blasts from these weapons.
But Force Protection and its line of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, are meeting the urgent demand for vehicles with the strength to keep the troops safe, while allowing them to complete missions.
"Our motto is to protect and save lives," said Force's Vice President Michael Aldrich. "Blast-protection vehicles are the missing arsenal of the U.S. forces. We're trying to change that."
Force's MRAP vehicles have a V-shaped hull that deflects glass and shrapnel away from the soldiers inside. Aldrich said not all V-shape hulls are created equal.
"The real strength is to bend the V-shape hull instead of welding it, which just weakens the hull," he said.
Tough Material
Force outfits each MRAP with bulletproof glass. It uses a specialty grade steel that's blast resistant and pliable. Aldrich would not reveal the type of steel due to security reasons.
The company has two types of MRAPs. The first is the Buffalo, a 23-ton, mine-protected clearance vehicle. It's used to clear traditional minefields, but has been adapted to clear routes along Iraq's deadliest streets.
The second vehicle is the Cougar, used by the Army Corps. of Engineers' bomb experts. It's a bit smaller than the Buffalo, but deflects blasts just as well.
Aldrich said Force's roughly 600 vehicles in Iraq have withstood more than 2,000 blasts. He said prior to Force's first vehicles deployed in Iraq, the Marines were losing one bomb squad a week. Since the arrival of its Cougar in October 2004, there's been just one fatality in its MRAPs.
Force shipped 195 vehicles in the first quarter, including 13 Buffalos and 182 Cougars, an increase of more than 300% from a year ago.
It raised first-quarter sales by 188% to $100.2 million, reflecting contract awards received in the second half of 2006. It was the fifth straight quarter of triple-digit growth.
In the last two months, Force's stock has shot up 80% to 30.27. But after rival Navistar International was awarded the largest MRAP contract worth more than $600 million, Force's stock has fallen 19% from its all-time high.
Aldrich said today Force builds 90 vehicles a month, but will lift that to 200 by the end of this year. It expects to build 400 a month by early 2008 and ramp that up to 800 by the end of 2008. He said its joint venture with General Dynamics (NYSE:GD - News), called Force Dynamics, will help reach its production goal.
"Every time we increase capacity, the U.S. buys every vehicle," he said. "But to get above 400 a month, we need to get an additional order, which we might see in the third quarter."
Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently said the military's MRAP program is the highest priority for the Department of Defense. Force is poised to answer the call to make more blast-resistant vehicles.
Aldrich said Force Dynamics is ready to produce 12,000 MRAPs by the end of 2008. But he said it needs to get Marine Corps orders before it can ramp up production.
Analyst Joe Maxa of Dougherty & Co. said the ongoing push to evolve the MRAP program will help Force.
Force has been awarded 1,325 of the 1,595 MRAP contracts to date, which is valued at nearly $800 million, Maxa says.
In April, the Navy gave Force Protection a $481 million order, the second largest to date, to deliver 1,000 MRAPs. Its joint venture will help build those vehicles.
"The company is awarded most of the military's contracts because its (MRAP) vehicles are battle tested and field proven," Maxa said.
Marine Corps Plan
The company's first MRAP vehicle hit the ground in Iraq in late 2004. The Pentagon was criticized for not providing U.S. troops with MRAPs and has since increased the number of orders.
The Marine Corps is seeking to double the size of its MRAP program to meet short-term combat needs. The Marines and Army want to buy 7,774 MRAP vehicles at an expected cost of $8.4 billion.
Force has already spent more money on research and development in the first quarter than it did all last year. Force's R&D spending hit $4.84 million last quarter, up more than 630% from a year ago.
Most R&D spending was for its new Cheetah vehicle, which is still in the prototype stage. The new vehicle is smaller, lighter and faster than Force's other two MRAPs.
The spending increase was one reason the company missed analysts' views in the first quarter. While Force reversed a 3-cent loss a year ago to post a gain of 4 cents a share, it missed views by 9 cents.
While the Iraq War has driven up demand for MRAPs, Force should see strength in orders continue well after the war.
The military's Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program has plans to replace its line of Humvees because they cannot withstand the blasts from IEDs. Maxa says once the Cheetah is ready for production, it should receive the bulk of the replacement orders.
"The U.S. military's plans to replace Humvees will bode well for the Cheetah, which should be a big opportunity for Force over the next 10 to 15 years" Maxa said. "Force can also sell the Cheetah to other NATO allies because it is not built to U.S. specs."
The Cheetah costs $250,000 to $300,000. That price is less than the cost of the Buffalo and Cougar at $850,000 and $500,000, respectively. Force isn't the only company vying for replacement contracts. Competitors include Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT - News), Oshkosh Truck (NYSE:OSK - News) and BAE Systems.
In order to meet the needs of the U.S. forces, the company announced in March that it is spending $4.1 million to buy land, buildings and equipment in South Carolina for research, development and testing.
"The first rule of first aid is to stop the bleeding," Aldrich said. "Our MRAPs would stop the spilling of American blood in Iraq."
Contracts Coming - Competition To Get Scraps
The competition is still many steps behind. Apparently, from the contracts that have been awarded, Cat II is likely going all to FPI. Oshkosh's Bushmaster and Navistar's MaxxPro are the other major competitors for Cat 1. The competition will only have competitive offerings for the Cat 1 vehicle only until the Cheetah goes into full production this in the autumn of 2007.
Aberdeen Testing is done. FPI is meeting all the production goals of the April 23rd 1000 Vehicle Low Rate Initial Production stress test. A full rate production contract for Cougars is right around the corner...And an initial Cheetah Order is not far behind!
Navistar Contract
Navistar's vehicle performed well enough in testing & soldiers would rather be in a Navistar vehicle then in a humvee.
However, the Navistar contract is entirely political. Sen. Lott said, "I've worked with the Marine Corps to ensure this competition was a fair one which gave West Point's work force an opportunity to participate in this very important contract.
---When the former Senate Majority Leader, present Senate Republican Whip, is ensuring this competition gives Mississippi's work force an opportunity to participate, he is actually directing the Defense Department to award his constituents a contract.
This isn't a random truck company producing an approvable MRAP. Navistar is only a truck company but they partnered with Israeli firm Plasan Sasa for the armoring of the truck. Plasan Sasa has been making up-armoring kits for the Marine Corps' MTVR trucks for several years now, including contracts with Oshkosh. So their offering has always been legitimate.
Others Getting Contracts
Why have the no other contractors received follow up LRIP's?
BAE Systems
On February 14th, BAE Systems received a $55,366,500 delivery order for 15 Category I and 75 Category II MRAP vehicles. That was almost 4 months ago! BAE's RG-33 vehicles were not prototypes, and they were based on the RG-31. They had production facilities. So, either they have been very slow to deliver these 15 Cat 1's and 75 cat II's or the Government doesn't want any more...and they apparently don't have powerful senators fighting for them.
General Dynamics
On February 26th, GD received an $11,014,290 delivery order for 10 Category I and 10 Category II MRAP vehicles. That too was almost 4 months ago! GD's RG-31 vehicles were not prototypes. They have production facilities and they still delivered their prototypes late!
So, either they have been very slow to deliver these 10 Cat 1's and 10 cat II's, they've been too busy fixing their piece of crap Stryker vehicles, or the Government doesn't want any more...and they too apparently don't have powerful senators fighting for them to get MRAP without FPI. The Government knows GD is FPI's partner and will not want to hurt Cougar production. If they were to receive contracts they should have been in by now.
Oshkosh
On February 26th, Oshkosh Truck Corporation received a $30,619,900 delivery order for 100 Category I MRAP vehicles. That too was almost 4 months ago! Oshkosh's Bushmaster vehicles were not prototypes. They have had active production facilities. So, either they have been very slow to deliver these 100 Cat 1's or the Government doesn't want any more...and they too apparently don't have powerful senators fighting for them. If they were to receive contracts they should have been in by now.
Protected Vehicles Inc.
On February 26th, Protected Vehicles, Inc. received $37,444,440 delivery order for 60 Category II MRAP vehicles.. That too was almost 4 months ago! Either they have been very slow to deliver these 60 Cat II's or the Government doesn't want any more...and they too apparently don't have powerful senators fighting for them. If they were to receive contracts they should have been in by now. The Government may feel sorry for them and send a small contract their way.
Cheetah is the Future!
The Cheetah is "Awesome!" according to the soldier in this must see NBC news segment that aired May 25th. Not good, not I like it, not performs according to the specifications..."Awesome!" No PR could even touch something as simple as the "Awesome" quote.
With full production starting in the fall, contracts should be issued soon. Typically contracts are issued 3 months prior to delivery of initial units. So an out of the blue, sole source, initial Cheetah contract could be awarded at any time likely for only 100-500 vehicles. But that would be all it takes to accelerate the PPS to new highs again.
Remember the May 18th General Conway interview:
Q I just wanted to follow up on the MRAP. There's some downsides. It's -- as far as I understand -- a slower vehicle than the humvee, it's a bigger vehicle, it's not a vehicle particularly suited for off road. I mean are we spending all this money, all this procurement effort, on a vehicle that has a very specific use that may be well-suited to the current battle, but by the time we actually have these vehicles built, we will have gotten something that won't be as useful in the next battle?
GEN. CONWAY: I don't know that any of those things you said are accurate. Now, you got three different sizes of MRAPS, and yeah, the largest size is larger than the humvee, okay? But the one that we're most interested in comes as a replacement to the humvee. If you checked our buy, we've got a couple thousand and more that are going to be replacements for the humvee. And it certainly has to have an off-road capability. It will do anything that the humvee will do.
The General is definitely aware of the Cheetah. When he said "it" and not "they", he had in mind only one vehicle - and that's the Cheetah!
He's telling us there's a 2000 vehicle order coming for a replacement vehicle for the Humvee!!! Could this be the Cheetah? -It has to be, no other could be a replacement Humvee! This will be HUGE if (when) it is.
& when you combine all that with the specs for the Cheetah on Force Protection's website now say under Roles "MRAP CAT I".
FPI is still working to make Cheetah better. Hybrid Diesel technology on the Cheetah will likely be in future versions. Not to save the environment but too provide a separate system that together substantially increase horse power, all-wheel drive capability and acceleration. Oshkosh is working on Diesel hybrids, Force Protection is as well with the partnership with Quantum.
for all the links:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&pt=msg&mid=2310512
cheers
O.
The Cheetah is starting to look like the dark horse. I thought the Cheetah as a replacement to the Hummer was a reach. Now it looks like a possability because the second production facility was primarily for the Cheetah and other production increases.
They have only recently proposed moving their production from 400 maximum to 800 maximum. I can only wonder if it is one sided or going both ways. But we will have to wait until the 2008 Fiscal budget to see if this comes true.
Remember the May 18th General Conway interview:
Q I just wanted to follow up on the MRAP. There's some downsides. It's -- as far as I understand -- a slower vehicle than the humvee, it's a bigger vehicle, it's not a vehicle particularly suited for off road. I mean are we spending all this money, all this procurement effort, on a vehicle that has a very specific use that may be well-suited to the current battle, but by the time we actually have these vehicles built, we will have gotten something that won't be as useful in the next battle?
GEN. CONWAY: I don't know that any of those things you said are accurate. Now, you got three different sizes of MRAPS, and yeah, the largest size is larger than the humvee, okay? But the one that we're most interested in comes as a replacement to the humvee. If you checked our buy, we've got a couple thousand and more that are going to be replacements for the humvee. And it certainly has to have an off-road capability. It will do anything that the humvee will do.
The General is definitely aware of the Cheetah. When he said "it" and not "they", he had in mind only one vehicle - and that's the Cheetah!
for all the links:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&pt=msg&mid=2310512Force Protection Offers to Double Truck Output (Update2)
By Edmond Lococo
June 7 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., a maker of mine-resistant trucks, has offered a plan to the U.S. military to double output during the next 18 months to speed delivery of the vehicles to troops in Iraq.
The company offered to produce a total of 12,000 of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, by the end of 2008 through a joint venture with General Dynamics Corp., Michael Aldrich, a vice president of Ladson, South Carolina- based Force Protection said in an interview today.
Reaching the target would require boosting manufacturing to 800 vehicles a month, compared with current plans for 400, Aldrich said. U.S. forces suffered in May their deadliest month in Iraq since November 2004, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates said May 9 that faster acquisition of blast-resistant trucks is the Pentagon's top procurement priority.
``Force Protection is a company which is a relative newcomer to mass volume production, so they may not be getting credit for the idle production capacity that could be brought on line,'' said Chris Donaghey, an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey in Atlanta. ``General Dynamics has plenty of capacity but they have never built these vehicles in volume either.''
Donaghey rates Force Protection's shares ``buy'' and doesn't own any. SunTrust has done investment banking work for Force Protection in the past year.
Second-Largest Order
Force Protection has received the second-largest order for the trucks to date: a $481.4 million contract for 1,000 of the vehicles awarded in April. It produces the trucks through its joint venture with Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics. The largest MRAP order so far went to Navistar International Corp. in Warrenville, Illinois, last month for $623 million to build 1,200 trucks.
Force Protection won't raise output without additional military contracts, Aldrich said.
``It would be improper for a publicly traded company to ramp up on its own initiative and spend a lot of shareholder money possibly in the wrong direction,'' Aldrich said.
U.S. Marine Corps spokesman Bill Johnson-Miles said he didn't immediately have information on the production plan.
Shares of Force Protection fell 34 cents to $23.78 at 4 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. They have risen 37 percent this year. Shares of General Dynamics rose 69 cents to $79.62 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.
Half the Market
General Dynamics and Force Protection established their joint venture to build Cougar vehicles for the MRAP program in November. Prior to that, Force Protection had a production capacity on its own of about 140 vehicles a month, Aldrich said.
The Marine Corps has announced plans to buy as many as 7,700 of the trucks with a value of $8.4 billion. The Army is still evaluating its final requirement, which could be as many as 17,700 trucks.
Force Protection and General Dynamics together may win at least 50 percent of the total truck purchase, David Gremmels, an analyst with Thomas Weisel Partners in New York, wrote in a note to clients today. The joint venture will probably win an additional order of up to 2,200 vehicles in the June-July time frame, he wrote.
The Marines have said mine-resistant trucks like the Cougar, which have V-shaped hulls to deflect blasts, are four times safer than traditional flat-bottomed vehicles. Attacks with homemade bombs accounted for 61 percent of the 2,793 U.S. combat deaths in Iraq as of May 19, according to Pentagon data.
Other companies with truck production contracts under the MRAP program include BAE Systems Plc in London, Oshkosh Truck Corp. in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and closely held Protected Vehicles Inc. of North Charleston, South Carolina.
BAE and Oshkosh will probably win more awards in the next few weeks, Gremmels wrote.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] .
Last Updated: June 7, 2007 16:19 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=aNZYiNKXz0FU
amstocks82 quotation from IV:
MRAP More Probabilities and Analysis
Under MRAP, the military announced that they would purchase three categories of vehicles called CAT 1, CAT 2 and CAT 3. All three types of vehicles are mine and IED resistant. CAT 1 is mainly for urban combat operations and can carry a minimum of six personnel. CAT 2 is a multi-mission vehicle that can be used for troop transport, convoy escort, ambulance EOD and etc. CAT 2 vehicles can carry 10 or more personnel. CAT 3 is a Mine/IED clearance vehicle and the Buffalo manufactured by FPI has been named as the sole source CAT 3 vehicle.
The Defense Supplemental bill should cover more than the original requested 4100 vehicles but not the entire 7700 vehicles. The Defense Supplemental bill has around 3 billion dollars for MRAP. On average, the cost of vehicles has been around 500,000 each but this does not include standard deployment items or maintenance items. It also does not include military equipment such as weapons mounts radios and etc. If the military purchases the other items with the 3 billion for MRAP, then the actual cost to the military to deploy the vehicles goes up to around $700,000 to $800,000. The military may take the weapons mounts and radios from other vehicles that they will retire. If so, the cost to deploy the average vehicle so far ordered might be around $600,000 to $700,000. Therefore, the military has the funds to order up to approximately 4500 +- 500 vehicles. There are a few assumptions underlying this:
A. The military reuses some military equipment.
B. The military does not use other funds to pay for standard deployment items.
C. The original 1000 vehicle order to FPI was partly funded by retargeting funds from other projects. It is unknown how much of that money will be returned to the original project.
The list of companies that competed for MRAP contracts were: Armored Holdings, BAE Systems, Force Dynamics, General Dynamics Land Systems, General Purpose Vehicles, International Military and Government, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Protected Vehicles, Inc, and Textron. Force Dynamics (FD) is the joint venture between General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) and Force Protection, Inc (FPI). FD will bid on MRAP opportunities available for various versions of the Cougar and GDLS and FPI will share in production and profits.
Prior to the testing of vehicles at Aberdeen, based on the militaries assessment of vehicles, some initial Limited Rate Initial Production (LRIP) orders were given. These orders were issued to accelerate the production of vehicle the military had assessed as lower risk designs for which the initial assessment was that they would likely pass testing. These LRIP orders were given as follows:
1) Force Dynamics received orders for 60 CAT I's and 65 CAT II's ($67.4 million)
2) BAE received orders for 15 CAT I's and 75 CAT II's ($55.5 million)
3) PVI received orders for 60 CAT II's ($37.4 million)
4) Oshkosh received orders for 100 CAT I's ($30.6 million)
5) GDLS-Canada received orders for 10 CAT I's and 10 CAT IIs ($11 million).
After testing at Aberdeen:
1) Force Dynamics received an order for 700 CAT II and 300 CAT I MRAP vehicles
2) International Military and Government received an order for 1200 CAT I MRAP vehicles
The question is who gets the remaining orders?
In the original terms for the MRAP contract, the military listed the following two main criteria for a vendor selection:
1) The Contractor or Contractors vehicle systems that demonstrate the best overall performance in PVT testing (with survivability being the highest priority)
2) The Contractor or Contractors that demonstrate the greatest capability to produce and deliver vehicles with the shortest ramp up time and greatest maximum production capacity, in order to meet the urgent delivery requirements for these vehicles.
Testing is done at Aberdeen Proving ground: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=46087
Since the original terms of the MRAP contracts were announced, Defense Secretary Gates has prioritized the acquisition of MRAP making it the priority one Defense acquisition project and on June 1, gave the program a "DX" rating. The "DX" rating requires industry to give the MRAP project priority over commercial orders and over other Defense related projects that have a normal DO rating.
BAE's RG33 CAT II from public information has an excellent chance to get a large order and was expected to get an early order for MRAP vehicles. It received the second largest pre-Aberdeen contract award after Force Protection and delivered it's vehicles on time. The fact that BAE has not yet received an order is feeding speculation that their vehicle failed testing at Aberdeen. There have also been reports that some manufacturers have asked for additional time to correct deficiencies in their vehicles and it is thought that BAE might be one of these manufacturers.
The RG33 and Force Protection's Cougar and Buffalo vehicle are based on designs that originated in South Africa. Force Protection has exclusive licenses to some of the South African technology for MRAP vehicles that are manufactured outside of South Africa and those licenses are not available to BAE. Most of the development of the RG33 is reported to have occurred in 2006. If BAE's vehicle failed testing, it is possible that any new technology that they recently developed for MRAP was not as effective as BAE hoped.
International's vehicle the "MaxxPro" was not considered likely to get a large contract this quickly. International does not have experience making any type of armored vehicle and its vehicles have never been in the field. However, they received the largest single order to date of 1200 vehicles.
International does have a credible ability to manufacture many vehicles quickly due to their large size. International's deficiencies in armor development were addressed by purchasing the armor for the vehicles from Plasan Sasa which is manufacturer of many types of composite armor.
The main criticisms of the order to International is that repairs to vehicles using the type of armor made by Plasan Sasa will be much more expensive than repairing a vehicle such as those made by Force Protection. Another criticism of the order is that there are no vehicles of this type in the field so it is unknown how they will perform in practice. Internationals vehicles are also more expensive than Force Protection vehicles.
Oshkosh's Bushmaster CAT II vehicle does not have the same specifications as other CAT II vehicles. The Bushmaster can survive a 9.5kg high-explosive land mine detonated under any wheel or under the centerline of the vehicle. Force Protection's vehicles can handle 15kg high-explosive under any wheel and at least 7.5kg anywhere under the vehicle. The centerline is actually the strongest area and 9.5kg means that may translate to 5kg to 6kg anywhere under the vehicle. The Bushmaster specs that I read are not clear on this. Mines are most likely to be detonated under a wheel and IEDs are most likely to be detonated close to the sides of the vehicle. There are not a large number of Bushmasters that have been built and therefore, existing manufacturing capacity to build this vehicle is low. Reliability of the Bushmaster has in the past not been high. In addition, the US military and British militaries purchased the Cougar even though the Bushmaster was available. The British tested the Cougar against the Bushmaster and the Cougar was chosen instead of the Bushmaster. I believe based on survivability, the Bushmaster does not match the Cougar.
PVI's Golan vehicle is an unknown competitor and production capacity is believed to be low. The Golan has armor tiles that can be replaced. The main armor tile on the Golan is made from a type of reactive armor. In other words, it explodes outwards to deflect the force of IEDs and RPGs directed against the vehicle. The Golan was mainly developed by Rafael that has a very good reputation for armoring. The problem with using reactive armor is that if it is hit by something which triggers the reactive armor, soldiers close to the vehicle or civilians close to the vehicle may be injured or killed by the additional explosive power of the armor.
GDLS has not gotten an order but their RG31 has been relatively effective in the field but not as effective as the Cougar.
AH – Believed to have no suitable vehicle and have indicated that they are committed to relationship with other MRAP vendors as subcontractor.
Textron – Vehicle failed testing
General Purpose vehicle – No Vehicle
The Cougar has the best safety record proven in Iraq and Afghanistan of any vehicle that vendors are bidding for the MRAP contracts. The joint venture between General Dynamics and Force protection FD has the largest and most credible ramp-up plan for producing MRAP vehicles. According to the criteria for awarding contracts for MRAP, this means that FD should be awarded contracts to manufacture as many vehicles as they can credibly manufacture.
As reported in Forbes, "Under a joint venture with General Dynamics, Force Protection will be able to deliver 12,100 vehicles between July 2007 and December 2008, Aldrich said. "We have reason to be wildly optimistic that we will receive more orders," he said. "We have passed the test, we have more than quadrupled production and we are ahead on all the contracts we are on right now." http://www.forbes.com/markets/2007/06/04/force-protection-udpate-markets-equity-cx_er_0604markets25.html
Therefore, I believe the end result will probably be:
1) If the RG33 passes military testing, BAE will probably get a large order for part of the remaining vehicles to be ordered with the funding the military currently has.
2) PVI with only a limited manufacturing capacity may get an order for some Golan vehicles if those vehicles pass the military testing.
3) Bushmaster – has been passed over in the past for orders for MRAP, the specs are not as good as other vehicles and has a low production capability and therefore probably gets few or no orders.
4) GDLS may get orders for RG31.
5) Force Dynamics gets the remaining orders. Given that Force Protection has announced that they can deliver 12,100 vehicles by December 2008, and has the best vehicle, it seems likely that the Defense Department will at least in part take them up on the offer and provide Force Dynamics with the remaining orders. The remaining orders might be larger than expected depending on which vehicles did not pass testing.
The Defense Department would be under a lot of political pressure if they don't provide Force Protection with enough orders to continue ramping up if other vehicles perform poorly in Iraq and Afghanistan. The question will be asked is why didn't they buy as many vehicles as possible from their proven vendor? Therefore, I think it is extremely likely that FD gets some very large orders in July or early August at the latest.
nice summarization:
THE OFFICIAL BLOGSITE OF BIG CAPITAL ADVISORS LTD
Thursday, June 07, 2007
FRPT gets Whacked: It's Time To Scale Back In
Force Protection is doing just fine thank you. Revenues & profits are growing at over 300% compounded annually. They make the worlds gold standard of MRAP vehicles.
The demand for MRAPS is growing exponentially to the point where the entire MRAP pie has grown from a few thousand vehicles to around 23,000 vehicles. In addition FRPT's Cheetah is the odds on leader in the race to replace all the 170,000 Humvees around the world
So what the heck has caused FRPT's price to hit an all time high of $31 only to drop to $23.88? The simple answer is fear of competition.
Early this year we were told that nine companies would be supplying their vehicles to the DOD's Aberdeen IED testing grounds. It was understood at the time that FRPT's vehicles had a technological moat around them that all but BAE systems (to some extent) could not overcome.
Now that the testing period is over, we will find out just how wide that moat is. In my opinion, FRPT's technological moat is insurmountable. However, that might not matter to our Defense Department because even at FRPT's great growth rate, FRPT can not possibly produce all the MRAPs required to protect our troops. As a consequence, the armed services might have to order some lesser quality vehicles from FRPT's competitors. Hopefully these vehicles will be able to protect our troops. Let's face it, anything is better than a Humvee.
We know that FRPT has continued to ramp up production and has guaranteed that with GD they can produce over 12,000 vehicles by December 2008. FRPT's management has repeatedly stated that the DOD has told them that they will get all the orders that they can produce. That all but insures that FRPT's revenues will more than triple again, exceeding $2 billion in 2008.
So now back down to Earth with my analysis. FRPT is growing faster than any company in America and will get contracts for all the vehicles they can produce. In all reality, the Defense Department has no choice in the matter, because they can not afford to fool around with our troop's lives.
Nevertheless, it is obvious that other contractors will be given some business. The confusion caused by the recent lull in orders, the stock market's wipeout, some insider sales, and the award of a large contract to NAV has caused a shakeout in FRPT's share price.
It is my belief that NAV will have a hard time proving that it can deliver high quality MRAPs on time. There is something fishy about how the NAV contract was awarded out of the blue with the aid of Senator Trent Lott. It is also my understanding that BAE systems is having a hard time passing the tests at Aberdeen.
It should be noted that in past times of war, the DOD has ordered other contractors to produce the DOD's preferred vehicle. Hence, it would be logical for the military to force all vendors to use FRPT's technology under a licensing or subcontract arrangement with FRPT
In short, it's time to fasten your seat belts because many major questions are going to be answered by month's end. Next week we have the GD investor conference. On June 21st FRPT will hold it's annual meeting. Lastly, we are about to hear from the DOD about who is going to be awarded MRAP contracts and how much of the pie FRPT is going to get.
Oh yes, there is the strong possibility that GD will buy FRPT lock stock & barrel. So it's time to scale back in to the portion of the FRPT shares that we sold in the high twenties.
http://bigcapitaladvisors.blogspot.com/2007/06/frpt-gets-whacked-its-time-to-scale.html
Favorable. It is more than I imagined or hoped for. It has been FRPT's secret that DoD has quietly been buying every vehicle they can produce. If DoD continues to buy every vehicle FRPT can produce it would be a business coup. Because of the competition and size of the budget proposal. My business goal for FRPT was a 1 billion dollar year, a 2 billion dollar year seems possible and optomistic.
All the negativity is being generated waiting to see what the competion is going to do. Still long and strong but vindication will not come until the Fiscal 2008 budget in October in my opinion.
This is a forward move.
The Philadelphia Stock Exchange To Begin Trading Nine New Options On Tuesday, June 12
Force Protection, Inc. (option/stock symbol: QFZ/FRPT) will trade on the March expiration cycle with initial expiration months of June, July, September and December. Position and exercise limits have been set at 250,000 contracts.
http://www.exchange-handbook.co.uk/index.cfm?section=news&action=detail&id=67504
Its not blind ambition. Looks like they are moving forward to 400 and 800 vehicles per month.
General Dynamics to Expand Alabama Operations
Tuesday June 12, 4:15 pm ET
Company to add 270 employees and lease facility in Oxford
STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich., June 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD - News), will establish assembly operations for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in Anniston and Oxford, Ala., and beginning mid-June will increase employment there by 270. In addition, General Dynamics will invest approx. $2.6 million in capital improvements to the facilities.
The main production site for assembly of MRAP vehicles will employ 220 new workers in an 80,000 square-foot leased portion of a BR Williams-owned building in Oxford. A supporting production site in Building 169, on Anniston Army Depot, will employ 50 new workers. General Dynamics Land Systems currently employs 240 workers on the depot building Fox and Stryker combat vehicles.
The assembly operations are being created to support a $244.5 million work order awarded on April 30 by Force Protection, Inc. (Nasdaq: FRPT - News) to assist with the production of 1,000 vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program. Force Protection and General Dynamics have formed a joint venture, Force Dynamics, to share in the production and program management of the contract. The Alabama sites will add production capacity for Force Protection's Category I 4x4 and Category II 6x6 Cougar vehicles.
Anniston Army Depot will partner with General Dynamics and perform a share of the MRAP work. General Dynamics also contracted with BR Williams to operate a warehouse in Oxford to support the new production operations.
General Dynamics currently employs approximately 700 workers throughout Alabama. These new positions will increase total General Dynamics employment in the state to nearly 1,000.
General Dynamics, headquartered in Falls Church, Va., employs approximately 82,600 people worldwide and had 2006 revenues of $24.1 billion. More information about the company is available online at www.generaldynamics.com.
Source: General Dynamics Land Systems
JAGfn Rumors
Tuesday , June 12, 2007 10:48ET
Jun 12, 2007 (JAGfn.com via COMTEX) -- (FRPT) (GD) Rumor that GEN DYNAMICS CP (NYSE:GD) will make a bid for FORCE PROTECTION INC (NasdaqCM:FRPT). Price whispered to be in the $40's.
Copyright 2007 JAGfn.com All Rights Reserved
That makes two places in town.
Rumors
Sponsored by:
Market Rumors 06/12
06-12-2007 03:26:25 PM
Market Rumors:
Investment Technology Group Inc. (NYSE: ITG): 6.2% holder D. E. Shaw disclosed a letter to the company saying, the time is right for the Board to evaluate strategic alternatives to realize shareholder value, including a sale of some or all of ITG's businesses to a strategic or financial buyer.
Seagate Technology (NYSE: STX): Takeover speculation.
Massey Energy Company (NYSE: MEE): Completed its strategic review process with no deal.
Force Protection Inc. (Nasdaq: FRPT): Renewed takeover speculation.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Rumors/Market+Rumors/2468171.html
June 13, 2007 - 9:57 AM EDT
Force Protection to Join Russell 3000 Index
LADSON, S.C., June 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Force Protection (Nasdaq: FRPT), the first company to bring lifesaving, mine-resistant, ambush- protected vehicles (MRAPs) to U.S. troops in combat, and the only company whose MRAP vehicles have a proven track record of saving soldiers' lives in the battlefield, has announced that the company has been added to the Russell(R) 3000 Index, according to a preliminary list of additions issued by Frank Russell Company.
Force Protection's inclusion into the Russell 3000 index will occur when the index formally reconstitutes its family of U.S. indices on June 22nd, according to the Russell website. The Russell 3000 Index measures the performance of the 3,000 largest U.S. companies based on total market capitalization.
Membership in the broad-market Russell 3000 remains in place for one year. It also means automatic inclusion in additional Russell indices. Russell determines membership for its equity indices primarily by objective, market capitalization rankings, and style attributes.
'Force Protection's inclusion in the Russell 3000 is truly a milestone for our growing company,' said Force Protection Chief Financial Officer Michael S. Durski. 'Our company's inclusion in the Russell 3000 will further enhance Force Protection's visibility with investors, and with the institutions that rely on the Russell indices as part of their investment strategies. Moreover, this milestone reaffirms our commitment to getting as many of our lifesaving trucks into the hands of U.S. troops as quickly as possible.
'Russell indices are widely used by investment managers and institutional investors for index funds, and as benchmarks for both passive and active investment strategies. Investment managers who oversee these funds purchase shares of member stocks according to the company's weighting in that particular index. The combined market capitalization of stocks in the Russell 3000, which reflects about 98% of the U.S. equity universe, has increased more than $3 trillion from $15.3 trillion at this point last year to $18.5 trillion today.
About Force Protection
http://www.forceprotection.net/investors/news.html
Force Protection gains ground
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 16:41ET
By Staff Reporter
NEW YORK, Jun 14, 2007 (AP via COMTEX) -- Force Protection Inc. shares jumped Wednesday after an analyst said the maker of blast-protected vehicles is preparing to ramp up production.
Force Protection is filling a U.S. Marine Corps order for 1,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles. General Dynamics, which has a $244.5 million contract with Force Protection to help complete the order, said Tuesday it is adding 320 jobs and spending $2.6 million on two Alabama facilities connected to that contract.
SunTrust Robinson Humphrey analyst Chris Donaghey said Force Protection is looking to increase its production, and will need to place some large orders to do so. He believes General Dynamics is expecting a larger contract, because the current one is too small to justify what it is spending. "In our opinion, General Dynamics would not be making an investment in these facilities for a 1,000 vehicle contract and we believe this move by General Dynamics implies it expects to see significantly larger awards," the analyst wrote in a client note.
He maintained a "Buy" rating on Force Protection shares, noting that the stock has slipped 23.5 percent since touching a seven-year high on May 22.
Force Protection also said it is being added to the Russell 3000, an index of the 3000 largest publicly traded companies measured by market capitalization.
Shares of Force Protection rose $1.85, or 7.8 percent, to $25.70.
General Dynamics shares added 82 cents to $80.06.
They have to be getting more contracts, maybe a buyout?? GD buyout?
Too much potential here...move to the upside.
Also being added to the Russell 3000, that's got to be good!
SHM is next week. The partnership with General Dynamics (Force Dynamics) has been very quiet. It only makes sense for GD to buy FRPT out.
Look for a LARGE MRAP order soon. FRPT is the only company really producing MRAP vehicles - ones that the DoD really prefer, want, and desperately need.
General Dynamics' Alabama Presence Rises.......
General Dynamics to Expand Alabama Operations, Add Jobs and Revamp Facilities.
Said Monday it would develop vehicle assembly operations in Alabama, bringing in new 270 jobs and $2.6 million for facility improvements.
The main production site for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles will take place in Oxford, Ala., in an 80,000 square-foot leased portion of a building owned by B.R. Williams Trucking.
The other production site will be at the Anniston Army Depot and will employ 50 new workers. General Dynamics Land Systems currently employs 240 workers at that site.
The new positions, expected to be added by mid-month, will increase total General Dynamics employment in Alabama to nearly 1,000.
The operations are being developed to support a $244.5 million contract awarded by Force Protection Inc., in April to develop the vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps, the company said.
Volume: 3,115,358
Avg Vol (3m): 596,374
Technicals
Last Price Quote is:
0.83%above 13-day MA
6.12%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 96
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $1,557.31
P/E Ratio: 52.53
PEG Ratio: 1.42697
Next Earnings: 08/14/2007
Last Analyst Rating: Overweight
Nice move today, hopefully it will continue.
Right now it is vulnerable to budget timing. They have enough budgeted for the next four months and amstocks may be right about one more contract to pad the production backlog until Fiscal 2008 in October, then the DoD has been good at sending the contracts right after.
amstocks82 has one other good observation. It has been four months, where is the competition and where are their vehicles? We have seen nothing but FRPT/GD displaying their production plan. Is the competition going to show? Is the competition going to deliver?
This is what the DoD was thinking three weeks ago. Are they bargaining or negotiating for something different? Is that why production went from 400 to 800? Where is that 2008 budget? Which may show something this month as MRAP is still a number one priority.
inside defense.com
16 may 07
Army Eyes $10 Billion in Procurement Cuts to Fund Larger MRAP Fleet
By Jason Sherman
......The size of the bill ultimately depends on how many MRAP vehicles the Army decides to procure each year -- and those purchases may be limited by industry's ability to deliver the new fleet. An internal Pentagon industrial assessment pegs the maximum MRAP procurement rate at 977 a month by the end of this year.
inside defense.com
16 may 07
Army Eyes $10 Billion in Procurement Cuts to Fund Larger MRAP Fleet
By Jason Sherman
The Army is looking to slash as much as $10 billion from its procurement accounts to pay for a larger fleet of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, setting off a round of budget drills that could throw its modernization goals into chaos and trigger a wave of program terminations and delays, according to Defense Department officials.
In a bid to find between $8 billion and $10 billion for a down payment on as many as 15,000 additional MRAP vehicles requested by commanders in Iraq, the Army is considering options for financing a sizable portion of the new armored fleet program within its base budget, according to sources familiar with closely held spending deliberations.
"Everything else we had planned is now second priority," said a Pentagon official.
This hunt for new resources is sure to compound Army budget challenges and could test the viability of high-priority projects, such as an effort by Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, to accelerate the service's end strength increase -- an undertaking widely expected to produce a bill requiring billions of additional dollars.
"They are going to break the Army further to fund MRAP," said an industry official familiar with internal budget drills.
Until now, the quick-moving MRAP program was focused on procuring 7,774 vehicles -- 2,500 of which were for the Army -- largely through supplemental appropriations. Because MRAP is not a program of record and was regarded as a requirement unique to needs in Iraq, it was funded outside the service's base budget.
On May 2, however, Defense Secretary Robert Gates designated MRAP the Pentagon's highest priority acquisition program. Gates, in a memo to Pentagon leaders, also implicitly expressed concern that the Army was not buying enough of the vehicles.
"The earlier plan was 2,500 and that's not enough. I can't tell you the exact number at this point, but it's going to grow considerably," Pete Geren, the acting Army secretary, told reporters May 10.
That same day, Army leaders advanced a proposal for increasing its MRAP requirement from 2,500 to more than 8,000 vehicles. However, officials familiar with the situation say the service faced stiff political pressure to increase its requirement further.
Army leaders are now looking at options for funding the bulk of the more than 17,700 MRAP vehicles that commanders in Iraq, as first reported by InsideDefense.com, have requested inside the service's base budget, a move expected to siphon resources from other programs and delay funding for others.
"I don't know how the Army does that," the industry official said.
The MRAP budget drills are expected to affect the Army's fiscal year 2009 budget proposal, which is under construction, as well as the FY-08 supplemental spending request and the base budget proposal now before Congress. It may also affect the FY-07 budget, which is being executed.
The size of the bill ultimately depends on how many MRAP vehicles the Army decides to procure each year -- and those purchases may be limited by industry's ability to deliver the new fleet. An internal Pentagon industrial assessment pegs the maximum MRAP procurement rate at 977 a month by the end of this year.
In the hunt for funds to pay for MRAP, Army leaders are expected to fight to protect its top modernization priority, the Future Combat System, from cuts, Pentagon officials said.
Should the Army find funds to buy the entire 17,700 MRAPs now under consideration, the total MRAP program size would more than triple and drive the total price tag to more than $24 billion.
This is why I am saying this month.
..........Defense industry officials are closely eyeing which vehicle the Army, which will be the largest MRAP buyer, will select. The stakes for that contract award - which could come as soon as this month - are high. Army Secretary Pete Geren, in a memo last month, said "the Army's intent is to minimize the variants of MRAP vehicles it acquires, thereby reducing sustainment and training costs.".......
Entire article.
insidedefense.com
07 june 07
Army Leaders Due in Iraq to Add Up MRAP Needs; Program Could Grow Even Larger
By Jason Sherman
Army leaders are heading to Iraq and Kuwait on a mission to determine exactly how many Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles the service needs, an assessment that could propel the total size of the MRAP program well beyond 23,000 vehicles and the price tag north of $23 billion, according to defense sources.
Adm. Edmund Giambastiani, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon's top requirements officer, said in an interview with InsideDefense.com that he expects the results of the Army's analysis to be considered by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council - which he chairs – "in the next month."
A high-level team from the Department of the Army, according to a source familiar with the plan, is scheduled "within the week" to head to Baghdad and meet with top brass at Multi-National Corps Iraq, who earlier this year asked the Pentagon for 17,700 MRAP vehicles, enough to replace every armored humvee used by Army personnel in Iraq.
The Army's deputy chief of staff for operations and plans office plans to review that requirement as well as the attendant plans for employing the new vehicles. The size of the requirement is expected - with possible minor revisions - to be endorsed, according to Pentagon officials. "On top of that number, as any prudent Army planners would do, we will account for anticipated losses, for having an operational reserve fleet, both forward as well as in the rear in depots," said the source familiar with the trip's goal. "And we've got to account for training both in home station as well as in the institutional Army."
Defense industry officials are closely eyeing which vehicle the Army, which will be the largest MRAP buyer, will select. The stakes for that contract award - which could come as soon as this month - are high. Army Secretary Pete Geren, in a memo last month, said "the Army's intent is to minimize the variants of MRAP vehicles it acquires, thereby reducing sustainment and training costs."
Commandant of Marine Corps visits FPI (taken from Yahoo board)
http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/0/0D74FE36F9C331BF852572F90072DF60?opendocument
CHARLESTON, S.C. (June 14, 2007) -- The commandant of the Marine Corps met with assembly-line workers June 9 to observe production of the new troop-carrying trucks designed to withstand Long War punishment.
The production plant, owned by Force Protection Industries, has delivered hundreds of mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles to American troops in the Middle East.
About 1,000 plant employees are outfitting Marines fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan with dozens of MRAP vehicles each month.
"I wanted to look them in the eye, personally thank them and let them know that plenty of Marines are counting on them," said Gen. James T. Conway, proclaiming the company was truly mobilized and focused on saving American lives.
The Marine Corps currently drives two models: the 9-foot-tall "Cougar," and the hefty "Buffalo," weighing more than 22 short tons. The cost per troop-carrying truck ranges from $480,000 to $790,000.
"These vehicles are going to save lives." said Conway. "A Marine riding in a mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle is less likely to be killed or injured when engaged by an enemy employing the same type of improvised explosive device that would rip through the undercarriage of an up-armored humvee."
The difference between humvees and MRAP vehicles is a V-shaped hull that deflects an explosion instead of absorbing the impact.
Conway also test-drove a "Cheetah" prototype designed for reconnaissance and urban operations and able to sustain highway speeds up to 75 mph.
"If it proves itself through further testing, the Cheetah will offer the same survivability rates as its predecessors," said Conway. "But it's also designed to be relevant beyond Iraq."
Force Protection Industries plans to have 1,000 MRAP vehicles delivered to the Marine Corps by March 2008.
"Everyone at the company enjoys and takes great pride in their work," said Carrie Reavenell, a welder and fitter. "Other people send care packages; we send care trucks."
A rumor that something is coming down the pipeline.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=aZmnLinGMC6M
General Dynamics, Force Protection May Win Award Soon (Update1)
By Edmond Lococo
June 14 (Bloomberg) -- General Dynamics Corp., the largest maker of armored vehicles for the U.S. military, said its joint venture with Force Protection Inc. may win an additional award for blast-proof trucks ``very soon.''
The venture will deliver about 85 vehicles this month under existing contracts for 1,125 of the trucks, Dave Heebner, president of General Dynamics's land systems division, said at its investor conference today. He didn't comment on the potential size or value of the next award.
The U.S. Marine Corps is leading the military effort to buy the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, and may spend $8.4 billion over two years for as many as 7,700. Demand from all services could rise to as many as 23,000 vehicles as the Pentagon rushes them to troops in Iraq, Heebner said.
``The requirement for these vehicles is well understood now because of threats in theater,'' Heebner said. ``It's a battle tested and proven vehicle.''
The joint venture is increasing production capacity to meet customer requirements, he said, without giving details. General Dynamics said this week it will invest $2.6 million and add 270 workers at facilities in Alabama, which will eventually have capacity to produce 80 trucks a month. General Dynamics also works on the vehicles in Lima, Ohio.
The joint venture has so far been able to exceed its production commitments to the U.S. military, Heebner said, without giving details.
Biggest Issue
The biggest issue for increasing the venture's production is long lead times with suppliers of parts including steel, axles and tires, he said. From time of contract, it takes about six months to begin vehicle delivery, due to order times for parts, he said.
``Getting a commitment from the customer is the key first step in the process,'' Heebner said. ``As soon as the customer makes that commitment, then for us it's generally six months from contract to out-the-door.''
Shares of Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics fell 15 cents to $80.04 at 4:20 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. They have gained 7.7 percent so far this year. Force Protection, based in Ladson, South Carolina, added 29 cents, or 1.2 percent, to $25.54 in Nasdaq Stock Market trading.
And waiting.
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/06/18/force-protection-mission-configurable-armored-vehicles/
Force Protection: Mission configurable armored vehicles
Posted Jun 18th 2007 3:45PM by Larry Schutts
Filed under: Rumors, Technical Analysis
Put simply, modern warfare and security operations require high quality blast- and mine-protected vehicles. One of the best known producers of such vehicles is headquartered in Ladson, South Carolina.
Force Protection (NASDAQ: FRPT) is engaged in the manufacture of ballistic and blast protected vehicles. The company's products are used to protect personnel during transport, removal of unexploded ordnance, route clearance, humanitarian de-mining, and other missions that require protection from landmines and hostile fire. Customers include the U.S. Department of Defense, the Iraqi Army and the British military.
Investors were pleased last week, when the stock gained ground on takeover rumors and on word it would be added to the Russell 3000 Index (June 22). There was also speculation that the firm was preparing to ramp up work activities, when vehicle production sub-contractor General Dynamics (GD) committed to spending $2.6 million on two Alabama facilities connected to its contract. The stock popped through 50-day and 30-day moving average resistance on the news and subsequently began defining a bullish "flag" consolidation pattern. Prices frequently exit flags moving in the same direction they were traveling when they entered them. In this case, that would be to the upside.
Brokers recommend the issue with three "strong buys" and one "buy." Analysts expect a 128% growth rate through the next year. The FRPT Sales Growth rate (187.79%), EPS Growth rate (209.10%), Return on Assets (12.66%), Return on Investment (19.13%) and Return on Equity (20.46%) compare favorably with industry, sector and S&P 500 averages.
Institutional investors hold about 52% of the outstanding shares. Over the past 52 weeks, the stock has traded between $4.50 and $31.16. A stop-loss of $23.25 looks good here. Note that the firm will conduct its 2007 Annual Shareholders' Meeting on June 21st (10 am ET).
Larry Schutts is a contributing editor for Theflyonthewall.com and the Vice-President of Stockwinners.com.
Afterhours and Congratualations amstocks82 you are on target.
Elsewhere, Force Protection Inc. shares rose $1.21, or 4.7 percent, to $27 in aftermarket trading, on news that the company was awarded a $221.7 million deal from the U.S. Navy for 396 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicles.
In regular trading earlier, Force Protection shares declined $1.27, or 4.7 percent, to $25.79.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4903704.html
June 19, 2007, 6:18PM
Aftermarket Movers: Clarcor Climbs
© 2007 The Associated Press
NEW YORK — Shares of Clarcor Inc. rose in aftermarket electronic trading Tuesday, after the maker of industrial and automotive filters said its fiscal second-quarter profit jumped on sales growth.
The company reported income of 41 cents per share for the quarter ended June 2, compared with the 37 cents per share anticipated by analysts polled by Thomson Financial.
Results were also helped by easy comparisons from a year-ago quarter weighed down by a one-time charge.
The results, along with a fiscal 2007 outlook above Wall Street predictions, sent Clarcor shares up $1.60, or 4.7 percent, to $35.90 in aftermarket trading, after they rose 52 cents to $34.30 in the regular session.
Aftermarket indicators suggested a mixed opening for the major indexes on Tuesday.
Also on the rising side, IHS Inc. shares gained $3.22, or 7.2 percent, to $47.80. During the regular session, they added 50 cents to $44.58.
IHS, which supplies technical information to the energy, engineering, automotive and other industries, raised its full-year revenue forecast above Wall Street's expectations after posting strong second-quarter results.
IHS also reported its second-quarter profit rose sharply on strong sales, which topped analyst expectations.
Elsewhere, Force Protection Inc. shares rose $1.21, or 4.7 percent, to $27 in aftermarket trading, on news that the company was awarded a $221.7 million deal from the U.S. Navy for 396 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicles.
In regular trading earlier, Force Protection shares declined $1.27, or 4.7 percent, to $25.79.
On the losing side, shares of FSI International Inc., which makes equipment for microelectronics fabrication, declined after the company said its fiscal third-quarter loss more than doubled.
Results widely missed Wall Street expectations, sending shares down 37 cents, or 9.3 percent, to $3.60 in after-hours trading. In regular trading earlier, shares lost 4 cents to $3.97.
FSI said it expects a fourth-quarter loss, and forecast sales below Wall Street expectations.
Also declining were shares of Darden Restaurants Inc., which operates the Olive Garden and Red Lobster restaurant chains.
Darden swung to a fiscal fourth-quarter loss hurt by losses from discontinued operations related to the closing of certain restaurants. Sales edged higher, but still came in below Wall Street expectations.
The stock fell $2.30, or 4.9 percent, to $44.55 in aftermarket trading, after losing 23 cents to $46.85 in the regular session.
Two places. See you tomorrow.
See: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=acno0ZXOVQsg
Force Protection Wins $221.7 Million for Blast-Resistant Trucks
By Edmond Lococo
June 19 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., the first company to deliver blast-resistant trucks to U.S. troops in combat, won a $221.7 million order to build more of the vehicles as the Pentagon speeds delivery to forces in Iraq.
Force Protection will make 455 of the trucks under the latest award, the Defense Department said in a statement today. Work on the vehicles will be completed by December 2008.
Force Protection's trucks have been used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in limited quantities since 2003, and their safety record prompted the U.S. Marine Corps to begin a wider procurement effort in January. The Marines are leading purchases of the vehicles for the military and may spend as much as $8.4 billion for 7,700 trucks over the next two years.
The raised chassis and V-shaped hull of the vehicles makes them four times safer than traditional flat-bottomed trucks, according to the Marine Corps. Homemade bombs are the leading cause of U.S. deaths in Iraq, accounting for 61 percent of the 2,793 fatalities in Iraq as of May 19, according to Pentagon data.
The Marine Corps formally began the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, or MRAP, program in January when it awarded prototype development contracts to nine truck makers. Since then, six of those companies have received production awards. The Marines ordered trucks valued at more than $1.3 billion between Jan. 26 and May 31.
Today's award adds to two earlier orders to Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection for its Cougar trucks, a contract on Feb. 14 for $67.4 million to build 125 trucks and one on April 23 for $481.4 million to make 1,000.
Joint Venture
Force Protection shares production of the Cougar with General Dynamics Corp., the largest maker of armored vehicles for the U.S. military. The two companies established their joint venture, called Force Dynamics, in November.
Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics is also building a second truck, the RG-31, for the MRAP program.
The other companies with production contracts for MRAP vehicles include London-based BAE Systems Plc; Oshkosh Truck Corp. of Oshkosh, Wisconsin; Navistar International Corp.'s International Military and Government LLC unit in Warrenville, Illinois; and closely held Protected Vehicles Inc. in North Charleston, South Carolina.
Shares of Force Protection fell $1.27, or 4.7 percent, to $25.79 at 4:30 p.m. in Nasdaq Stock Market trading.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] .
I was watching a congressional hearing where a committee was questioning the secretary of the army. he was asked about modernizing the army's equipment.
for what it is worth, three things stood out:
(as paraphrased by me)
1. Q Will the MRAP program be useful after the Iraq conflict?
A Yes, Any future conflicts will likely be similar to Irag in that hey would involve urban warfare.
2. Q How is the MRAP program progressing?
A-1 we are moving as fast as possible.
A-2 We are looking in particular at the capacity for the ability for customization, in particular, a vehicle capable of carrying add-on armor. The vehicle chassis needs to be capable of carrying the extra weight.
Though the testing is complete they are still looking at designs. That means they are negotiating with vendors about upgrades and options. And that they have decided on a key design feature.
That would explain the delay in contracts after testing. The manufacturers are trying to correct their bid to the proposal. And the DoD may have narrowed the field.
And it would explain the drop in FRPT. What and when is the competition going to show up with, and how much of a compromise it will be to FRPT?
The positive note for FRPT is that the Marines are still buying every vehicle they can produce. And when the 2008 budget comes through DoD will be able to decide how much of 200, 300, 400, and 800 vehicles per month they will contract for and buy from FRPT.
Its target maximum production and probably FRPT's peak target price.
Our Cheetah as a dark horse is looking like it has legs. With its primary manufacturing facilities to be announced, and those other vendors still working on their vehicles and proposals and the DoD still waiting , though qualification testing is complete.
Those 4,506 vehicles still to be contracted this year and the 4 billion dollars in the 2008 budget for MRAP looks like a feast is coming, just who will be invited.
http://www.forbes.com/home/markets/2007/06/22/force-protection-capacity-markets-equity-cx_er_0621markets12.html
Competitors beware, Force Protection is prepared to win the lion's share of government contracts for armored vehicles. Within the next two weeks, the company is expected to announce the opening of new factories that will substantially boost its capacity.
According to a person familiar with the situation, the company's new factories, which will open later this year, will focus on the Cheetahs, a new line of armored vehicles that are lighter and more mobile than Force Protection 's popular Cougar line. Because of its size, the Cheetah is an attractive replacement candidate for the Humvee. The army has already indicated that a top priority is replacing the entire Humvee fleet— 17,700 vehicles— in Iraq with armored vehicles that can stand up better to mines, improvised explosive devices and rocket-propelled grenades.
Once the factories are up and running, they should be able to churn out 200 vehicles a month.
Remember the May 18th General Conway interview:
Q I just wanted to follow up on the MRAP. There's some downsides. It's -- as far as I understand -- a slower vehicle than the humvee, it's a bigger vehicle, it's not a vehicle particularly suited for off road. I mean are we spending all this money, all this procurement effort, on a vehicle that has a very specific use that may be well-suited to the current battle, but by the time we actually have these vehicles built, we will have gotten something that won't be as useful in the next battle?
GEN. CONWAY: I don't know that any of those things you said are accurate. Now, you got three different sizes of MRAPS, and yeah, the largest size is larger than the humvee, okay? But the one that we're most interested in comes as a replacement to the humvee. If you checked our buy, we've got a couple thousand and more that are going to be replacements for the humvee. And it certainly has to have an off-road capability. It will do anything that the humvee will do.
The General is definitely aware of the Cheetah. When he said "it" and not "they", he had in mind only one vehicle - and that's the Cheetah!
http://www.forbes.com/home/markets/2007/06/22/force-protection-capacity-markets-equity-cx_er_0621markets12.html
Market Scan
Force Protection Goes On The Offensive
Evelyn M. Rusli, 06.22.07, 12:40 PM ET
Competitors beware, Force Protection is prepared to win the lion's share of government contracts for armored vehicles. Within the next two weeks, the company is expected to announce the opening of new factories that will substantially boost its capacity.
According to a person familiar with the situation, the company's new factories, which will open later this year, will focus on the Cheetahs, a new line of armored vehicles that are lighter and more mobile than Force Protection 's popular Cougar line. Because of its size, the Cheetah is an attractive replacement candidate for the Humvee. The army has already indicated that a top priority is replacing the entire Humvee fleet— 17,700 vehicles— in Iraq with armored vehicles that can stand up better to mines, improvised explosive devices and rocket-propelled grenades.
Once the factories are up and running, they should be able to churn out 200 vehicles a month. That ramp-up will more than double Force Protection's current in-house capacity levels. For comparison, in 2006, Force Protection made 300 vehicles for the entire year.
Under the government's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program, the Army is expected to award contracts to produce 23,000 armored vehicles, about 7,700 of which will be awarded this year. For a company that is competing with a handful of manufacturers to bag the most contracts, capacity level is crucial. Force Protection's vehicles have had stellar performance on the field but the government has repeatedly told manufacturers that the bulk of the orders will go to companies that can deliver quantity as well as quality.
Force Protection currently has a 55% share of the orders, but its stock has rocked wildly in recent months as competitors nip at its heels. Shares of Force Protection fell 3.0%, or 70 cents, to $23.05 in afternoon trading on Friday.
Many analysts expect Force Protection to retain a large share of the market but other armored vehicle players, such as BAE Systems and Oshkosh Truck, should also win major contracts. There is also the threat of unexpected dark horses, such as Navistar. Last month, the government awarded a $623 million contract to Navistar, which was widely considered an unlikely competitor. (See: "Competition Saps Force Protection." )
Force Protection remains optimistic that it will be able to ramp up production to meet the military's needs. It has a major partnership with General Dynamics and subcontract deals with Armor Holdings and Spartan Motors' chassis unit to manufacture vehicles.
Under a joint venture with General Dynamics, Force Protection will be able to deliver 12,100 vehicles between July 2007 and December 2008, Michael Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president for sales, told Forbes.com earlier this month. "We have reason to be wildly optimistic that we will receive more orders," he said. "We have passed the test, we have more than quadrupled production and we are ahead on all the contracts we are on right now."
The market hasn't figured this one out yet.......
Excellent long term prospects.
Until the real MRAP contracts get awarded. As was noted previously, this is an award under the previous contract. While buying shares is the safer bet, check out the July 25 and 30 calls. Decent bets in the short term.
90% of DOD budget now for MRAP vehicles.
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles are the military's first choice for replacing the HumVee death-traps... ;)
Marines and Army buy everything they can build, and they can't sell to Canada and others, even with strong demand, until U.S. gets all they need... ;D
I recently read an artice which said the Marines had ordered more than the Army, but the pressure was on the Army to get the upgraded vehicles in action. I expect some big orders soon and a resulting appreciation in the stock price.... ;)
Volume: 7,648,843
Avg Vol (3m): 596,374
HEADLINES: Force Protection Inc. Gets Contract
Thursday , June 21, 2007 05:17ET
Jun 21, 2007 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- InvestorIM has been created as a tool for the average investor. The idea is simple, a website where the world can communicate. Do you have a stock related question, then why not ask 50,000 individual members? Are you a shareholder of Force Protection Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT)? Join the many members engaged in this stock right now. Come see for yourself at www.investorim.com for your complimentary subscription.
Force Protection Inc. said Wednesday June 20, 2007 it received a $221 million contract from the Marine Corps to produce 455 vehicles for its mine-resistant ambush protected program.
Force Protection, which makes mine- and blast-protected vehicles, will supply 395 Category I Cougar 4X4 and 60 Category II Cougar 6X6 vehicles.
Production is targeted for completion by the end of next year. The pact is the fourth order Force Protection has received under the program.
Questions or comments about this story should be directed to AP Financial News at 212-621-7190
I will hold FRPT long and strong
let me quote amstocks82 again:
Order Predictions for FRPT
My belief is that FRPT and the Force Dynamics (FD) joint venture is in very good shape for additional orders for several reasons:
1) My belief is that all companies that have passed testing have gotten orders. So far, the Cougar and Navistar MaxxPro have gotten follow on orders and therefore passed testing. The MaxxPro still may not pass the second and third round of testing and so far there are no MaxxPros delivered to the military for shipment to Iraq. That is all in the future.
2) Several companies requested either a delay to deliver their vehicles past the delivery deadline or time to fix problems with their vehicles that were discovered in testing. Rumors from BAE and the industry have been that BAE failed testing and received time to fix their vehicle. It was expected that BAE would have been able to make changes and for their vehicle to pass testing. However, BAE is not commenting on this and has not recently stated that their vehicle was able to pass. Conclusion – no reason to believe BAE's RG-33 has passed testing as of yet.
3) The Cougar ramp-up consists of several companies which are producing Cougars or part of Cougars. GD, Force Protection, Armored Holdings, Ultra, Spartan and possibly other partners are churning out Cougars or doing major parts of the work. The Cougar ramp-up began months ago and this puts the Cougar ramp-up ahead of other competitors.
The current status is that there are two vehicles that passed the first round of testing. That is the Cougar and the MaxxPro.
The other vehicles might at some point in the future pass after making changes. Until the other manufacturers are able to make changes and pass testing, they are in no position to order parts to make vehicles to begin their ramp-up.
GDLS claimed it takes about six months to order the steel to make the vehicles. The MaxxPro may require less time as they don't need the type of armor steel that most vendors need. The MaxxPro uses add on armor placed over a regular steel frame.
If the other manufacturers are not able to order their parts and steel yet, it will be extremely difficult for them to have any meaningful ramp-up. This means is that the military has few options other than the Cougar for many of the additional Category II orders.
If Force Protection is to make 12,100 vehicles between July 2007 and December 2008, then they need to get more orders soon to begin ordering the vehicles.
The above reasoning is why I believe there are the "rumors" of large orders in the works for Force Protection. I don't think there are any leaks about orders from the military procurement people.
Based on conversations I have had with various people in the Army, all of those I talked to are very excited about the Cheetah. Army officials in the few comments about the Cheetah also expressed considerable excitement about it. It is a relatively inexpensive vehicle that is fast, maneuverable, and can survive in a 360 degree battlefield. When Force Protection begins making large numbers of these vehicles, I believe the military will purchase everyone that they can make.
The current backlog attributable to Force Protection if the already announced Buffalo order is added to backlog is approximately $800 million. This does not include any orders for Cheetahs or account for all the vehicles Force Protection can build in 2007. My estimate is that Force Protection will have revenue for 2007 in excess of 1 billion dollars. This would be a 5X increase in orders over 2006.
amstocks82 again (thanx buddy!):
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Disaster at BAE
In June 2006, it was announced that BAE won the contract to build the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle (ILAV) for the Iraqi army and police. BAE would be building a "Cougar" vehicle designed by Force Protection, Inc. Force Protection and BAE would split the contract each manufacturing half the vehicles but Force Protection would get 100% of the maintenance and parts for the contract and would retain all rights to the Cougar design.
Reportedly, the relationship between BAE and Force Protection began to deteriorate. There are various rumors why this might be but none have been confirmed. It is rumored that BAE tried to purchase Force Protection in 2006 but by the time the BAE bid was completed and arrived at Force Protection, the offer was ridiculously low. Force Protection's stock price had been increasing rapidly and the BAE bid didn't take that into account.
Another possible source of problems is that BAE provided a low bid on the manufacture of the ILAV. Force Protection with their greater experience manufacturing Cougars was able to make a slim profit on the ILAV and a much larger profit on the maintenance and spare parts. BAE is rumored to have lost money on the deal.
The RG33 might be another possible source of anger between BAE and Force Protection. A few months after the relationship between BAE and Force Protection was begun, BAE introduced the RG33 which looks remarkably like the Force Protection Cougar -- so much alike that BAE was rumored to be considering using Spartan Motors Inc., for the Chassis work. Spartan does much of the Chassis work for Force Protection.
It can't be confirmed whether or not BAE reverse engineered the Cougar and provided their own version of the vehicle or if the vehicle simply by chance looked much like the Cougar. But the problem for BAE is that the Cougar and Buffalo use technology that Force Protection owns or has exclusive foreign manufacturing licenses from South Africa for. Therefore BAE can't use part of the designs.
BAE submitted their RG33 prototypes to the US military for phase 1 testing with the likely expectation that they would pass with flying colors. The problem is that the vehicles were submitted months ago and all vehicles that passed testing have received follow on contracts. BAE has not gotten such a contract.
Unconfirmed rumors were that the RG33 failed testing at the US military testing range at Aberdeen. Several vendors requested time to make changes to their vehicles and fix problems. It is believed that BAE is one of the vendors making that request. After BAE made changes to pass survivability and ballistic testing which are rumored in the main to consist of adding additional armor, it is rumored that the additional armor allowed them to pass survivability and ballistic tests but caused other problems with the vehicle again causing it to fail testing.
BAE has a long history and will likely be able to get the RG33 right in the end, but in the mean time, the US military is rethinking their options. The US military gave BAE the second largest pre-testing order for the RG33. The US military gave initial contracts to the vendors that seemed to have the best chance of passing testing and winning a contract so that they could begin ramping up. Since the RG33 got the second largest order, the US military was counting on purchasing those vehicles but BAE has not delivered a prototype that can pass testing.
The problem for BAE is that the RG31 is a South African Design which they modified mainly by updating the automotive components. BAE didn't design the armor. Therefore, they don't have any experts in designing this type of armor and are hampered by not being able to use some of the design features of the Cougar and Buffalo that Force Protection owns the technology for or has exclusive licenses from South Africa for.
For BAE, getting the RG33 to pass testing is critical. Even though they have no experts, it is likely that they will by "brute force" get a vehicle to pass testing even if they have to add a large amount of additional armor and a larger motor to do it. But this will create other problems for BAE. Adding armor and a larger motor is going to add to the expense of manufacturing this vehicle. The additional weight and associated fuel consumption will make it less attractive to the US military. Since BAE already submitted the bid for the price of the RG33, will BAE once more end up with a money losing contract if they even get one?
Dilemma for the US Military
The US military believed that they could offer contracts to build MRAP vehicles to industry and that industry would provide them with several suitable products. At that point, the military would provide contracts to several of them and production would ramp-up and they would get the vehicles that they need.
Up to now, based on follow on contracts, only two vehicles passed testing -- the Cougar and the Navistar MaxxPro. (The assumption is that there has been sufficient time to award contracts for all vehicles that initially passed testing.)
Navistar does not have any recent experience making armored vehicles and therefore tried another approach. They used a garbage truck chassis which has been in operation for many years and mounted a simple "V" hulled steel crew and passenger capsule on the chassis. Then to make this capsule ballistic and blast resistant, they place advanced composite armor panels on the steel capsule. In addition, the steel capsule is mounted higher in the air than competing designs. This design will be difficult to repair and there is a danger that the capsule will be blasted off the chassis. In addition, the unarmored drive components will make the vehicle very vulnerable to being disabled and unable to move. Therefore, the Navistar MaxxPro is not a vehicle that the military will purchase unless there are political reasons to purchase it or they have no choice because it is better than a Humvee.
The competition for MRAP has not yet worked out as the military will have hoped. Currently they don't have many vendors with a suitable vehicle. This may make it difficult for the military to ignore a recent offer that Force Protection made – they would build 12,100 MRAP vehicles between July 2007 and December 2008. However, to do this, they need additional orders to put the vehicle ramp-up in high gear.
With other vendors unable to provide suitable vehicles, this offer may be one that can't be ignored. Especially since Force Protection vehicles the Cougar and Buffalo have survived more than 2000 IED and mine blasts with only one incident where there were fatalities. The Cougar and Buffalo have great records of being highly reliable and very repairable after a mine or IED blast. This makes the vehicle the unmatched gold standard in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Cheetah – New Directions in Armored Vehicles
The South African Connection
During the long wars and insurgencies in South Africa, new types of vehicles were developed that could protect soldiers and police against mines, IEDs and small arms fire. The most famous of those vehicles is the Casspir vehicle which has been in use for over 20 years.
Leading up to the development of the Casspir and other mine protected vehicles, there were several major innovations. The first was the "V-shaped monocoque" hull. The term "monocoque" in this case refers to a vehicle where the armored shell of the vehicle provides the strength instead of a frame. The second major innovation was in the design of the drive train. The drive train is attached on the outside of the hull instead of through openings in that hull through which the explosive force of mines and IEDs might enter.
The third major innovation is not visible from the outside of the vehicle but added greatly to their toughness. It was the design of the actual steel armor. The armor needed to be both inexpensive and very tough. This was accomplished mainly through the creation of proprietary steel formulas, fabrication methods, and manufacturing techniques.
Current US Armor Designs
Most US armor was designed for use in wars against countries that had large capable military forces. The main focus of the armor was to survive against artillery and direct fire from other armored vehicles. It was not specifically designed to survive against mines and IEDs. However, the overall toughness of the US heavy armored vehicles gives them a great deal of protection. Other typical US equipment such as the Stryker light armored vehicle was designed for the same types of wars that other US armor was designed for except the Stryker is a lighter and faster version of those vehicles with less overall protection.
Vehicles like the Humvee were meant to ferry soldiers and equipment behind the front lines and was not meant for a combat role. Therefore, when terrorists and insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan began using mines and IEDs in larger numbers, the Humvee and other un-armored vehicles were vulnerable to these attacks. Armor was added to the Humvee to improve its protection. Unfortunately, the Humvee was not designed to carry armor and the vehicle body is not shaped such that blasts are easily deflected from it. Therefore, the additional armor to the Humvee is only marginally effective.
New Designs, the Cougar and Buffalo
Most vehicles purchased by the military in the last 40 years were designed to exact specifications. Often, the design process took many years and cost billions of dollars. The results of these design processes are vehicles that fit the current perceived threat and vehicles that usually don't use any common parts and are extremely expensive.
The Cougar and Buffalo are a different "breed" of armored vehicle altogether. The designs were not funded by the US Government but were mainly funded by private investors. Many of the private investors invested specifically because they believed the US military needed vehicles like the Cougar and Buffalo for Iraq and Afghanistan.
The design team at Force Protection, Inc (previously Technical Solutions Group) licensed the best technology from South Africa. They also hired the worlds leading expert on anti-mine and anti-IED technology to lead the design team.
The initial design of the Cougar and Buffalo vehicles were based off of the licensed South African technology. However, the Force Protection design team changed the design to use the most reliable American automotive components available. They also added improvements and technology upgrades making the Cougar and Buffalo superior to the South African vehicles.
The end result is a vehicle that is much tougher and more reliable than the original South African vehicles. This toughness allowed the Cougar and Buffalo to survive over 2000 mine and IED explosions with only one incident involving fatalities. In the one instance with fatalities, the terrorists specially targeted a Buffalo vehicle with an advanced Explosively Formed Projectile (EFP). My belief is that the terrorists received technical assistance from Iran to build that device.
Beyond South African Technology – Enter the Cheetah
The Cheetah is the next step or evolution in anti-mine and anti-IED defense. The Cheetah up-close has a futuristic space-age look with the flowing lines and angles that allow the force of an explosion to pass around the vehicle. The Cheetah does not rely on the South African technology and Force Protection will not have to pay a license fee to South Africa for this vehicle. However, it is able to survive very large IED and Mine blasts similar to a Cougar.
The Cheetah does not use the "V" shaped hull design and instead uses a thick flat wedge shaped bottom designed to allow the explosion to propagate along the ground passing under and around the vehicle.
One of the complaints about the Humvee is that after adding all the extra armor, it is prone to break downs, has terrible fuel efficiency and often convoys of vehicles must stop to refuel it -- sometimes in the worst possible areas. The Cheetah has better fuel efficiency than the Humvee, has a 500 mile range, and because of its extreme toughness, can be used safely for patrols without escorts of other "fighting" vehicles.
The Cheetah has impressive off-road ability and is a suitable vehicle for patrolling in areas where there are no roads. It is small and agile enough to patrol in city areas where the streets are narrow.
The Cheetah was designed to survive current mine and IED threats. However, if the battlefield gets even more deadly, it was designed specifically such that available add-on armor can be added to further enhance the vehicles survivability. Unlike the Humvee, the additional armor will not make it top-heavy and subject to rollovers. The suspension is designed to handle a large amount of additional armor if needed.
The Cheetah is everything the Humvee should have been. It is capable of surviving and keeping soldiers alive in combat. A remote fired machine gun or other weapons can be easily mounted on the roof and firing ports are available for soldiers to fire from inside the vehicle in case of ambush. It is relatively inexpensive so that the US military can afford to purchase many of them. It has the most efficient diesel motor commercially available for a vehicle of its weight. The Cheetah is a vehicle that can provide the much needed tactical mobility to our soldiers that is currently missing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Those who see the Cheetah for the first time may think it is well named. It has a slim sleek look, it is able to climb steep slopes and for an armored vehicle, it is very fast. In truth, it is the "Cheetah" of the armored world.
Force Protection has been hiring workers to manufacture the Cheetah for several months and indicated that they are building new manufacturing areas for it. Force Protection's management has indicated confidence that they will be able to sell Cheetahs to the government when the new factories are up and running. Since there is really no competitive vehicle to the Cheetah, and a replacement to the Humvee is desperately needed in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is likely that they will sell thousands of them and would be a crime if they don't.
This is interesting the JROC which has oversight of the MRAP program in DoD, ranking above the Navy and Marines has given Navistar's 1200 vehicles, that the Marines contracted for, to the Army.
It basically forces the Army to accept this compromise of only field tested prototypes and new unproven production lines. Though International is big with lots of resources new production lines of new products is always a time consuming task. Because being the first time for everything it takes a lot more than anyone thinks.
But it gives International an inside track to the Army MRAP selection process.
Our Cheetah as a dark horse is looking like it has legs. With its primary manufacturing facilities to be announced, and those other vendors still working on their vehicles and proposals and the DoD still waiting , though qualification testing is complete.
Those 4,506 vehicles still to be contracted this year and the 4 billion dollars in the 2008 budget for MRAP looks like a feast is coming, just who will be invited.
The Army is not done yet, 4 billion earmarked in the 2008 budget, but the Army is looking at 10 billion dollars of cuts elsewhere. The Army admits to a bigger need for MRAP and a future for them after Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army selection of decision on which MRAP looks bigger.
Army Eyes $10 Billion in Procurement Cuts to Fund Larger MRAP Fleet
DefenseAlert - 5/16/2007
May 16, 2007 -- The Army is looking to slash as much as $10 billion from its procurement accounts to pay for a larger fleet of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, setting off a round of budget drills that could throw its modernization goals into chaos and trigger a wave of program terminations and delays, according to Defense Department officials.
Cannot post a copy this is a pay site, but here are the teasers. Something is coming this week, I hope.
Pentagon Brass to Determine Scope of MRAP Program this Week
DefenseAlert - 6/25/2007
June 25, 2007 -- Pentagon leaders are expected to nail down the size of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program this week by validating an Army requirement for thousands of additional blast-proof vehicles, a move expected to generate a request to Congress for billions of additional dollars in the fiscal year 2008 supplemental request.
GEREN: ARMY SEES NEED FOR MRAPs BEYOND IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN WARS
Inside the Army - 6/25/2007
The Army sees a continuing need for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle beyond operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren told Senators last week during his confirmation hearing.
DOD Shifts 1,200 MRAPs from Marine Corps to Army (Updated)
DefenseAlert - 6/20/2007
June 20, 2007 -- Amid widespread concern about Army casualties in Baghdad, the Pentagon is diverting 1,200 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles ordered by the Marine Corps to the Army.
Armed With $2 Billion, Marine Corps Readies Big MRAP Awards
DefenseAlert - 6/13/2007
June 13, 2007 -- The first round of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle testing is nearly complete, setting the stage for the Marine Corps to place orders for $2 billion worth of the blast-resistant vehicles with contract awards that could influence the landscape of the tactical wheeled industrial base, according to defense officials and financial analysts.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/defensenewsstand_spclsubj.asp?s=ied
FRPT: Short Interest UP 3.4% to 9.0M in Jun 2007
Tuesday , June 26, 2007 16:33ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 3.4% to 8,994,004 shares for the month ended mid-June, 2007.
SYMBOL MAY JUNE CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 8,695,554 8,994,004 +298,450 +3.43% 3
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 3,297,500, it would require approximately 3 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
&
As of June 21, 2007, Frank Kavanaugh, the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company, resigned as a director.
still holding :o
Expect a hit tomorrow.
BAE Systems gets $212 mln U.S. Navy deal
Thu Jun 28, 2007 5:53 PM ET
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON, June 28 (Reuters) - BAE Systems Plc <BA.L> has won a $212.4 million U.S. Navy order for 271 vehicles designed to withstand roadside bombs in places like Iraq, the Defense Department said on Thursday.
The order was the first of its kind for a BAE unit since the company, headquartered in Farnborough, England, disclosed this week the existence of a U.S. Justice Department anti-corruption investigation that includes its business in Saudi Arabia.
The new order is part of a previously awarded contract that was subject to competition, the Pentagon said in its daily business summary.
Work under the deal is to be performed by BAE Systems Land & Armaments unit in York, Pennsylvania, and is expected to be wrapped up by July 2008, it said.
The order is for so-called Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected Vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps -- a fast-growing market that BAE Systems has been keen to tap.
People familiar with the matter said the Justice Department investigation of BAE Systems centers on alleged violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bars bribes to obtain business.
Citing national security concerns, the British government stopped its own Serious Fraud Office inquiry into an alleged BAE slush fund reportedly used to support multibillion-dollar arms deals with Saudi Arabia in the 1980s.
Simultaneously, the U.S. Justice Department is weighing antitrust considerations raised by BAE's proposed $4.1 billion takeover of Jacksonville, Florida-based Armor Holdings Inc. <AH.N>, another armored-vehicle maker.
much lower contract for BAE as expected (just 212 Mio US$), we will be closing green ;) >:D
cheers
Oliver
The bounce off of 20 or battle at 20 again.
Well FRPT still shows promise but it appears we will have to wait until October Fiscal 2008 because all the backlog and production are accounted for and priced in.
But the promise has moved from 100, 200, 400, 800, and now 1,000 vehicles per month.
The joint venture, called Force Dynamics, will increase total production capacity at all plants to as much as 1,000 vehicles per month early next year ``if necessary,'' Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics said in a statement today. General Dynamics Venture Delivers First Cougar Truck to Marines
By Edmond Lococo
June 29 (Bloomberg) -- General Dynamics Corp., the largest maker of armored vehicles for the U.S. military, delivered its first Cougar blast-resistant truck to the Marine Corps as part of its joint venture with Force Protection Inc.
Delivery of the first Cougar built entirely by General Dynamics in Anniston, Alabama, occurred yesterday. More than 350 of the trucks will be built there by January, General Dynamics spokesman Peter Keating said today in an interview.
Monthly production at the Alabama facilities will reach 80 vehicles by November, Keating said. The Marine Corps is leading the military effort to buy Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, and may spend $8.4 billion over two years for as many as 7,700.
The joint venture, called Force Dynamics, will increase total production capacity at all plants to as much as 1,000 vehicles per month early next year ``if necessary,'' Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics said in a statement today.
Force Protection, based in Ladson, South Carolina, has won awards valued at more than $770 million to produce more than 1,580 trucks since January, and it splits the awards evenly with General Dynamics through the joint venture. The venture was created in November to help Force Protection increase production as the U.S. military steps up purchases of the trucks to protect troops in Iraq and Afghanistan from homemade bombs.
Shares of General Dynamics dropped 78 cents to $78.22 at 4:20 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. Force Protection fell $1.05 to $20.64 in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] .
Last Updated: June 29, 2007 16:58 EDT
I am lost, our back is against a wall. I mean where can I get the 100 MA and 200 MA statistics from online?
The wall being will the trailing bull defend the 100 MA or watch it fall to 200 MA. The trailing bull defended the 100 MA at 15.50 last time.
Join the bears? Better late than never.
07/02/2007
Market Edge rates Avoid
Recommendation
Avoid the stock.
If you are long, close position or monitor stock closely.
Comment
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bearish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Weak Downward Trend.
Relative Strength is Bearish.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Distribution.
The 50 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
Watch for resistance at 22.91
Stock broke Double Bottom (Bearish) Point & Figure Chart Formation Last Week
TerryG, I use stockcharts.com (around 10$ per months) ;)
juts check the news, there is lots of money out to be invested the next years.
news update:
General Dynamics Delivers First MRAP Vehicles from Alabama
Friday , June 29, 2007 15:19ET
STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich., June 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD), has delivered its first Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles to the U.S. Marine Corps from Anniston, Ala., less than 120 days after the company received its first production order for the new product. "This milestone demonstrates our commitment to rapidly provide the Marine Corps with the protected vehicles essential for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Rick Gillette, senior vice president of production, delivery and support for General Dynamics Land Systems. "General Dynamics and our partners -- Force Protection, Anniston Army Depot and local subcontractors -- are fully engaged in building these life-saving vehicles while increasing our combined production capacity to deliver 1,000 vehicles per month early next year, if necessary. Our success to date is the combination of teamwork, funding and commitment by all involved."
Two General Dynamics assembly operations are being created in Alabama for the combined production with Force Protection Inc. (Nasdaq: FRPT) of 1,125 vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected program. Force Protection and General Dynamics have formed a joint venture, Force Dynamics, to share in the production and program management of MRAP contracts. The Alabama sites will build more than 350 of Force Protection's Category I 4x4 and Category II 6x6 Cougar vehicles by January 2008. The 80,000-square foot main General Dynamics assembly site for MRAP vehicles will eventually employ 220 new workers in Oxford, Ala. A supporting production site on Anniston Army Depot will employ 50 new workers. General Dynamics Land Systems currently employs 240 workers on the depot building Fox and Stryker combat vehicles and the Abrams tank gunner's primary sight. Anniston Army Depot will partner with General Dynamics and perform a share of the MRAP work. General Dynamics also contracted with BR Williams to operate a warehouse in Oxford to support the new production operations. General Dynamics currently employs approximately 700 workers throughout Alabama. These new positions will increase total General Dynamics' employment in the state to nearly 1,000.
&
U.S. Military Ground Vehicle Armor Represents a $20 Billion Market 2005 to 2013.May 7, 2007 - U.S. Military Ground Vehicle Armor Represents a $20 Billion Market 2005 to 2013.
In their newest report for the armor industry, 2007 U.S. Military Ground Vehicle Armor Forecast, Vector Strategy projects that an estimated $20 billion of military ground vehicle armor will be procured by the US Department of Defense for US military forces between 2005 and 2013 (nine years inclusive). In addition, the industry experiences an unprecedented peak in fiscal year 2007 armor procurement. According to Marcia Price, president of Vector Strategy, "Armor procurement in fiscal year 2007 is 159% the level of procurement in fiscal year 2006 - including base and supplemental budgets now under consideration by Congress."
"This peak is due to the need to repair and replace armored vehicles lost or worn out in current Iraq and Afghanistan operations, to add equipment such as MRAP vehicles to fill recently identified war-fighting needs, to supply armored vehicles to support the surge of additional troops to Iraq, to add and upgrade armored vehicles to improve current and future war-on-terrorism capabilities, and to begin procuring armored vehicles needed to support the Army and Marine Corps plans to add 92,000 active duty troops to the force over the next several years," says Ms. Price. Fiscal year 2007 and 2008 military ground vehicle armor procurement is sharply driven by large increases in supplemental funding for force protection and equipment reset. Vector projects that fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2013 armor procurement will decline slightly from 2009 levels, but still remain a substantial market for armor industry participants. Vector forecasts additional armor procurement for FY09 to FY13 (above the DoD's base budget for those years) to address contingency operations in which U.S. forces become involved in, to fund additional sustainment of combat vehicles, to provide applique armor to increase the protection level of mine protected vehicles, and fund JLTV armor procurement. In fiscal year 2007, 39% of total military ground vehicle armor procurement funds armor for light tactical vehicles such as HMMWV's; medium and heavy tactical vehicles represent 27% of total armor procurement; ASV's, MRAP, and other mine protected vehicles account for 10% of armor spending in 2007; and combat vehicles, such as the Stryker, Bradley, and Abrams, account for 24% of 2007 armor procurement.
Market trends affecting military ground vehicle armor procurement include:
- Even the newest HMMWV variants (M1151, M1152, and M1165) are facing weight and payload issues due to up-armoring and are still not offering vehicle occupants the desired ballistic and blast protection.
- MRAP procurement is likely to affect HMMWV procurement and production.
- Implementation of the Long Term Armoring Strategy within the US Army's procurement of the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles initiates in FY07.
- MRAP and ASV-like vehicles will play an expanded role in the procurement and deployment of military ground vehicles even beyond FY07 and FY08.
- TUSK (Tank Urban Survivability Kit) and other similar efforts funded through "Situational Awareness" program funding will continue to be developed and deployed on all combat vehicles in the future.
- Vector believes that current combat vehicles will receive more funding that that currently projected by the DoD to sustain their functionality through FCS deployment.
- Although Stryker procurement of new vehicles is slowing, Vector believes there is the potential for significant funding for armor related modification programs for in-service vehicles.
- The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC), and Internally Transportable Vehicle (ITV) are all new platforms coming into production during Vector's forecast horizon. Armor solutions for the EFV and MPC are likely to be lightweight composite based designs.
- Vector also foresees continued upgrades in LAV armor as this vehicle is a vital element of the USMC vehicle stable and will remain in the field for another 20 years.
&
from IV:
Latest Price Targets for FRPT
FORCE PROTECTION INC (FRPT)
Last Updated: June 30, 2007
Price Targets
Mean 33.33
High 36.00 # Raised this Week 1
Low 32.00
Data Provided by First Call
I am still holding
cheers
Oliver
Thanks for the positive news. But I feel I am being contrarian. I have checked three places and all three have turned to sell. One I posted, another has a 64% sell rating holding out hope of only in the 50 to 100 day horizon. (http://quote.barchart.com/quote.asp?sym=FRPT&code=BSTK)
The bad news from the DoD decision on the Army came through as a hedge agreeing only in principle that the Army needed more than 2500 vehicles. But made no formal estimate about the number of vehicles between 2500 and 23,044 estimated. Meaning they have not decided anything and are building a hedge. The hedge being aiming high but leaving themsevles off ramps should short term conditions change.
But you are right being positive they are predicting a large number as many as the manufacturers can produce. With reviews should conditions change.
I am pessimistic because the risk is so high and higher because everything is short term. And fortunes will be won or lost depending on how much and who's production the DoD decides to pay for. DoD is the only one who will see all the production plans and proposals, so only DoD will know what is coming. And we have seen what happens when a contract goes to the competition. And FRPT seems to be the only one making production plans public. Meaning the competition could spring out and surprise everyone
I cannot post a copy but here is the teaser. Mainly the good news may take a while, while FRPT slips and slides.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/
JROC Backs Larger Army MRAP Fleet With Option to Curtail Total Size
DefenseAlert, June 29, 2007 -- A high-level Pentagon panel avoided locking the Army into a long-term, and very expensive, commitment to acquire all of the entire 17,700 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles sought by commanders in Baghdad, opting instead to back aggressive near-term acquisition strategy coupled with periodic reviews of the situation in Iraq to curtail purchases as conditions permit.
Positive and forward, but what news is the market waiting for?
http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/2007/07/wheres_my_triquarter.html
Giambastiani discussed several procurement programs meant to protect U.S. soldiers from improvised explosive devices and suicide car bombings. The admiral said the military plans to soon ship the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicle to Afghanistan and Iraq. "I sign the military requirements for MRAP," Giambastiani said. "It doesn't say anything in there about going to the cheapest bidder. It says you have to pass certain tests."
Army gets big boost in safer vehicles
By Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has approved an Army recommendation for a 600% increase in production of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles to protect soldiers from makeshift bombs in Iraq. The unannounced decision Thursday to build as many as 17,770 MRAPs for the Army comes as Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made the vehicle the Pentagon's top priority. The MRAP's V-shaped hull and raised chassis are up to four times safer against the top threat to U.S. troops in Iraq — improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.
In a letter Thursday to Gates, Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Kit Bond, R-Mo., said MRAPs could have saved as many as 742 U.S. troops if they had been deployed when the Marines in Iraq's restive Anbar province filed an urgent request for 1,169 of the vehicles in February 2005.
Gates said Friday he was pushing industry and the military to build MRAPs faster: "For every month we delay, scores of young Americans are going to die."
The Joint Requirement Oversight Council, a group of top Pentagon officers, accepted the Army's recommendation to make a "one for one" swap of MRAPs for armored Humvees in most cases, said Col. Steve Sliwa, chief of the Army's future war-fighting capabilities division.
That recommendation followed a visit to Iraq by a high-level Army team to assess soldiers' needs and which vehicles would best fill them.
"We're going to aggressively pursue maxing out production, definitely for '08," Sliwa said. "We're extensively testing the vehicle to ensure the soldier's very well protected."
The Pentagon's move boosts the Army's MRAP total from the 2,500 the service had originally sought and the Pentagon's total commitment to almost 23,000 vehicles. That includes 3,700 for the Marines and 1,500 for other branches of the military.
The Pentagon's decision to build more MRAPs may encounter opposition from Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who leads the committee that writes the defense budget.
Murtha said he wouldn't support more than $6 billion in MRAP spending for next year because contractors can't build the vehicles fast enough.
The Army's bill for MRAPs next year would be $8.1 billion, according to a memo from Acting Secretary of the Army Pete Geren.
To meet the increased demand, the Pentagon awarded contracts to nine companies in January to develop and build vehicles for consideration for its MRAP program.
Since April 23, the Pentagon has awarded contracts worth about $1.6 billion to three companies to build 3,130 MRAPs, records show.
Last week, Australian television reported that Thales Australia would make 1,500 MRAPs for the Pentagon, although that has not been confirmed by the Defense Department.
Contributing: Peter Eisler
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-01-mrap-production_N.htm
The quote refers to the JROC which has the final decision in the DoD for all services. Meaning the Army can make all the proposals it likes, but the JROC has the final decision, or the hedge being built.
The bad news from the DoD decision on the Army came through as a hedge agreeing only in principle that the Army needed more than 2500 vehicles. But made no formal estimate about the number of vehicles between 2500 and 23,044 estimated. Meaning they have not decided anything and are building a hedge. The hedge being aiming high but leaving themsevles off ramps should short term conditions change.
But until then I am enjoying the rebound on the Army's opinion on what it means. But worry about what the market is thinking.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-01-mrap-production_N.htm
Army gets big boost in safer vehicles
By Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has approved an Army recommendation for a 600% increase in production of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles to protect soldiers from makeshift bombs in Iraq.
The unannounced decision Thursday to build as many as 17,770 MRAPs for the Army comes as Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made the vehicle the Pentagon's top priority. The MRAP's V-shaped hull and raised chassis are up to four times safer against the top threat to U.S. troops in Iraq — improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.
Here is the teaser of what they are talking about.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/
JROC Backs Larger Army MRAP Fleet With Option to Curtail Total Size
DefenseAlert, June 29, 2007 -- A high-level Pentagon panel avoided locking the Army into a long-term, and very expensive, commitment to acquire all of the entire 17,700 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles sought by commanders in Baghdad, opting instead to back aggressive near-term acquisition strategy coupled with periodic reviews of the situation in Iraq to curtail purchases as conditions permit.
And while we are at this source. Here is some good news/bad news.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/
Pentagon Preparing New MRAP Competition for EFP-Stopping Designs
DefenseAlert, July 2, 2007 -- The Pentagon is preparing to launch a new competition for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles capable of stopping explosively formed penetrators, effectively opening the field to new manufacturers in a race for a piece of the possible $20 billion-plus blast-resistant vehicle program that since January has been limited to a handful of companies.
chart update ;)
US Army eyes seven-fold armored vehicle jump
Mon Jul 2, 2007 1:54pm ET
WASHINGTON, July 2 (Reuters) - The Pentagon has cleared the U.S. Army to seek rush orders for up to seven times more specially designed armored vehicles to help protect troops in Iraq in a move that could be worth more than $20 billion.
"The Army has been approved for the purchase of up to 17,770 MRAP vehicles," Lt. Col. Carl Ey, an Army spokesman, said on Monday, using shorthand for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected replacements for the more than 20-year-old Humvee.
A push is under way to get to Iraq as many MRAPS -- which feature V-shaped hulls designed to protect occupants from roadside bombs -- as industry can produce through the end of next year, Ey said.
Prior to the nod from the Pentagon's high-level Joint Requirements Oversight Council late last week, the Army had been approved for 2,500 MRAPS.
The planned "one for one" swapout of "uparmored" Army Humvees could more than triple the overall Pentagon purchase, now valued at $8.4 billion for 7,774 MRAP vehicles, including 3,700 for the Marine Corps.
The high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle, as the Humvee is officially known, is a successor to the Jeep, a fixture of U.S. military patrols for decades.
Seven contractors are vying for MRAP orders after sending prototypes to military testers.
Navistar International Corp.'s (NAVZ.PK: Quote, Profile , Research) International Military and Government LLC has received the largest single order -- a May 31 Marine Corps $623 million deal for 1,200 Category 1 vehicles.
Force Protection Inc. (FRPT.O: Quote, Profile , Research) has received four orders to produce a total of more than 1,800 MRAP vehicles. It is partnered with General Dynamics Corp. (GD.N: Quote, Profile , Research)'s Land Systems business arm, which has received an order of its own for 20 vehicles through a Canadian unit in London, Ontario.
Also in line are BAE Systems Plc (BA.L: Quote, Profile , Research); Oshkosh Truck Corp. (OSK.N: Quote, Profile , Research); closely held Protected Vehicles Inc. of North Charleston, South Carolina; and Armor Holdings Inc. (AH.N: Quote, Profile , Research).
BAE is awaiting U.S. Justice Department clearance to buy Armor Holdings for $4.1 billion. Protected Vehicles is offering an MRAP it designed jointly with Israel's state-owned Rafael Armament Development authority.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made rushing the new vehicles to Iraq his top procurement priority.
On Friday, he said he was pressing industry to roll the vehicles out as quickly as possible, if necessary by going outside normal bureaucratic channels.
"For every month we delay, scores of young Americans are going to die," Gates told reporters.
Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, referred on Monday to the action by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, an arm of the military's Joint Chiefs, as a kind of validation of request from commanders in Iraq.
"The goal right now is to get started and you don't have to know what your end requirement is going to be to embark on an aggressive strategy to start to put vehicles, more vehicles, into the field," he said. (Additional reporting by Andrew Gray)
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Bullish Engulfing.......
61.8% Fib retrace.......and a move to the north.
You would have to be out of your mind to short this thing when the Pentagon just approved 17,700 MRAPs be purchased, and approved a 1 for 1 Humvee replacement. And on top of that, MRAP contracts will be announced any day now. You short this stock when it's had an extended run, or when the fundamentals are collapsing, not now. Otherwise you're just rolling the dice.
Technicals
Percentage Gainer
Last Price Quote is:
-2.91%below 13-day MA
-4.93%below 50-day MA
RS Rating: 93
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $1,404.85
P/E Ratio: 55.36
PEG Ratio: 1.23221
Next Earnings: 08/14/2007
Last Analyst Rating: Overweight
Market reality looks good.
But this is the government and business. Business has submitted its proposals for maximum production for remaining Fiscal 2007. With three contenders already accounted for, the fourth of OSH/PVI still has a chance at a large contract like the other three.
And the DoD has enough money to buy every vehicle the four of them can produce in Fiscal 2007. And I believe have contracted for those vehicles already except for OSH/PVI. Meaning all the contracts have been priced in until Fiscal 2008. Or as Kramer says "Wait for it to be priced to perfection."
A manuver the DoD may use is apply for budget carryover and apply their remaining funds of Fiscal 2007 to vehicle contracts in Fiscal 2008. Or write contracts now for vehicles in Fiscal 2008.
But you are right the pot looks rich. 20 billion was over two years to fulfill the maximum number. The pot right now has 4 billion earmarked for 2008 and they are looking at making to its 10 billion mark or its half of the 2 year 20 billion.
So now the consideration is where between 4 and 10 billion will the number fall for 2008.
nice link:
http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/totals.asp?thisContractor=Force%20Protection
Here is one more interpretation of last week.
DOD agrees to pay for as many MRAPs as industry makes
Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
07/05/2007, page 04
MORE MRAPS: The Defense Department's Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has endorsed procuring as many Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles as industry can provide in fiscal 2008. DOD and military services are trying to "incentivize" companies to boost production while cutting the production timetable, according to Bryan Whitman, deputy assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. He told Pentagon reporters July 2 that the JROC decision follows Defense Secretary Robert Gates' efforts to expedite MRAP fielding (DAILY, July 3). Leading House Armed Services Committee members criticized industry in January for not making MRAPs a higher priority. Earlier in Iraq operations, defense officials complained that industry was not throwing enough effort behind countering improvised explosive devices (DAILY, Oct. 19, 2005). Both efforts have turned into multibillion-dollar spending campaigns to provide solutions to warfighters. "We absolutely are not accepting (IED attacks) as a challenge that can't be defeated," Gates said during a Pentagon news conference June 29.
Support of what to look for next week. Definitly follow the link and look at the chart.
http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis/technicalanalysis/10366578.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
This weekly chart of Force Protection shows a stock that has gone from about zero to $30 in less than 18 months. Now that's fast! The money flow indicator shows that money outflows really began in January, but the stock kept rising in spite of that. However, the recent correction has broken the uptrending support line. I'd look at $20 as being the next line of defense. If that level breaks down, the 40-week (200-day) moving average is in play
this are the reasons why I am still holding FRPT with strong hands:
1)
Test Drive BoostsU.S. Marines' Interest In Cheetah Vehicle
By KRIS OSBORN
The U.S. Marine Corps may buy hundreds of Force Protection's Cheetah, an 8-ton Humvee-type, four-wheel-drive vehicle with lightweight armor composites and blast-deflecting technology.
The Corps' interest in the V-hulled, raised-chassis vehicle intensified after U.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway test-drove a prototype Cheetah at Force Protection's plant in Ladson, S.C., June 9.
The Cheetah would function as a smaller, more mobile version of the 16-ton Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles the U.S. military is beginning to buy.
"I'm excited about the latest addition to Force Protection's family of MRAP Vehicles, the Cheetah," Conway told the Marine Corps News, an internal publication of the Marine Corps, after the visit.
"If it proves itself through further testing, the Cheetah will offer the same survivability rates as its predecessors, but it's also designed to be relevant beyond Iraq. The Cheetah will be easier to rapidly deploy, as it will be much more compatible with air and sea transport than larger MRAP vehicles currently in production," he said.
Overseas Interest
The Marines aren't the only ones interested in the Cheetah; company officials said Britain, Italy and Turkey are also eyeing the vehicle. In response, Force Protection plans to build a factory in the coming months and is now weighing bids by two states.
"We are establishing a new production facility, where we will produce 70 to 90 vehicles in the fourth quarter this year, and be producing at a rate of 2,000 a year by 2008," said Mike Aldrich, Force Protection vice president.
Conway went to the factory, which has built roughly 600 Cougar and Buffalo armored vehicles now in service in Iraq and Afghanistan, to see how the vehicles are made and to thank workers for building them. He was so impressed with the Cheetah that he started calling his program officials.
Commandant Impressed
"The commandant's office called and said he has directed a lot of people to get serious about the Cheetah in a hurry," said a senior Marine Corps official with the MRAP program office.
The Cheetah vehicle is built for reconnaissance missions and faster-moving tactical, urban operations. At its top speed of 85 miles per hour, it also gets twice the gas mileage of a Cougar, another Force Protection vehicle.
"It will be much more adaptable to maneuvering in tight areas such as urban environments and it does well off-road. The Cheetah has half the weight of the Cougar with equal protection," said Aldrich.
The Cheetah's armor, which is intended to protect against up to 30 pounds of TNT, is designed, as is the Cougar, to accommodate add-on armor as newer composites emerge, said Aldrich. A prototype Cheetah has been blast-tested at Force Protection's test site in Edgefield, S.C., with 15 pounds of TNT within 25 feet, and other charges directly underneath the chassis.
"We set off a blast similar to an IED [improvised explosive device] under a minivan or pickup truck to show in a basic way what this kind of blast does to a regular civilian vehicle, then saw the Cheetah withstand the explosion," said company spokesman Jeffrey Child.
As an expeditionary force, the Marine Corps needs mobile, quick-to-deploy vehicles.
"We are excited about the compatibility it has for rapid deployment," said Marine Corps Lt. Col. Thomas Johnson, spokesman for Conway.
link:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2879605&C=mideast
2)
IV quotation ( from trustthetape; thanx buddy)
Impact of a Cheetah order on valuation
Well Marvin, with the Marine FINALLY expressing a sense of urgency to get on board with the Cheetah ("The commandant's office called and said he has directed a lot of people to get serious about the Cheetah in a hurry," said a senior Marine Corps official with the MRAP program office.) perhaps this is a good time to revisit some analysis we did nearly 8 months ago when you ask for my thoughts on the impact of a Cheetah order.
Attached is the analysis from last November when the stock was trading near $10 a share. While much has happened since then, I still stand by the analysis and believe the next price targets ($34.47 and $42.79) will be challenged in the not too distant future - perhaps much sooner then many believe. In addition, if the author of the article identified by Jolly-Llama is accurate and FPI produces 2000 Cheetahs in 2008 at approx $300k each, we're looking at another revenue stream of over $600m. Assuming they "only" produce 200 Cougars/month in 2008 that's another $1b in revenue and that leaves out Buffalos (at 10/month close to another $100m) and ILS. All told, assuming everything comes together, 2008 revenue could approach $2b. At 10% net profit that's about $3/share in earnings and a 20-30 multiple puts us at $60-90/share.
Given the demonstrated ability of this company to produce quality vehicles in large quantities, I'm confident that not only will the next price targets be exceeded (sans Cheetah) but that the Cheetah Premium of $35-40 per share will also be realized as the Cheetah goes from Prototype to initial production to mass production in the thousands in the coming years.
Here's the dated, yet very relevant, analysis from all the way back in November - seems like another life time:
I'm going to try and answer your question in a larger context, Marvin. Hope you don't mind. Just realize my eyes are foggy, my throat is sore and I'm still on a high from the Buckeye win yesterday so if my thinking is not clear perhaps someone here can offer their opinion.
Technical Price Targets
Setting the Cheetah aside, I'd run some Technical Targets some time ago based on a breakout above 8.52 (and a subsequent major consolidation such as the one we just had). Recently, I updated those targets based on the new high of 9.43 (and the same major consolidation but from a higher level - 9.42 vs 8.52). Here are my intermediate term technical targets:
8.52 13.36 21.19 33.86
9.43 14.83 23.57 37.71
It would appear that current and emerging fundamentals (without any consideration for the Cheetah) will support any and all of these price levels over time. I suspect some technicians might have an opinion or two on these and I'd encourage them to opine.
Fundamental Price Targets
Fundamentally, the challenge is how to value the company based on factors such as:
* Trailing Twelve Month (TTM) revenue ($150m) vs production capacity/rates (approaching $500m annualized) and ILS (easily $50m in 2007 but more likely closer to $100m) vs a growing backlog (currently close to $400m and growing)
* Factoring in growth rates (Year over Year being 200% or so) and market positioning (becoming recognized as market leader in armored vehicle market)
* Factoring in partnerships (SPAR and BAE, GD emerging, AH still a possibility IMHO)
Well, we know the market valued FRPT trailing revenue at up to 4.2 times revenue (P/S ratio) when TTM sales were $100m, production capacity was around $200m ($50m per quarter as in Q2) and backlog was around $200m. The question then becomes, what multiple does the market put on growing trailing revenue as production capacity increases (both internally and thru partnerships) and the backlog grows to $400m (currently) and then to much higher levels as new contracts such as the MRAP materialize? This is the basic, yet perplexting, question of how to express the relationship between TTM revenue, production capacity (or revenue potential both internally and with partnerships), and backlog (available future revenue) as some multiple of something (TTM revenue perhaps?). I guess the other factors in the equation is the impact of growth rates on the valuation and also the future profit potential of all this revenue, production, backlog. So, if $100m TTM revenue and $200m production capacity and $200m backlog is worth 4.2x TTM revenue, what is $200-225m TTM revenue (end of Q4), $400-500m production capacity and $400m-$1b+ backlog worth? Certainly at least but likely much more than 4.2x TTM revenue since the production capabity and backlog are growing so much faster than the revenue. Even at 4.2x as TTM revenue increases each quarter from 150m (currently) to 225m (approx after Q4) to 250m'ish to 300m+, etc, etc, price targets start being hit. Given the growth in production, backlog, partnerships and subsequent trailing twelve month revenue, I start getting price fundamental price targets that include numbers like:
11.83
16.49
20.86
25.93
34.47
42.79
All numbers reasonably consistent with the technical price targets.
Finally, Addresing the Original Cheetah Question
So, back to your original question of the impact on the price is the company receives a $1b Cheetah order. We know McGilton said at the SHM that it will be produced "off site" in secrecy (with few people knowing the details). I suspect that is for either security reasons (with the govt) and/or competitive reasons. The 10Q talks about getting the production lines up and going in 2007. Therefore, we know this is something the company is planning for so there would be some consideration already given to production capability. From a market perspective, I look at the Cheetah as a roughly $45b market (150k vehicles * approx $300k each and ignoring the downstream ILS revenue potential for the time being). Even at 10% capture (or 15k vehicles) of this market, $4.5b is some serious revenue from just this one product line.
It seems we have to address the same questions as above to value this future revenue stream. Initially, the backlog would be $1b, production capability would be minimal and initial TTM revenue would be zero. So, certainly the market can't value it based on TTM revenue but rather on future potential revenue. Certainly it's not likely to be valued at 4.2 but something less than that. Is it worth 1x, .5x, 2x backlog? If we say .5 x contract that would be 500m or about $10/share. Is that realistic? Conservative? I've talked to some knowledgeable wall street types recently that felt such a contract would be fairly valued at 2x backlog or about $2b. That would equate to $35-40/share (in addition to the current share price). Regardless of the first order/orders, if we assume the FRPT eventually captures 10% of the overall available Humvee market then $35-40/share seems very conservative. However, the company has to first capture the first order and produce the first production vehicles, etc etc - in other words, walk before it can run.
Putting it All Together
If I'm even close and the existing business (sans Cheetah) is worth $25-40 in the not too distant future (from a technical and fundamental standpoint) and the Cheetah business has similar potential in the next few years (based on the logic of a $1b backlog) and even greater potential long term ($45b market), the overall business becomes more and more attractive for investors as well as being a takeover target and triple digit stock prices are not out of the realm of possibility in years to come.
My Conclusion
Regardless of the immediate impact on the share price of an initial Cheetah order, it seems highly probable that there will be an initial order and then subsequent larger orders. Likewise, it's highly probable there will be larger and larger Buffalo and Cougar orders. How much larger and how soon remains to be seen but larger and in due time, nonetheless. In addition, it's clear that production capacity (both internally and through partnerships) is expanding and the combination of increased production capacity and increasing backlog will lead to increasing trailing revenue and higher stock prices over time.
Personally, this all goes back to my Investment Thesis for FRPT and the realization that this is a long term investment in a growth company and continued Due Diligence and patience will be rewarded.
The one weakness I see now is all 2007 vehicle production may be priced in.
Remember the price slid last year waiting for next year's budget?
With deliveries of the Cheetah to begin in Fiscal 2008 or Q4 that would leave it out the remaining Fiscal 2007 budget money. Unless they can whip out a production increase before October, Fiscal 2008 it is.
But the good news about the 2008 budget of where between 4 and 10 billion dollars will next year be?
Defensenews.com
July 6, 2007
DoD Panel Approves $8.3B for MRAPs Through 2008
By Kris Osborn
The Joint Requirements Oversight Council, the top DoD procurement panel, approved in early July spending $8.3 billion through 2008 to produce an unspecified number of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs) as fast as possible.
"The final procurement quantity will be shaped by continual assessment of changing threat conditions, feedback from commanders in theater, and potential changes in strategic landscapes and assigned missions," said DoD spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin.
DoD sources said part of the reason for the uncertainty is that U.S. forces may not be deployed in Iraq in large numbers after 2008.
The JROC already has authorized the military to buy 7,774 MRAPs: 3,700 for the Marine Corps, 2,500 for the Army, 697 for the Air Force, 544 for the Navy and 333 for Special Operations Forces.
The $8.3 billion will cover these vehicles, and possibly more, Irwin said.
The Pentagon plans to buy a total of 23,200 14- and 21-ton MRAPs, a number that tripled in May after Army Secretary Pete Geren said his service planned to buy 17,700 MRAPs by 2010. In early May, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the service chiefs to make MRAPs DoD's top acquisition priority.
Battlefield commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as lawmakers, have called for more MRAPs.
U.S. Army Gen. Richard Cody, the vice chief of staff, said in late June that the MRAP push would continue through 2008.
"Sometime in 2008, we'll know, based on the commanders' needs on the ground, what the buy will be," Cody said. "I don't know how many we're going to buy. We have the plan for a one-to-one replacement the commanders asked for, but more important is to maximize the monthly production rate through '07 and '08 so we give the operational commander what they need."
Great work guys in terms of research you have posted.
A little concerned at the moment that we are being attcked there does seem to be a short term down trend and we have to break out on the upside of the triangle.
where are your sell signals kicking in.
At the moment i amjust a bit tetchy. Though i like the stock alot
I think there are two issues, retracement of the last 100 days because the next 100 days are in doubt. And continuation.
Continuation. The next 100 days are unclear because the competition has not been as public as FRPT, making FRPT an easier target.
Retracement? The trailing bull defends the 100 MA or not otherwise the bears could have it all. This retracement bounced from 15.50 before the rally brought it here and 20 was a battle. So yes taking shots at FRPT's 100 day record could send it into the teens again. Which is what I think the market wants so more people can get back in.
Meaning join the bears or gamble on whether the redistribution is done well enough.
I am looking at battleground 20 and the 100 MA before this heads back up. I am also worried about the 200 MA because the 100 MA is a well tested breaking point in the bear camp. Gambling will the trailing bull defend the 100 MA or 50 MA? Since now its flat.
thanks amstocks82:
;)
The Real Story of Production Delays
When the government began purchasing Mine Resistant Vehicle types which later became known as Mine Protected Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, there were limited choices available.
Force Protection, Inc (FPI) had developed the Cougar and Buffalo but had almost no sales and were building them on a one by one basis. Building vehicles on a one by one bases is fine so long as the number of requested vehicles is low.
The military gradually increased the number of vehicles they were purchasing from Force Protection. The first sales of the initial Cougar went to the British. In 2002, the British purchased 8 "Tempest" vehicles from Technical Solutions Group (TSG). TSG was later purchased by the company that became Force Protection and Force Protection's business became that of making armored vehicles.
In 2004, FPI had only sold a total of 29 vehicles to the military. The military was purchasing very limited number of MRAP type vehicles from FPI and other vendors.
Unlike the Cougar and Buffalo, many of the other vendors vehicles suffered occasional casualties which is why those vehicles gradually became more in demand.
In 2005, FPI delivered 71 vehicles to the military and began to get contracts for larger numbers of vehicles. Therefore, FPI started the process of creating a regular production line for Cougars. During this time period, there were production and parts problems. As FPI grew in size, some of their suppliers were unable to support the production growth in a timely manner or did not prioritize orders for armored glass for these vehicles. Therefore, FPI began the process of getting multiple vendors to provide parts for their vehicles. They also increased the inventory of critical parts.
In early 2006, FPI completed staffing the new production line and by April 2006 they had reached target production of 20 Cougars per month. By mid 2006, FPI seemed to have solved their production and parts issues and were mainly producing ahead of schedule.
Later in 2006, the military announced the MRAP program which initially was going to provide 1200 vehicles and solicited bids for vehicles from multiple vendors. The numbers of vehicles were at this point sufficient to interest industry in developing new vehicles. Prior to the launch of the MRAP program, the military had limited options for purchasing MRAP vehicles due to the low numbers of vehicles that they were purchasing. The only company that had built an entirely new and upgraded MRAP vehicle was FPI.
The size of the MRAP program grew and so did the interest in building MRAP vehicles by other companies.
During the initial phase of MRAP testing, FPI's Cougar passed testing. Other vendors either delivered vehicles late in testing or like BAE took several iterations of testing, design changes retest and further changes before the vehicle passed.
The inspector general indicates that if the military would have provided the awards for military vehicles to other vendors, that they "might" have produced them. However, until the number of solicited vehicles was increased in 2006, other vendors of vehicles had limited production of MRAP vehicles most of which were much more expensive than a Cougar or Buffalo and less safe. It is not reasonable to believe that they would have invested the money and effort to improve their vehicles or increase production capacity if the military were ordering only 100 vehicles per year.
Force Protection got the orders despite initial start up issues, and intermittent production issues because they had the superior vehicle. The production problems are the result of typical start up issues, not corruption or incompetence.
The article suggesting that there was influence peddling or other reasons for the orders is not credible: http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-armored-vehicle-delays,0,7411825.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
The Cougar is the least expensive MRAP type vehicle that was available in 2002 to early 2006 and the safest vehicle available during that time frame. For those two reasons alone, the marines should be praised for purchasing those vehicles.
Currently, FPI and the joint venture with General Dynamics as well as their many production agreements with other companies such as Armored Holdings have positioned FPI as the current vendor that has the highest production capacity. If the military were to award too many high volume contracts to other vendors that might not yet proven that they can produce MRAP vehicles in volume and proven that their vehicle will be survivable in combat, then this would be a true tragedy and crime.
They believe everything they hear. But in reality there were no other producers. BAE prime contracts and co-produces the Cougar as the ILAV, General Dynamics produces the RG-31 but has all the contracts it needs and wants and is also late, the ASV has also all the contracts it needs and wants.
The Marines have been with and are still with FRPT. And all the production problems are because this is new production, as you will note the competition is having the same problems with their new production. Recently namely General Dynamics and PVI which will both be late by months.
http://iraqnam.blogspot.com/2007/07/report-finds-dod-awarded-mrap-contracts.html
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Defense Department put U.S. troops in Iraq at risk by awarding contracts for badly needed armored vehicles to companies that failed to deliver them on schedule, according to a review by the Pentagon's inspector general.
The June 27 report, obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, examined 15 contracts worth $2.2 billion dollars awarded since 2000 to Force Protection, Inc., and Armor Holdings, Inc.
The auditors found several contracts issued by the Marine Corps on a sole-source basis to Force Protection even though it knew there were other manufacturers that might have supplied the vehicles in a more timely fashion.
The Marine Corps determined that Force Protection of Ladson, S.C., was the only supplier that could meet the urgent delivery schedule for the vehicles.
The inspector general's report, however, concludes otherwise. It says the company "did not perform as a responsible contractor and repeatedly failed to meet contractual delivery schedules for getting the vehicles the theater."
Read the rest at AOL News
Here is some sanity about todays selling.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2BCwJd4lE&mode=user&search=
fyi
Armored vehicle contracts draw fire
Ladson company Force Protection among producers criticized in report
By RICHARD LARDNER and ANNE FLAHERTY
Associated Press
Thursday, July 12, 2007
The Cougar armored vehicle is constructed by Force Protection at its Ladson facility.
WASHINGTON — The Defense Department put American soldiers in Iraq at risk by awarding contracts for badly needed armored vehicles to companies that failed to deliver them on schedule, according to a review by the Pentagon's inspector general.
The June 27 report, obtained Wednesday by the Associated Press, examined 15 contracts worth $2.2 billion dollars awarded since 2000 to Ladson, S.C.-based Force Protection and Armor Holdings.
The auditors found several contracts issued by The Marine Corps on a sole-source basis to Force Protection, even though Corps officials knew there were other manufacturers that might have supplied the vehicles in a more timely fashion. The Marine Corps determined that Force Protection was the only supplier that could meet the urgent delivery schedule for the vehicles.
The inspector general's report, however, concludes otherwise. It says the company "did not perform as a responsible contractor and repeatedly failed to meet contractual delivery schedules for getting the vehicles the theater."
Force Protection issued a statement late Wednesday that said it was "disappointed" with the report. "We have consistently operated under urgent operational needs and have sought diligently to meet government requirements under extremely short timeframes," the company said. "When delays in deliveries have occurred, it has been representative not of a problem with the vehicle nor the system, but that even a minor glitch in the supply chain can push things back under such tight parameters."
Company spokesman Tommy Pruitt pointed out that the report examined contracts under a program that ended about two years ago, the Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicle, which began when the company was just starting to expand its staff and facilities to increase production.
Pruitt acknowledged that Force Protection did fall behind schedule last month, but the company worked through the July 4 holiday and is now caught up.
Workers build a Cougar armored vehicle at the Force Protection plant in Ladson.
Under the current Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program administered by the Marine Corps, the company has won orders for about 1,600 vehicles. "If we were continuing to do a bad job on deliveries, we would not expect to continue getting contracts," Pruitt said.
The inspector general's report also criticizes the Army's decision to award a contract for armor kits to Simula Aerospace and Defense Group, a subsidiary of Armor Holdings of Jacksonville, Fla.
Simula did not meet the government's definition of a "responsible prospective contractor," according to the report, and it lacked the mechanisms necessary to ensure proper delivery of the kits, which were needed to make Humvees less vulnerable to roadside bombs. The Army received kits "with missing and unusable components, which increased the kit installation time and required additional reinspection of kits," it said.
Overall, the problems "resulted in increased risk to the lives of soldiers," the report states. In written comments to the inspector general, the Marine Corps defended its acquisition decisions for the vehicles. The armored vehicle contracts "were executed within the law, spirit and intent of the current acquisition rules and regulations," according the comments.
The Army did not object to the report's findings.The review was requested by Rep. Louise Slaughter in 2006, after she learned the Pentagon was relying on a just a few small companies to supply armored vehicles to troops. With improvised explosive devices accounting for the majority of combat deaths and injuries, Slaughter said strategy needed to be examined.
"It's been business as usual," Slaughter, D-N.Y., said Wednesday after reviewing the report. "The lives of our soldiers took a back seat to who got the contracts."
Slaughter said the report raises "more questions than answers" and she wants to know if the awards were the result of "influence peddling or insider connections."
Someone is confident or optomistic. They were saying yesterday that it had to do with interest from other countries. This is the third production location with the second delivering vehicles in Q4.
Force Protection Acquires New Vehicle Production Facility
BusinessWire
4:15 PM ET
Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT) today announced it has purchased a new 430,000 square foot facility in Roxboro, NC. Force Protection plans to use the Person County facility for additional capacity for current and future products including its new Cheetah vehicle line. The company's ownership is effective today.
Force Protection is a leader in producing the world's most advanced mine protected vehicles that have become the gold standard for troop safety against the threat of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), land mines, and roadside bombs.
"This is an exciting devel opment for Force Protection," said COO Raymond Pollard. "This will be a strategically important facility for the company, as it will enable us to continue to ramp up MRAP vehicle deliveries on the Cougar and Buffalo lines while simultaneously producing the next generation Cheetah vehicle series. At this new facility, we will initially have the capacity to produce approximately 2,000 vehicles in 2008."
"Force Protection is excited about establishing this significant new manufacturing capability in North Carolina," said Executive Vice President Dan Busher. "North Carolina and Person County understand the urgency of delivering more of our life saving products to our armed forces and have worked with us to identify the right set of facilities and resources to accomplish that missi on. The broad based community involvement in understanding our needs and proposing solutions has really been outstanding."
Force Protection's Cheetah vehicle was recently featured in a Fox News Channel special report, and will join the Cougar and Buffalo vehicles that have an unmatched record for troop safety in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003.
Force Protection is a leading ballistics research and manufacturing enterprise, specializing in the development and production of highly reinforced armored personnel carriers that are designed to save soldiers' lives by shielding them from the deadly effects of roadside bombs, or IEDs, which have become a leading killer of U.S. troops in Iraq. The trucks' unique, V-shaped hull is designed to deflect the force of IED blasts away from the vehicle, keeping soldiers inside safe and alive, and have become the proven response to an emerging global threat to U.S. troops. Its leading models include the 23 ton "Buffalo", a uniquely-designed mine clearance vehicle with a reinforced mechanical arm, and the family of "Cougar" vehicles, both of whose mine and ballistic protection capabilities are among the most advanced in the world. The vehicles are manufactured outside Charleston, SC. Visit the company's website at www.forceprotection.net.
This release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements con cerning our business, future plans and objectives and the performance of our products. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties ultimately may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. The company cautions that these forward looking statements are further qualified by factors including, but not limited to, those set forth in the company's Form 10-K filing and other filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (available at http://www.sec.gov) and the company's public statements. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any statements in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
SOURCE: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. Media Contact: Policy Impact Communications Jeff Child, 202-737-5339
it is all said now:
Force Protection, Inc. Offers Comment on Report by Pentagon's Inspector General
Friday July 13, 8:30 am ET
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT - News) today offered comment on a June 27 report issued by the Pentagon's Inspector General that criticized the U.S. Marine Corps for awarding sole source armored vehicle contracts to the company in 2005, despite delays in delivering the vehicles on schedule.
"Like all Americans, we are disappointed with some of the findings in the Inspector General's report," said Force Protection CEO Gordon McGilton. "From its beginnings, Force Protection's objective has been to provide the finest lifesaving vehicles in the world. We have consistently operated under urgent operational needs and have sought diligently to meet government requirements under extremely short timeframes. However, we believe that recent press coverage on the report has missed some key findings. As stated clearly on page 26, 'the Cougars and the JERRVs proved to have significant and operational value to our warfighters on the field.' The report also states that, 'We reviewed documentation from users and classified data on vehicle performance and learned that the vehicles performed well and saved lives.'
"When past delivery delays have occurred it has been representative that even a minor glitch in the supply chain can push things back under such tight parameters," McGilton said. "Enormous progress has been made in fielding this proven, battlefield solution years ahead of traditional defense schedules. Tens of thousands of our servicemen and women are alive and have reunited with their families and friends at home because of the protection provided by our vehicles. Force Protection will continue to work with the Department of Defense to produce and improve upon the best blast and ballistic protection technology in the world."
Force Protection's vehicles have become the gold standard in troop protection against IEDs, roadside bombs, and land mines. The vehicles have logged more than three million hours of heavy combat operations and withstood thousands of blast attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003.
&
Force Protection May Rise to Record on Cougar, Buffalo Sales
By Edmond Lococo
July 13 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc. has the largest share of orders for the Pentagon's top procurement priority for the war in Iraq: blast-resistant trucks. Analysts estimate the company's 2008 sales will double.
The stock is rated ``buy'' by all four analysts who follow it, according to Bloomberg data. None of that has shielded the Ladson, South Carolina-based company's shares from a 25 percent drop in the past six weeks.
The decline was sparked by concerns the company may struggle with deliveries and lose market share to larger rivals such as Navistar International Corp. Stock sales by senior executives exacerbated the fall. Still, three of the four analysts who follow the company say the shares will climb to a record as Force Protection wins its portion of a planned U.S. Marine Corps order of 20,000 trucks valued at about $20 billion.
``Force Protection does have some of the best vehicles and they are going to be rewarded with orders,'' said Joseph Maxa, an analyst at Dougherty & Co. in Minneapolis. ``When they get the orders, that is going to drive the stock.''
Maxa projects Force Protection shares will rise 40 percent to $32 in the next 12 months. He doesn't own any. Sales will double to $1.4 billion in 2008 from $697 million this year, according to four analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.
The trucks protect U.S. troops from homemade bombs, which are the leading cause of combat deaths in Iraq. The Marines say Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, with V- shaped hulls like Force Protection's Cougar and Buffalo trucks, are four times safer than flat-bottomed transports.
Second Contest
Force Protection is among six companies that won orders valued at $1.7 billion since January. Force Protection's $770 million is about 44 percent of the total. The second competition will be decided in January.
Three of the four analysts following Force Protection project the stock to rise above the company's record close of $30.27 on May 30 in the next 12 months. The shares closed at $22.79 yesterday, and have risen 31 percent so far this year.
James McIlree, an analyst at C.E. Unterberg Towbin in New York, projects the shares will rise to $32, while Chris Donaghey, an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey in Atlanta, predicts they'll hit $36. Neither owns the stock. Both SunTrust and C.E. Unterberg have done investment banking work for Force.
The fourth analyst, David Gremmels at Thomas Weisel Partners in New York, doesn't forecast a price or own any shares. Thomas Weisel buys and sells the shares for customers.
Mouths Shut
The company doesn't provide financial forecasts. Chief Executive Officer Gordon McGilton, 63, declined to answer most questions shareholders asked about competitive position and vehicle output during Force Protection's annual meeting on June 21.
``A refusal to interact doesn't mean we're hiding something,'' McGilton said in an interview after the meeting in Charleston, South Carolina. ``We have a history of keeping our mouths shut until there is something beneficial to say.''
Force Protection shares may rise because investors have overestimated the threat from rivals, and incorrectly assumed demand for the trucks will disappear if the U.S. exits Iraq, said Donaghey.
Troop Reduction
``The downside could be a lower-than-expected win rate, which doesn't seem likely, or that a troop reduction in Iraq would reduce the urgent need,'' Donaghey said. ``A troop withdrawal doesn't take this need away. This is the type of threat we are going to see in future.''
Force Protection was the first company to deliver the trucks in 2003.
The Marines started a competition in January to lift production. Since then, Navistar in Warrenville, Illinois, won a $623 million order on May 31. London-based BAE Systems Plc won a $212 million award on June 28.
To boost output, Force Protection last November teamed with Falls Church Virginia-based General Dynamics Corp., the largest producer of armored vehicles for the U.S. military.
Their joint venture, Force Dynamics, now splits Cougar production, and Force also signed up Jacksonville, Florida-based Armor Holdings Inc., the largest maker of armor for Humvees.
Missed Deliveries
The partnerships have initially strained Force Protection's supply chain, causing missed deliveries, said Michael Aldrich, vice president of government relations. Force deliveries were late by ``a few days'' in May and June as it shipped materials to new production lines, he said. The late vehicles were shipped this month.
Compounding fears about late deliveries and eroding market share were stock sales by Force Protection executives including former Chairman Frank Kavanaugh and CEO McGilton.
Between April 24 and May 31, Kavanaugh sold a total of 1.07 million shares at prices ranging between $23.13 and $30.78. On June 15, he announced he'd leave the company. In January, McGilton had also sold 1 million shares.
Force will continue to ``exceed expectations,'' Kavanaugh, 47, said in an interview one week after stepping down on June 21. His share sales were part of a prearranged plan for company executives, which can't be altered once put into place, he said.
Off the Table
That plan, which ends in August, had about 329,000 shares remaining as of June. Kavanaugh continues to hold another 840,000 shares, which he says he has no current plans to sell.
``I'm an investor, and I took some money off the table,'' Kavanaugh said. ``I still have a substantial amount of my net worth in this company.''
His holdings at the end of May made him the company's 12th largest shareholder, according to Bloomberg data.
Kavanaugh said his departure is actually a sign of the company's good health, because his specialty is corporate turn- arounds, rather than defense programs. As managing director of Fort Ashford Funds LLC in Irvine, California, he helped raise $250 million for the company's expansion from 2003 through 2006.
Kavanaugh became chairman in 2005 when he said Force Protection ``was in a mess.'' He presided over the revamping of the company's manufacturing processes. Before leaving, he oversaw the listing of the company's shares on the Nasdaq market in January. They previously traded over the counter.
Buying Opportunity
The company's shareholder base is now shifting from retail investors to institutions including FMR Corp.'s Fidelity Investments and Wellington Management Co. Both declined to comment on their holdings in Force Protection.
For some retail investors who have held the shares since they traded over the counter, the recent dip was nothing but a buying opportunity.
Kenneth Williams, 65, has put almost all his personal investments in Force Protection since he saw plywood prototypes of its trucks on a factory tour in 2004. The retired former Air Force technician from Columbus, Ohio, bought most of his holdings around $1 a share. He added to his stake, now more than 100,000 shares, when they fell under $22 last month, because he says they will rise to as much as $60 over the next few years.
``I'm surprised it headed lower,'' Williams said. ``If I could dig up more money, I would buy even more, but I'm pretty well committed.''
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=asL_nZnSXrnc
nice story :)
'We were in a Cougar, so we survived'
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-07-15-colomer-usat_N.htm
overreaction imho ::)
Rival's Gain, Force Protection's Loss
Evelyn M. Rusli , 07.16.07, 4:20 PM ET
Force Protection
Military procurement seems like a zero-sum game. When Armor Holdings won a $518.5 million contract to produce armored vehicles for the Navy on Monday, its competitor Force Protection paid for it in the stock market.
Force Protection (nasdaq: FRPT - news - people ) shares tumbled 11.8%, or $2.71, to $20.18, in afternoon trading as investors worried that the companywas losing its dominance in the armored vehicle market. Meanwhile the stock price of Armor, which has held steady ever since BAE Systems (other-otc: BAESF - news - people ) announced a takeover earlier this year, barely budged. Armor edged down 0.03%, or 3 cents, to $87.35.
Since it peaked in May at $28.40, Force Protection's stock has drifted lower amid increased competition. Other armored vehicle makers, such as Armor Holdings (nyse: AH - news - people ), its soon-to-be parent BAE Systems (other-otc: BAESF - news - people ), and Navistar (other-otc: NAVZ - news - people ), have sweeped up large-sized contracts in the last few months. (See: "Competitive Concerns Sap Force Force Protection." )
Under the government's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program the Army is expected to award contracts to produce 23,000 armored vehicles, about 7,700 of which will be awarded this year. When all is said and done, Force Protection is expected to have a 40% share of the pie. In terms of field performance, Force Protection boasts the best record -- to date, no one has died in its mid-sized vehicles. However, the young Ladson, South Caroline-based company has struggled to meet the military's tight deadlines in the past.
"It's not a step forward for Force Protection, but it's not a step back," C.E. Unterberg, Towbin analyst James McIlree, told Forbes.com on Monday. McIlree still believes Force Protection will be able to hold on to its 40% stake.
Some analysts were not surprised by Armor's victory on Monday. According to Timothy Quillin of Stephens, Armor had "the most reliable medium-sized tactical vehicle." Under the deal, Armor will make 1,054 Category I vehicles and 16 Category II vehicles. Category I vehicles are light-weight vehicles designed for urban terrain. Relatively, Category II vehicles are larger and are used for rapid-response activities, such as troop transpors,
With its Cougar vehicle, Force Protection easily monopolizes Category II. However, it has struggled in Category I, which should comprise the bulk of the army's orders. The company has a strong contender for Category I coming up later this year. At 7 tons, the Cheetah will be lighter and more mobile than the Cougar line, making it an attractive Category I vehicle or a replacement candidate for the Humvee.
True. Selling for no reason can still happen. The stock is oversold but the full Stochastic still says there is downside to this.
The only good news that could come before the 2008 budget is any remaining 2007 funds being applied to carryover into 2008. Meaning using remaining 2007 funds to buy vehicles in Fiscal 2008 now. That was the bright spot in the AH contract friday, that the contract included carryover into February 2008.
Meaning one more contract coming?
About another contract if carryover is applied. According to my tally there are about 2200 vehicles left to be contracted with budgeted funds in 2007.
If this dip has hit bottom?
http://www.jimcramerblog.com/2007/07/hot-stocks-to-watch-today_17.html
Force Protection (NasdaqCM:FRPT - News). FRPT's PowerRating is 7.
5+ Consecutive Down Days: These are stocks that have closed down for five or more consecutive days and are trading above their 200-day moving average. Our research shows that stocks trading above their 200-day moving average that close down for five or more days have shown positive returns, on average, 1-day, 2-days and 1-week later. Historically, these stocks have provided traders with a significant edge. Historically, these stocks have provided traders with a significant edge.
thanx AMSTOCKS82:
Force Protection and the MRAP Program
The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) program is designed to bring a type of life saving armored vehicle to the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan that can survive in an environment where mines, IEDs and ambushes are common. The most common type of MRAP vehicle has a "V" shaped hull designed to deflect the force of a mine blast away from the undercarriage of the vehicle.
The original MRAP vehicles purchased by the government consisted mainly of vehicles designed in South Africa and manufactured by subsidiaries of BAE or General Dynamics Land Systems. The main vehicles purchased were RG-31s. The RG-31 was much safer than a Humvee but it was produced in low volume and cost in excess of one million per unit.
In 2000, the US Military began looking for domestic suppliers of MRAP type vehicles. From 2000 to 2002, the US military purchased 12 Buffalos for testing and evaluation. The Buffalo is a vehicle manufactured by Force Protection Inc designed for route clearance. The British military was also investigating MRAP type vehicles and purchased 8 Tempest vehicles (an early model of the Cougar).
Both the Buffalo and Cougar performed exceptionally well – much better than competing vehicles. However, the British put on hold plans to buy more MRAP vehicles until 2006. In 2006, the British purchased a Cougar vehicle called the Mastiff after once again evaluating existing MRAP vehicles. In 2004, the US Military began purchasing small numbers of Cougar vehicles from Force Protection Inc (FPI) and in 2005 purchased additional Buffalo vehicles. The military was at this time purchasing other MRAP vehicles especially the RG-31 from other countries as well.
In the field, between 2002 and 2005, the Buffalo and Cougar continued to perform and survived hundreds of mine and IED blasts without any fatalities. During this time, other MRAP vehicles such as the RG-31 and other types of armored vehicles such as the Stryker, M1 Tank and Bradley were not as safe and soldiers continued to be killed riding in them.
In 2005, the military started ordering more MRAPs than they had in the past with the preference going to FPI for Buffalo and Cougar vehicles due to their safety record in Iraq and Afghanistan – and because field commanders in Iraq increasingly specifically requested Cougar and Buffalo vehicles.
The increase in orders allowed FPI to begin growing in size but at the same time strained the company's ability to purchase parts for the vehicles and assemble them on time. Prior to 2005, this type of MRAP vehicle had not been manufactured in large numbers and there were few suppliers of such things as the armored glass or the specific type of armored steel used by FPI. The shortage of parts caused slow delivery of vehicles straining Force Protection's relationship with the military and causing them to miss delivery deadlines.
To prevent future delivery problems, Force Protection began the process of modernizing their manufacturing procedures, increasing the inventory of spare parts, and developing multiple vendors for parts that could not be readily purchased. The modernization had a large impact on Force Protection's management as well. Garth Barrett Force Protection's chief technical officer had opposed the modernization of the manufacturing facility and increases in parts inventory that had contributed to FPI's production problems. Mr. Barrett subsequently left Force Protection and founded a competing company called Protected Vehicles Inc. (PVI).
FPI as an early innovator for MRAP vehicles was able to secure exclusive licenses to the best of the South African technology for manufacture outside of South Africa. In addition, FPI hired the worlds leading expert in mine and IED protection Dr. Vernon Joynt to help design the vehicles and develop new blast manipulation technology. This allowed Force Protection to get an early lead in MRAP technology.
In mid-2006 the military officially announced the MRAP program. They were soliciting bids for 4100 MRAP type vehicles. At this point, multiple vendors began developing MRAP vehicles.
FPI had ramped up production of vehicles to over 40 per month by mid-2006 but due to previous late vehicle deliveries, began adding additional manufacturing partners. This would not only increase the number of vehicles that they could manufacture but also provide the department of Defense with additional assurances that Force Protection could manufacture the vehicles on time. In December 2006, FPI entered into a joint venture to build Cougars with General Dynamics. The joint venture is called Force Dynamics (FD). FD will manufacture Cat I and Cat II Cougars for the MRAP program.
FPI has developed a third vehicle type called the Cheetah. The Cheetah is smaller and lighter than the Cougar or Buffalo but still has a large degree of mine and Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) protection built into it. The Cheetah is designed to be a light tactical vehicle that can be used in the place of Humvees where mines and IEDs are a danger. Given its performance and safety, the Cheetah is the most likely interim replacement for the Humvee. Force Protection is currently in the process of building manufacturing lines to produce Cheetahs and expects to start production this fall.
Force Protection's many manufacturing agreements may have caused them some problems. Shortly after working with BAE on providing a Cougar variant for the Iraqi Army, BAE developed a vehicle remarkably similar to the Cougar called the RG33. BAE and FPI build a Cougar vehicle for the Iraqi Army. FPI provided the vehicle design but kept all rights to the technology and spare parts business. FPI entered into a manufacturing agreement in November 2006 with Armored Holdings where Armored Holdings subcontracted to build Cougars. Recently, Armored Holdings won a manufacturing award with a vehicle that from the outside appears very similar to the Cougar.
Much of the technology in the Cougar is not protected by patents. Instead, it's only protection was trade secrets or the licensed technology from South Africa. Due to the manufacturing agreements that FPI entered into, the competitors were able to learn the trade secrets but were not able to use the licensed technology from South Africa. Although BAE was able to build a vehicle that appeared similar to the Cougar called the RG-33, without the South African Technology that was exclusively licensed to FPI, BAE had difficulty in getting their vehicle to pass testing. But in the end after several design changes and adding additional armor, the vehicle was able to pass blast testing. The same is true for the Armored Holdings vehicle.
Perhaps because of FPI's past relationships with BAE and Armored Holdings, FPI is keeping their newest technologies and trade secrets to themselves. They are not licensing other manufacturers to build the Cheetah and are keeping other technologies such as their lightweight add-on armor product secret. FPI's add-on armor was recently tested by the military and is designed to stop Explosively Formed Projectiles (EFP)s and Multi-slug IEDs. Other add-on armor solutions from manufactures such as Plasan Sasa, Ceradyne and Armor Holdings are designed to stop only EFPs. Therefore, FPI believes that they have a superior add-on armor product.
To date, approximately 4750 MRAP vehicles have been ordered:
1) The joint Venture FD received orders for 1798 MRAP vehicles
2) Navistar has received orders for 1202 vehicles
2) BAE received orders for 365 vehicles
3) AH received orders for 1156 vehicles
4) Oshkosh received a pre-testing order of 100 vehicles but has not received subsequent orders – they were expected to get the third large order instead of Armored Holdings but due to manufacturing issues, have not received a subsequent order. It is not known if they will receive one in the future.
5) PVI has received a pre-testing order for 62 vehicles but has not received subsequent orders. After testing, PVI must make changes to strengthen the vehicle prior to delivering the 60 vehicles
6) GD received a pre-testing order for 24 vehicles but has not received subsequent orders. GD must strengthen the vehicles before delivering the entire order to the military.
Based on comments from people familiar with MRAP testing, FPI's vehicle performed overall best, followed by Navistar, BAE, Oshkosh, AH, PVI and GD.
Force Protection began ramping-up their production lines in 2006 and had reached approximately 100 vehicles per month by early 2007. The Joint Venture FD and production partners have provided plans to the military to build up to 1000 MRAP vehicles per month early in 2008.
However, for FD to continue ramping-up, they must get new production contracts by my calculation no later than early August to begin pre-ordering parts to build the vehicles. If they don't get the orders, then their ramp-up will likely be less aggressive.
The militaries strategy is to get many manufacturers making MRAP vehicles in order to rapidly acquire thousands of MRAP vehicles. However, in the current MRAP budget, the Defense Department has spent most of the money available. Therefore, Defense Secretary Gates is speaking to Congress to get additional funds moved from other defense programs re-targeted to MRAP. If this effort succeeds, it is not certain where that money will be targeted but FD is expected to get a portion of that money in additional vehicle orders. Fiscal year 2008 begins November 1 and the budget for MRAP is expected to be $4.1 billion dollars. Force Dynamics is expected to get large contracts from that budget.
Short term, FPI should maintain the technology lead with their Cougar and Buffalo products. Longer term, other companies are expected to continue to reverse engineer existing armor technologies and develop new. However, by the time other competitors are able to build comparable products, the second MRAP competition is expected to be decided. The second MRAP competition is for vehicles that have an even greater level of protection against IEDs, mines and can protect against newer IEDs and EFPs. FPI is well situated for this as they have already developed their solution. Their newer vehicle the Cheetah already has available EFP protection as do their Cougar and Buffalo products.
However, due to the demand for vehicles, the quality edge may not be enough to get the majority of orders. Any MRAP vehicle that can pass the militaries testing is superior to a Humvee and will save lives in Iraq. Therefore, not only is quality important but so is production capacity. FD has the most aggressive ramp-up plan so far announced by any of the competitors but even with orders for over 1700 MRAP vehicles, this is not enough backlog to support the massive ramp-up to 1000 vehicles per month that FD announced they were capable of.
FPI's longer term objective is to sell their Cheetah product and add-on armor products. No other competitor has access to FPI's technology used in designing the Cheetah. The Cheetah is capable of becoming the combat replacement to the Humvee. This would mean thousands of orders each year for many years to come.
Whatever happens, one thing is sure, the ramp-up and backlog that FPI currently has will rapidly increase their revenue from 2006. Force Protection's 2007 revenue and profit could be over 400% higher than 2006.
This explains how Armor Holdings jumped ahead of OSH/PVI to make it a four way split. Their partner is Lockheed Martin. Contender in JLTV.
Lockheed May Bid in Blast-Resistant Truck Contest (Update1)
By Edmond Lococo
July 17 (Bloomberg) -- Lockheed Martin Corp. may make a bid in the U.S. Marine Corps's second contest for blast-resistant trucks, which might award contracts totaling $20 billion.
Lockheed didn't bid in the first contest for the Mine- Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicles, or MRAPs. Its involvement is now limited to supporting Armor Holdings Inc., which won a $518.5 million contract last week, said Lockheed's Kathryn Hasse, head of truck programs.
Armor Holdings is one of seven companies that won orders for blast-resistant trucks valued at more than $2.2 billion since January. The Marine Corps on July 2 announced a second competition for as many as 20,000 vehicles to be decided in January 2008. Lockheed will assess the request for proposals when it is issued this month, Hasse said.
``We're evaluating what we want to do with respect to that opportunity,'' Hasse, director of tactical wheeled vehicles, said today in a phone interview.
Lockheed, the world's largest defense company, is still defining the terms of its partnership with Armor Holdings for the first phase of the MRAP competition, Hasse said. Lockheed will likely provide ``systems integration'' and ``logistics support'' for Armor's truck, called the Caiman. Lockheed declined to be more specific about the work.
Jump Start
The partnership, announced in March, was ``jump-started'' by Armor's 1,170 vehicle contract last week, Hasse said. The order was Armor's first since a contract to deliver prototypes in January.
``We now have a basis to come to agreement on a definitive work scope,'' Hasse said. ``Without their having an MRAP vehicle award, there was nothing much we could do.''
The MRAP vehicles have a blast-deflecting V-shaped hull which the Marine Corps has said is four times safer than flat- bottomed trucks. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in May purchasing the trucks is the top priority to protect forces in Iraq from homemade bombs, which are the leading cause of U.S. combat deaths.
The largest maker of blast-resistant trucks for the U.S. military is Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection Inc.
Shares of Lockheed rose $1.81 to $98.61 at 4:02 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. They have risen 7.1 percent so far this year.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] Last Updated: July 17, 2007 16:18 EDT
My tally was 2,200 vehicles but the official tally for the remaining Fiscal 2007 year is 1,480 vehicles to be contracted for. Meaning more contracts before fall.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/defensenewsstand_spclsubj.asp?s=ied
Pentagon Plans Orders for 1,480 Additional MRAP Vehicles This Summer
DefenseAlert - 7/18/2007
July 18, 2007 -- The Defense Department's $1.1 billion reprogramming proposal for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program would provide funds for an additional 1,480 vehicles during fiscal year 2007, bringing the total number of vehicles on order to 6,415, according to senior Pentagon officials.
Another estimate of whats in the pipeline.
The funds would add 2,650 vehicles to an existing Defense Department order for 3,765 MRAPs
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?p=263160#post263160
Corps redirects $563M to speed MRAP delivery
By Kimberly Johnson - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Jul 18, 2007 18:59:45 EDT
The Corps is pulling $563 million from low-priority programs and funneling it into blast-proof vehicles in a bid to push the vehicles out to troops faster.
The move is part of a Pentagon-wide plan to inject about $1.2 billion into production of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, which would almost double existing orders. The funds would add 2,650 vehicles to an existing Defense Department order for 3,765 MRAPs, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Wednesday.
Technical Analysis
Short the Established Downtrend in Force Protection
By Dan Fitzpatrick
RealMoney.com Contributor
7/19/2007 8:56 AM EDT
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/newsanalysis/technicalanalysis/10368515.html
Force Protection (FRPT) is a dominant player in the armored vehicle industry. In light of the plethora of hot spots in the world, this is a good business to be in today.
The company has had the lion's share of the armored vehicle market, but that appears to be changing. TheStreet.com's Melissa Davis has written some great articles on Force Protection's troubles, though I have heard from one or two bulls who feel the company is getting unjustly smeared.
Now, there are always two sides to every argument, and after listening to the bulls and the bears, I'm going to use my usual tiebreaker -- the stock chart.
If you look at the daily chart of Force Protection, you'll see that the stock price has been cut by one-third since late May, steadily declining in a stair-step fashion. But the stock is now testing a critical level.
With its share price now down at $20, an obvious level of support, Force Protection could be at a bottom. The bulls could be making a stand right here, right now.
But if $20 fails to hold off the selling pressure, I believe the stock could fall another $3 before the next level of support comes into play.
If Force Protection falls below $20 down to $19.90 you might consider shorting this established downtrend. But because of the nature of this short idea, the stop needs to be fairly tight, just above yesterday's high of $21.19 -- let's say $21.25.
Assuming support is broken, you'll want to keep a tight leash on the position, and any strength that's sufficient to push the stock above yesterday's high is also a signal that the bulls are making a stand at $20. You don't want to be short.
The downside target on this short is $17, right in the middle of the March consolidation level. Shares of Force Protection closed at $20.56 Wednesday.
thestreet.com is posting bullshit imho ;)
moer important is this:
Force Protection seen as MRAP beneficiary
Analyst cites head start in production of fortified military vehicles
By Christopher Hinton, MarketWatch
Last Update: 9:34 AM ET Jul 19, 2007
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Force Protection Inc. stands to benefit from a Defense Department plan to allocate another $1.2 billion for purchases of military vehicles specially designed to withstand powerful explosions, a Thomas Weisel analyst said Thursday.
These so-called MRAP vehicles -- short for military resistant ambush protected -- are in great demand because they would afford greater protection for U.S. forces exposed to deadly improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, during patrols in Iraq and Afghanistan.
FRPT20.81, +0.25, +1.2% ) , based in Ladson, S.C., is "well positioned" to meet the Defense Department's requirements and is believed to be three to six months ahead of the competition in ramping up MRAP production, Thomas Weisel's David Gremmels said in a research note.
Chart of FRPT
Force Protection's shares traded 2% to $20.99 in premarket trading.
On Wednesday, the Defense Department said it wants to transfer $1.2 billion in existing funds to order an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, bringing the total size of the order to 6,415.
"The need for these vehicles supersedes all other programs right now," a Pentagon spokesman said at a press briefing, according to a Defense Department transcript.
"Force Protection's Cheetah vehicle, which is scheduled to start production in 4Q07, is the furthest along of any protected vehicle in its weight class, and as such is well ahead of competitors in terms of being able to supply large numbers to the Pentagon as soon as next year," Gremmels told clients.
Earlier this month, the companies received a $111.5 million contract to build 235 MRAP vehicles for the Marine Corps.
I worry. The stochastics look like we have hit a bottom. This is the fourth day of testing 20 and the bollinger bands have narrowed in the last two. But today's close is lower than the open.
About the signs of weakness, the good news is that we may be at the bottom of a bear trap. Because the NASDAQ is still trending upward. Lets hope the market lifts FRPT with it. The bad news may be the bears are still trying to sink FRPT. I will feel better when we make it out of bear territory.
The good news that may be coming. Money for 2,650 vehicles to be contracted before October. And FRPT and the Cheetah moving into position with two production facilities just for the Cheetah, which FRPT will benefit 100% since Cheetah is not a part of FRPT/GD aka Force Dynamics.
It looks like FRPT will be able to push off any Cougar/Buffalo production off to Force Dynamics though. And Force Dynamics can handle the ILAV aka Cougar production from the BAE/FRPT partnership also. The ILAV contract had options for over 3,000 more vehicles as they deliver the first 800 now.
Tested the 200 MA and rebounded. The bad news the "no reason" sale afterhours dipped to 17.68.
Well if this stays above the 200 MA, I am contrarian as this keeps testing low end trends.
And my reason is: Summer is?
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/defensenewsstand_spclsubj.asp?s=ied
Pentagon Plans Orders for 1,480 Additional MRAP Vehicles This Summer
DefenseAlert - 7/18/2007
July 18, 2007 -- The Defense Department's $1.1 billion reprogramming proposal for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program would provide funds for an additional 1,480 vehicles during fiscal year 2007, bringing the total number of vehicles on order to 6,415, according to senior Pentagon officials.
One more ouch then a maybe?
Navistar Wins $413.9 Million Marine Corps Truck Award (Update1)
By Edmond Lococo and Mike Ramsey
July 20 (Bloomberg) -- Navistar International Corp. won a $413.9 million award from the U.S. Marine Corps to build blast- resistant trucks as the Pentagon speeds delivery of the vehicles to protect troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Navistar's International Military and Government unit in Warrenville, Illinois,
will build 755 of the trucks by February 2008 as part of the Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicle, or MRAP, program, the U.S. Defense Department said in a statement today. Navistar is the world's fourth largest truckmaker.
The award is Navistar's third manufacturing contract for the vehicles, following $631.5 million in awards this year. The $1.04 billion total gives it the largest share of among the seven companies awarded production contracts. Navistar's shares have more than doubled this year, fueled by ``MRAP enthusiasm,'' said JB Groh, an analyst with D.A. Davidson & Co.
``The timing is pretty convenient based on the downturn in commercial trucks because of new emissions standards,'' said Groh, who is based in Lake Oswego, Oregon. He rates the shares ``underperform'' and doesn't own any. ``It's sort of perfect timing.''
Shares of Navistar fell 65 cents to $70 at 3:59 p.m. New York time in over-the-counter trading before the award was announced at 5 p.m.
Since January, the Marine Corps has awarded more than $2.6 billion, giving Navistar about 40 percent of the total. The Defense Department said this week it plans to spend more than $5 billion this year on the trucks, which have a raised chassis and a blast-deflecting V-shaped hull that make them four times safer than flat-bottomed trucks.
3,765 Trucks
As of the end of June, 3,765 trucks had been ordered, and current plans call for having a total of 6,415 vehicles delivered by March 2008, John Young, head of the Pentagon's MRAP task force, said at a July 18 press conference.
Prior to today's award, the largest recipient of orders for the trucks was Force Protection Inc. of Ladson, South Carolina. Force has received orders valued at more than $770 million, or about 30 percent of the total after the Navistar award.
DaimlerChrysler Corp. is the world's largest truckmaker, followed by Volvo AB and Paccar Inc.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] ; Mike Ramsey in Southfield, Michigan, at mramsey6bloomberg.net
Last Updated: July 20, 2007 18:41 EDT
There is still hope for FRPT, there are still 725 of 1480 vehicles near term to be contracted. With another 1170 on top of that before October.
from 60% profit to small loss,what a shame from my side :-[
but I am still holding and I am still convinced that FRPT will be the dominant player on the MRAP market.
nice article:
Firm guards niche in armored vehicles
By Roxana Tiron
July 24, 2007
As the Pentagon and Congress urgently try to provide as many mine-resistant vehicles as possible to troops in Iraq, one company is warning lawmakers that the military may end up buying vehicles that don't all offer a consistent level of protection.
Additionally, it warns, the Pentagon could face an expensive logistical nightmare.
Force Protection Inc., of Ladson, S.C., quickly shot to fame with its V-shaped-hull vehicles, which can withstand blasts from the improvised explosive devices that are so common in Iraq. But the field is now getting crowded with other companies offering similar vehicles — and Force Protection is trying to assert its ascendancy.
The firm is pressing its case with lawmakers and Pentagon officials that "all V-shaped vehicles are not created equal," said Michael Aldrich, the company's vice president of marketing and government relations.
Company officials want to convince the Pentagon and lawmakers that Force Protection could license its original designs to other manufacturers rather than compete with a slew of vehicles that may not offer the same level of protection.
Indeed, based on the success of Force Protection's Cougar and Buffalo vehicles in Iraq, the Pentagon has significantly stepped up its acquisition of the uniquely designed vehicles, which deflect and stifle shockwaves from explosions through a V-shaped undercarriage.
The Pentagon created a Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle task force as a top priority under Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and a whole host of defense contractors are expected to build up to 5,761 MRAP vehicles by February 2008. Force Protection will supply more than 30 percent of that order.
The Pentagon could buy as many as 17,000 of the V-shaped-hull vehicles in the coming years to replace Humvees.
But Force Protection, which is partnered with General Dynamics Corp.'s Land Systems business arm, is no longer the only company producing the vehicles. Six other contractors are also vying for MRAP orders after sending prototypes to military testers: Navistar International Corp.'s International Military and Government LLC; a General Dynamics Canadian unit; BAE Systems Plc.; Oshkosh Truck Corp.; Protected Vehicles Inc.; and Armor Holdings Inc.
Force Protection has already licensed its technical data package to General Dynamics as part of a joint venture, Force Dynamics, and Armor Holdings, which is manufacturing both Force Protection vehicles and its own competing design.
"We think they [the Pentagon] jump-started getting more protection to soldiers, but now it is time to focus on one design and we're hopeful it's going to be our design," said Aldrich.
"Our concern is that everything is being lumped together under one program called MRAP, but they are all different vehicles which are inefficiently managed," he added.
Aldrich also claimed that not all vehicles might perform as well as Force Protection's against blasts. "They have been tested against a common set of standards and that is why they are being fielded," he said. "But they have not been exposed to the real field."
He explained that Force Protection vehicles can survive blasts well due to their geometry and a specialty-grade steel that bends rather than welds. The vehicles also stand three feet off the ground and are very heavy to better withstand blasts.
If the Pentagon deploys different kinds of vehicles, however, sustaining them on the battlefield could become cumbersome, given the different parts needed. According to Pentagon numbers, 72 percent of the total life-cycle cost for the MRAPs goes toward maintaining and sustaining the vehicles, while the rest is for the actual purchase. On a $4 billion MRAP purchase, the life cycle cost would be as much as $10 billion.
The cost of one MRAP vehicle ranges between $1 million and $1.2 million. The vehicles are heavy and have a high fuel consumption of 5-10 miles per gallon, depending on their size. MRAPs come in three categories, ranging from a lighter utility vehicle to a large mine-protected clearance vehicle.
"It's much too heavy, it doesn't perform well off the road, and it's a logistical nightmare in terms of [the] fuel support it needs," said retired Gen. Jack Keane. "We are talking about tanks on wheels here."
"The life-cycle costs and logistics infrastructure is going to be very expensive," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told The Hill. "But we can absorb the cost easier than it is for a family to absorb another loss of life."
Together with Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), Graham filed an amendment to the currently shelved defense authorization bill to provide up to $24 billion to buy additional MRAP vehicles.
Biden, a presidential contender, on Monday met with executives from Force Protection and Protected Vehicles Inc, also a South Carolina company.
But Graham said that the consequences of having more than one source for building the vehicles could be beneficial.
"You'll have different minds looking at ways to make this better," Graham said. "More companies will ensure that innovation is alive because they will be competing for a share of the market."
For example, Navistar won a $414 million contract for 755 MRAPs on Friday, following another contract in May for 1,200 of the ambush-protected vehicles. The company said it works to develop vehicles according to the rigorous Pentagon specifications.
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, acknowledged that the maintenance of these vehicles is going to be "substantial." Last week, Congress approved a Pentagon reprogramming request of $1.2 billion to buy more MRAPs.
The lawmaker has also expressed concern that there won't be enough spare parts available for all the vehicles. Murtha and other lawmakers are criticizing the Pentagon for not moving fast enough with its MRAP acquisition even though requests have been coming from Iraq since 2004.
"They are coming to us with a program request that they should have asked for two years ago," Murtha said in an interview.
"This is the most screwed-up Defense Department I have ever seen," said Murtha, who acknowledged that Gates has started to make a difference.
link:
http://thehill.com/business--lobby/firm-guards-niche-in-armored-vehicles-2007-07-24.html
bad chart (back on April levels):
I think there is a fire for FRPT and the Cheetah. FRPT has quoted a second facility just for the Cheetah delivering vehicles in Q4. And has purchased a third facility also primarily for the Cheetah.
Navistar has captured 1,955 Cat I vehicles and there are 1,825 vehicles left in the 2007 budget to be contracted for. If FRPT captures the remaining for Cheetah?
If this turns into a two way split? Because the Army wanted to keep the number of different vehicles to a minimum to simplify fielding and maintaining the vehicles.
It looks like the second and third FRPT facility, both for Cheetah, was to directly compete for Cat I because the Cheetah comes in at the price point of the competition.
So unless BAE, OSH/PVI, or General Dynamics emerges from the pack, that straight away for the remaining 1,825 vehicles could be for the Cheetah.
fyi:
FRPT: Short Interest UP 65.5% to 14.9M in Jul 2007
Tuesday , July 24, 2007 16:18ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 65.5% to 14,881,117 shares for the month ended mid-July, 2007.
SYMBOL JUNE JULY CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 8,994,004 14,881,117 +5,887,113 +65.46% 6
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 2,698,170, it would require approximately 6 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
oversold inmho
cheers
Oliver
I've had puts on this one since around $20 .. cashed them all in today, any suggestions what to look for to go long again? First close over 200 ma with volume?
Just got a rumor. Those 13 million shares issued for the 152 million expansion are no longer restricted and being shorted? See attachment.
The 200 MA sounds like a fair price to start. But any contract announcement I think this still has legs. Otherwise the Q2 report due in the second week of August.
I am down to one position in case of a contract announcement. There is still 1.2 billion realigned last week for 2007. I do not know if FRPT is maxed out or working up its proposal for the remaining funds. Until then I am looking for the bottom of the stock dilution being priced in. This is more than a dip.
Some News:
White House to request additional funding for bomb resistant vehicles
Associated Press - July 31, 2007 3:13 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House is set to ask Congress for more money for bomb-resistant vehicles -- about $5.3 billion.
Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England says the vehicles have special V-shaped undercarriages that can deflect roadside bomb blasts and better protect troops.
The request will be added to the Pentagon's more-than $141 billion budget request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the budget year.
England tells the House Budget Committee that other costs, especially President Bush's ongoing strategy of increased troop levels in Baghdad and Anbar province, will require additional funding. But England couldn't yet say exactly how much additional funding will be needed.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
fyi:
MRAP: Another One Bites the Dust?
05-Aug-2007 16:18
Textron Land Systems' M1117 Guardian Armored Security Vehicle has already been disqualified from the USA's MRAP competition, though purchases for American military police continue. Now Oshkosh Truck's Category 1 partnership with Protected Vehicles, Inc. to produce the Alpha may have joined the casualty list, in the wake of testing at Aberdeen. The Alpha vehicle was a partnership with PVI and Battelle, whose ShieldAll™ ceramic armoring has reportedly survived recent testing against EFP land mines. The 13-ton Alpha was one of the 6+ person CAT I patrol vehicle's heavier entries, but it had been an early winner in the MRAP field thanks to a 100 "low risk" rapid-fielding order on Feb 14/07 before testing had commenced. A July 12/07 DefenseLink announcement listed a revised contract completion time frame of July 2007 for this order.
Bloomberg's July 27/07 article "Oshkosh Mine-Resistant Truck Rejected By Pentagon" excerpts a June 29/07 letter from the Marine Corps to Oshkosh Truck official Moss Ruedinger – and has significant implications for both Oshkosh and PVI going forward...
The USMC's letter allegedly said that explosives testing of the Alpha had "caused concern regarding overall vehicle survivability,'' and unspecified "automotive'' and "human factors'' also "preclude safe vehicle operation.'' These issues were, said the letter "borne out'' by a limited troop evaluation and the military "is convinced that remediation of this issue would require significant redesign.... The result would be an unacceptable delay to future production orders.''
(In plain English: rejected)
Oshkosh also has yet to see any orders for its Bushmaster vehicles, a CAT-II vehicle partnership with Thales Australia. Bushmaster vehicles make up Australia's mine-protected vehicle patrol fleet, and they have served successfully in Iraq and Afghanistan for several years with the Australians – and now the Dutch as well. Surprisingly, the Bushmaster received no "low risk" orders in the MRAP program's early stages, nor any following orders despite rumors of a 1,500 vehicle MRAP purchase and the recent placement of additional production orders by Australia.
To date, therefore, Oshkosh has largely been relegated to the sidelines. Meanwhile, competitor Navistar's MaxxPro has rocketed to the top of the MRAP competition thanks to a highly producible design created in conjunction with Israeli firm Plasan Sasa.
On July 27/07, Oshkosh announced a partnership with Ceradyne and I3 to produce The Bull using Oshkosh truck chassis. Their solution has significant applications for the logistics vehicles that travel the roads to supply combat units, but infantry carrier versions have also been designed and may qualify for the new MRAP-II solicitation. Its upgraded protection requirements are believed to include protection against EFP land mines, which makes it a solid 'Plan B' in light of emerging circumstances.
Oshkosh's smaller partner Protected Vehicles, Inc. will be hit harder if news concerning the Alpha is true. Force Protection's Cougar vehicles had a 2-year ramp up period thanks to slow orders and slowly-dawning awareness. PVI, on the other hand, is introducing its offerings at the height of awareness and competition. That's a less forgiving environment, where there's little tolerance or time for modifications, and significant production capacity is required to play. A July 30/07 interview by PVI CEO Garth Barrett with Jane's Defence Weekly indicates that he never expected the massive push now under way by the US military to acquire thousands of mine-resistant vehicles. Nevertheless, that is where the situation now stands.
Neither the Marines, Oshkosh, or PVI would comment on the Alpha situation when questioned by Bloomberg, or by DID; if true, however, the firm may begin to find itself in a Catch-22 situation. In order to become a serious contender and reap substantial MRAP orders, PVI needs significant expansion of its production capacity. In order to finance that investment, of course, PVI needs contracts and orders – or reliable expectation of same. A failure with the Alpha throws that reliability into serious question, and will complicate attempts at private financing.
The firm isn't out of the competition yet, however. they've just unveiled a JLTV-type competitor in The Protector, and PVI is still producing its initial Feb 14/07 order for 60 of its Golan CAT-II squad/specialty vehicles. Golan was developed in conjunction with Israeli firm RAFAEL and that country's ManTak tank program office and offers a number of advanced features. These include the same explosive reactive armor that protects US Bradley armored vehicles against threats including anti-tank rockets and EFP land mines, and is designed into the vehicle in such a way that the vehicle's appearance doesn't change whether it's protected by reactive armor or not. This makes the Golan another potential competitor in the upcoming MRAP-II program, and even one additional order for a couple hundred vehicles before MRAP-I closes would make a big difference to the firm's ability to ramp up future production.
So, too, would a major strategic production partner for its Golan vehicle. The best features in the world won't win a production race, which is what the MRAP competition has unquestionably become.
&
BAE Delivering a Cougar Variant for Iraq's $445.4M ILAV Contract
05-Aug-2007 16:14
The global trend toward mine-resistant vehicles has become unmistakable. The 101st Airborne's RG-31s and Australian Bushmasters were the first examples in Iraq, followed by the M1117 ASVs for military police and Cougar and Buffalo vehicles among US Marines et. al. Britain has the 'Mastiff' Cougar variant. And the Iraqis? While up-armored Hummers are a big upgrade over the Ford commercial pickups some units were using, they knew that they, too, needed a mine-resistant vehicle that could perform patrols in urban areas and along their country's roads.
Their choice featured a familiar vehicle base – but an unfamiliar partnership. While the design is based on Force Protection Inc's v-hulled Cougar that has earned such praise from US Marine Corps and Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams in Iraq, the prime contractor is competitor BAE Systems. The original contract and associated work began at the end of May 2006, and its total value could reach $445.4 million and 1,050 vehicles if all options are exercised. The first ILAVs were delivered to Iraq 90 days after contract award, i.e. by the end of August 2006.
So why use Cougar variant, instead of existing BAE products... and is the Iraqi vehicle getting the RG-33L's robotic arm?
After all, BAE's vast array of products include the M2/M3 Bradley, the M113 APC family, the highly-regarded v-hulled RG-31 Nyala 4×4s that are also in battlefield use by American and Canadian troops, and larger v-hulled Casspir personnel carriers that have a long history of effective use in mined war zones.
DID spoke with a BAE executive, whose simple response was that they looked at the Iraqis' stated requirements, looked at what was available on the market, decided that this option would be the best offering (the RG-33 hadn't yet been introduced), and put the consortium together.
This has not stopped BAE from making competitive moves of its own toward the Cougar/Buffalo's market niche, however, just as Force Protection is making moves toward the smaller mine-resistant vehicle niche of BAE OMC's RG-31/32 offerings. See below for further details.
BAE Systems Land and Armaments is the prime contractor for the ILAV, with subcontractors Force Protection Inc. in Ladson, SC, and Spartan Chassis, Inc. in Charlotte, MI. This consortium will also have the happy result of expanding the manufacturing capacity for Cougar-type vehicles; BAE Systems personnel told DID that work would be going on at Spartan Chassis in Michigan and BAE's manufacturing plants in Anniston, AL and York, PA, as well as Force Protection's South Carolina facilities; note, for instance, the work split in the original May 31, 2006 order.
All contracts are issued by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command in Warren, MI.
links:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/mrap-another-one-bites-the-dust-03574
&
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/bae-delivering-a-cougar-variant-for-iraqs-4454m-ilav-contract-02338
cheers
Oliver
Aside from the MRAP II RFP ( Request For Proposal ) that came out which looks promising for FRPT is that BAE does not appear to do a thing with its ILAV agreement with FRPT.
BAE was the prime contractor on the1,050 vehicle production initial part of the proposal. But the proposal had a maximum of over 4,000 vehicles or 3,000 more ILAVs. If BAE is not interested in producing its half of the vehicles BAE has an escape clause that lets FRPT produce all the vehicles. Enter substitute Cougars for ILAVs. I mention this because the last ILAV contract FRPT received did not mention BAE doing any of the work.
I am reading the MRAP II RFP right now.
https://www.neco.navy.mil/static/840-v5static_sh.cfm?header_key=63728529&CFID=3006585&CFTOKEN=75127359
Looking for a close above the 200 MA looks fair. TheStreet.com has been advertising a high teens entry point before they would be interested. Lets hope more interested parties show up.
Continuation breaking the downtrend or sideways.
Jumped the gun. I thought this was two weeks ago. If all the paper work is done the signature loop should be weeks. Reset the weeks counter.
Congress OKs MRAP Reprogramming; Additional Production Orders Expected
Aug. 7, 2007 -- Congress has officially blessed the Pentagon's July 17 request to shift $1.16 billion between accounts to procure additional Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, setting the stage for additional production orders of as many as 725 blast-proof trucks.
Story length: 345 words.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/newsstand_latest.asp
I am pissed :-[
Force Protection's Friend Becomes a Foe
By Melissa Davis
Senior Writer
8/8/2007 11:09 AM EDT
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/newsanalysis/manufacturing/10373072.html
OKLAHOMA CITY -- Force Protection's (FRPT) chief ally, General Dynamics (GD) , is starting to look more like a formidable foe.
Up to now, Force Protection and General Dynamics have worked together as a team to snag big contracts for Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicles. This week, however, General Dynamics landed a $339 million order for 600 MRAP vehicles on its own.
Moreover, that order calls for heavy-duty Category II vehicles -- a class of MRAP vehicles previously dominated by Force Protection's celebrated Cougar.
Force Protection's stock plummeted 12% to $16 on Wednesday due to the stunning setback. The shares have lost nearly half of their value this summer as competitive pressures have mounted.
"The award is clearly a negative for FRPT, which now faces another Category II competitor ahead of large MRAP orders in 2008," Thomas Weisel Partners analyst David Gremmels admitted on Wednesday. "As a result of this new reality, we are lowering our Cougar market-share assumption for MRAP from 40% to 33% for 2007-2008."
Gremmels lowered that same target less than a month ago, when Armor Holdings, a rival now owned by BAE Systems, snagged a surprising MRAP win. Until then, Gremmels had projected that Force Protection's Cougar would represent at least half of all vehicles ordered under the multibillion-dollar MRAP program.
"Force Protection's Cougar vehicle dominates the Category II MRAP vehicle market, being the only contractor awarded volume production since testing wrapped up at Aberdeen," Gremmels wrote at the time. "Although our model has lost some of its conservatism by the addition of an unexpected contender to the production competition, we continue to believe it is achievable."
While now backing away from that call, Gremmels continues to maintain his overweight rating on Force Protection's shares. He views the stock as especially attractive following the latest selloff.
Still, even Gremmels admits that the rules of the MRAP competition -- which once seemed to favor Force Protection -- have clearly changed.
"We believe the MRAP acquisition strategy has evolved as the Department of Defense struggles under intense political pressure to get as many vehicles fielded as soon as possible," wrote Gremmels, whose firm makes a market in Force Protection's securities. "This has resulted in the original intent of having industry focus on two or three of the best designs transforming into a free-for-all, with orders seemingly going to all players that passed testing at Aberdeen and can make a case for production capacity."
As a relatively young company with a spotted production record, Force Protection could further lose its competitive edge. Indeed, rival Navistar (NAVZ.PK) -- an established player with a long history of mass producing commercial vehicles -- has already overtaken Force Protection as this year's biggest MRAP winner so far.
Navistar's stock, up 2.4% to $61.40 on Wednesday and hovering in the upper end of its 52-week range, has handily outperformed Force Protection's in a reflection of the changing landscape.
Considering doing a Cramer "mo back" and do an all in right now.
Should not have been a surprise. The RG-31 is the grandfather of FRPT, and the DoD has been buying them all along. They have just partnered to produce them at 100 vehicles per month. FRPT had to partner to get its production above 100 vehicles per month also.
I know it looks compromising and a conflict. But this is a governement contract. So all General Dynamics has to do is prove it is not compromising the government in its business conflicts which may arise. Leaving the business conflicts to civil court. But assume it is just a compromise and not a conflict. Or General Dynamics would not do it or get away with it.
Below it says Congress officially blessed a shift of 1,160 million dollars to MRAP. Subtract today's 338.7 million. Who gets the remaining 821.3 million? Navistar and General Dynamics contracts are written for vehicles to be delivered in October by March of 2008.
Cheetah enters production in Q4 2007 plus January and February's production can still be contracted for. It is the only card I see for FRPT because it brings the price point of a Cat I Cougar down to the competition's price point in the Cheetah.
The second story below which I cannot post because it is a pay site says that MRAP testing is continueing and preparing for MRAP II testing. The current MRAP testing is being done in three phases.
The first phase or blast testing to see how much punishment it can take is complete. Vehicles for phase two are there now. Phase two testing will be an objective view of how it is built and how it will perform.
Phase three they will review all the results and decide about the tests and vehicles. So yes the Cheetah may will still be in there, but what are they waiting for? They have announced ASVs and OSH's Alpha rejected. Cheetah?
Congress OKs MRAP Reprogramming; Additional Production Orders
Expected
Aug. 7, 2007 -- Congress has officially blessed the Pentagon's July
17
request to shift $1.16 billion between accounts to procure additional
Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, setting the stage for
additional production orders of as many as 725 blast-proof trucks.
Story length: 345 words.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/newsstand_latest.asp
ABERDEEN COMMANDER SAYS MRAP II WON'T SLOW ONGOING MRAP I TESTING
Inside the Army - 8/6/2007
As Aberdeen Test Center undertakes the second phase of testing for the
base Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program, testers are also
readying for MRAP II vehicle evaluation.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/newsstand_latest.asp
Force Protection Inc
Force Protection Rises as Earnings Beat Estimates (Update1)
By Edmond Lococo
Aug. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Shares of Force Protection Inc., the largest builder of blast-resistant vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps, rose as much as 7.8 percent after the company's second- quarter profit topped analysts' estimates.
The stock gained $1.02, or 7.1 percent, to $15.40 at 11:53 a.m. in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. Ladson, South Carolina-based Force said yesterday after U.S. markets closed that second-quarter net income surged almost 23-fold to $9.63 million, or 14 cents a share, from $424,047, or 1 cent, a year earlier.
Demand for the company's Cougar and Buffalo vehicles for U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan lifted per-share profit past 12 cents a share, the average estimate of three analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Force was the first company to deliver blast-resistant trucks for combat use in 2003. It is now one of seven companies building them and the largest as measured by deliveries.
``They are going to get these vehicles out as fast as they can,'' Joseph Maxa, an analyst at Dougherty & Co. in Minneapolis, said in an interview. ``As the company gets capacity up to a certain level, the military will support them with orders to keep production at that level.''
Maxa estimates monthly manufacturing at the company's Ladson plant is at 100 trucks a month now, and will rise to 150 a month by the end of the year. He said the company could get its next ``small'' truck order ``soon,'' and didn't project how large the award would be. Maxa rates the shares ``buy'' and doesn't own any.
Force Shipped
Force shipped a total of 229 Cougar and Buffalo trucks in the second quarter, up from 64 a year earlier.
``This quarter confirms our commitment to increasing capacity for the best-protected vehicles for our troops,'' Michael Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president for government relations, said in an interview. ``We are not only getting better at deliveries, we're becoming more profitable in the process.''
Sales more than doubled to $134.7 million. Revenue fell short of the average estimate of $144.3 million from the Bloomberg survey.
Sales missed estimates partly because some June vehicle deliveries were late and shipped in July, David Gremmels, a New York-based analyst with Thomas Weisel Partners, wrote in a note to clients. Gremmels had projected quarterly sales of $148 million, while Dougherty's Maxa had predicted $147 million.
Strong Outlook
``Long-term outlook remains strong,'' wrote Gremmels, who rates the shares ``overweight'' and doesn't own any. ``Stronger- than-expected margin performance and ability to quickly make up the handful of deliveries that slipped out of 2Q increases our confidence that the company can execute on its aggressive planned production ramp.''
At the end of June, Force Protection had a backlog of 1,662 trucks, the company said in a regulatory filing yesterday. That includes 1,558 Cougars and 104 Buffalos. Force shares production of the Cougar via a joint venture with Falls Church, Virginia- based General Dynamics Corp., while building the Buffalo on its own. The backlog is adequate to carry Force through about February 2008, Aldrich said in a phone interview yesterday. As it takes about six months from order to delivery, due to the need to secure raw materials, Force will need its next award soon to avoid a gap in production early next year, Aldrich said.
Close to Wall
``We're dangerously close to hitting a wall,'' Aldrich said. ``When you have to order things six months in advance to get them in a delivery state, to only have seven months of backlog is dangerously close to backing off our ramp-up schedule.''
About two-thirds of the six-month delivery time is needed for material procurement, he said.
Dougherty's Maxa estimates the company will probably get an award in the near-term that would carry them through March, and further larger orders may come as early as October to stretch production further into 2008.
``There will be orders to sustain production,'' Maxa said. ``More funding is coming.''
link:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=aWQlmLHdurtE
;)
Force Protection's bottom line gets a lift
Military demand for bomb-resistant armored trucks boosts profit
By Christopher Hinton, MarketWatch
Last Update: 2:03 PM ET Aug 10, 2007
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Shares of Force Protection Inc. got a lift Friday after better-than-expected financial results for the second quarter showed increased demand for its heavily armored trucks used in military settings.
During the June quarter, the Ladson, S.C., company FRPT said it sold 17 of its Buffalo series armored truck -- a behemoth weighing 22.7 metric tons that's currently being used in Iraq to protect troops from roadside bombs and missile attacks.
The company also sold 212 of its medium-size Cougar trucks, used from troop transportation and command and control. Altogether, the company said produced 229 vehicles in the recent quarter, compared to the 285 produced for all of 2006.
The U.S. military has said it wants to purchase thousands of these trucks -- better known as MRAP, or mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles -- to use in place of the more vulnerable Humvee. Recently, the Defense Department requested the transfer of $1.2 billion in existing funds for an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, bringing the total size of its order to 6,415.
Force Protection is in a joint-venture partnership with General Dynamics Corp. to help increase production to meet the government's demands.
The venture has helped secure several new contracts, Chief Executive Gordon McGilton said. "During the quarter, we announced that we had been awarded contracts totaling $711 million to produce 1,455 vehicles for the U.S Marine Corps' (MRAP) vehicle program," he said.
The competition for government contracts is getting more crowded, however: Textron Inc. , OshKosh Truck Corp. and even General Dynamics itself are all maneuvering for a piece of the business.
Shares of Force Protection have more than doubled in the past year, and recently traded at $15.40, up 7% on the session. General Dynamics also traded higher, up 6% to $78.70.
Margins show improvement
Late Thursday, Force Protection said it earned $32.8 million, or 14 cents a share in the second quarter, up from $10.2 million, or a penny a share, in the same period last year. Net sales rose 140%, reaching $134.7 million from $56.1 million in the year-ago second quarter.
Analysts polled by Thomson Financial had expected, on average, quarterly earnings of 13 cents a share on revenue of $145 million.
Force Protection said gross margin widened to 24.3% in the recent quarter from 18.1% last year, primarily due to improved material and labor costs as well as the company's ability to leverage fixed costs as it expands production capacity.
Alexander Motamed, analyst at Thomas Weisel, found the results impressive.
"FRPT's stronger-than-expected margin performance and ability to quickly make up the handful of deliveries that slipped out of 2Q increases our confidence that the company can execute on its aggressive planned production ramp while improving operating performance," Motamed said in a note to clients.
See what I mean, todays contract was only through December, they still have January and February. Following suit, Navistar's and GD's contracts included January and February also.
Then there is Cheetah in Q4 plus January and February, that is five months production unaccounted for. Cheetah?
Close to Wall
``We're dangerously close to hitting a wall,'' Aldrich said. ``When you have to order things six months in advance to get them in a delivery state, to only have seven months of backlog is dangerously close to backing off our ramp-up schedule.''
About two-thirds of the six-month delivery time is needed for material procurement, he said.
Dougherty's Maxa estimates the company will probably get an award in the near-term that would carry them through March, and further larger orders may come as early as October to stretch production further into 2008.
``There will be orders to sustain production,'' Maxa said. ``More funding is coming.''
link:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=FRPT:US&sid=aWQlmLHdurtE
from IV (thanks trustthetape)
What did earnings tell us?
The following is my objective analysis of Q2 results based on the FACTS reported in the 10Q.
1. Is revenue continuing to trend up? The past 4 quarter, revenues have trended up nicely (with a hiccup in 2006 Q3) as follows:
2006 Q2: $56m
2006 Q3: $42m
2007 Q4: $63m
2007 Q1: $100m
So, will the positive growth in revenue continue? Yes
Will FRPT have another $100+m quarter? Yes
There were 12 Cougars delivered late (from June into July). That represents approximately $6m in revenue.
Analyst revenue estimates range considerably from $111 - 165m with the average being $145m. How much did the $6m in delayed revenue impact revenue for the quarter and did it throw revenue outside of the analyst range? Revenue came in at $135m, $10m below analyst consensus estimates. In addition to the 12 late Cougars, there were In addition, there was nearly $12m in "finished goods" that could not be counted in Q2 revenue because the govt had not completed the DD 250. Here is the exerpt from the 10Q:
"As of June 30, 2007 there were vehicles which had been inspected and accepted by the customer but the customer had not taken title (signed Form DD250). These vehicles were accounted for as finished goods. "
On one hand, the revenue shortfall was a disappointment but on the other it appears that Q3 is off to a jump start with the 12 late Cougars (est. revenue of $6m) reported to be completed in the first 10 days of July and the $12m of "finished goods" becoming Q3 revenue. I guess we can assume Q3 revenue will be at least $18m :)))
2. Will Gross Margins continue to be solid? The past 4 quarters, gross margins have ranged from 18-nearly 22%. Can FRPT continue to achieve gross margins in this range while ramping up production?
Gross margins came in at 24% and was a pleasant surprise. While I would have been content with 18-20% and very happy with 20=22@, 24% is just phenomenal.
3. In Q1, FRPT made a sizable (by comparison purposes) investment in R&D ($4.8m in Q1 vs $3.2m for all of 2006) for development of the Cheetah. Is FRPT continuing to make investments in product development, whether it be the Cheetah or other products (e.g, EFP technology)?
Q3 R&D was $3.3m so the company continues to make investments in the development of the Cheetah - consistent with the purchase of the Roxboro facility for Cheetah production. From the 10Q:
"The increase in both periods is due primarily to increased expenditures related to the development of the Cheetah vehicle. The second quarter of 2007 costs are down from the first quarter of 2007 due to the heavy purchase of materials for the Cheetah development in the first quarter of 2007. "
4. In the past, FRPT has had a number of one time charges. While fees associated with the PP are anticipated will the company start showing discipline to get past these types of charges?
The only one time charge was the anticipated PP fees. Fortunately, the PP fees are now in the rear view mirror. Hopefully this is the last of the one-time charges for some time.
5. To this point, record net income (ignoring the benefit for favorable tax treatment) is around $4.6m. Will FRPT report record net income for the quarter?
Net income (after taxes) came in at $9.6m, over twice the prior record net income.
6. Analysts EPS estimates vary widely from .08-.17 with an average of .13. I'm anticipating a negative impact of .05 from the PP fees and the 12 Cougars that were delayed from late June to early July. How well did the analysts do in predicting FRPT EPS for the quarter and did the .05 (my anticipation) throw EPS outside the analyst range?
I was pleasantly surprised to see EPS come in at .14, .01 over analysts expectations (Had it not been for the PP charts and the 12 delayed vehicles and the unsigned DD 250s, EPS would have come in well over .20. This is encouraging as we look forward to Q3 results.
7. In Q1, FRPT delivered a record 195 vehicles. Will Q2 establish a new production record and indicate a continued ramp up of production?
As anticipated, Q2 production was another record with 229 vehicles delivered to customers. As mentioned above, Q3 is off to a good start and, barring unforeseen circumstances will be another production record. The challenge for the company is maximizing production and staying on or ahead of the schedule established with the MRAP program office so that additional and larger orders are secured.
8. At the end of Q1, FRPT had a production backlog of approximately 187 vehicle. Since then, the company has received a number of new orders (1000 MRAP order, 5 Buffalo and 5 Cougar Canadian Order, 22 ILAVs, 455 MRAP order). Of these orders, FRPT issued an order to GD to produce 235. What is the current backlog? In comparing production capacity to production backlog, how long will it take FRPT to work off the current backlog to put it in position for another MRAP order?
Current backlog is reported as 1662 vehicles. Escalating production by both FRPT and GD will be critical to work the backlog down so that the next MRAP orders can be secured. It is anticipated that the FD JV will be producing 200 vehicles per month at some point this summer and growing to 400 vehicles in Feb 2008. Assuming those increases come to be, FRPT should be in a position to receive a sizeable follow-on order in Q4 when 2008 govt funds become available. Beyond the recent order for 125 vehicles, I'll be very surprised if an additional order is received before Oct.
So, for me, this quarterly report will be telling to confirm the positive trend in revenue, production, backlog, net income, etc and then use that data to gain a better understanding of what to expect in subsequent quarters.
In summary, Q2 was an excellent quarter for the company. Yes, revenue was slightly below expectations but gross margins were well beyond expectations, production was solid, backlog is significant, net income was a record and EPS beat expectations - even with a $1.7m one time PP charge. This quarter demonstrates strong management performance and sets the company up for a strong 2nd half of record production, record revenue and record profits. That, IMHO, is a good thing as it makes the company attractive to investors who value solid financial results and exceptional growth.
All of the above IMHO and not meant as a substitute for your own due diligence.
&
nice video:
http://wral.com/business/video/1599253
This is a down to earth article.
Force Protection an attractive buyout target: analyst
3:52p ET August 13, 2007 (MarketWatch)
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Force Protection Inc. shares remain inexpensive ahead of a U.S. military procurement bid that could lead to a deal to replace the popular Humvee, making the company an attractive acquisition target, C.E. Unterberg analyst James McIlree said Monday, in a note to investors.
The Landson, S.C., maker of MRAPs, or mine resistant ambush protected vehicles, will likely bid for the military procurement seeking 8,000 category I vehicles with its Cheetah series, McIlree said. The Cheetah is a light-armored vehicle with greater mobility than the company's Cougar and Buffalo series now used in Iraq and Afghanistan. See full story.
If a company bid for the military procurement is successful, it could be the precursor for a joint light tactical vehicle, which is targeted to replace the military's Humvee fleet, he said.
Meanwhile, Force Protection shares have been trading at about 15 times the low end of analysts' earnings-per-share estimate for 2008, or seven times the high end of analyst estimates, McIlree said.
"All to say, the stock is cheap virtually no matter what EPS assumptions one makes...This is the type of environment the primes wait for to make acquisitions," McIlree said. He reiterated his $32 price target based on 23 times his 2008 earnings estimate of $1.40 a share.
Shares recently changed hands at $16.45, up 5.8%.
Aside from making a bid on its own, another possibility is that Force Protection makes a bid through its 50-50 joint venture with General Dynamics Corp. , but that would be with the heavier Cougar series, which seems unlikely to be chosen, McIlree said.
"We believe the Cheetah can be an effective entrant in this competition and
improve the company's market share in the...round of procurements," he said.
McIlree noted risk for shares achieving his price target include difficulties for the company in obtaining supplies to meet demand and a potential reduction of forces in Iraq.
McIlree doesn't own any Force Protection shares, but his firm does have investment banking relations with the company.
Well things have cooled down. All the contracts have been priced in for 2007 at 6,415 vehicles. Now we must wait for the Fiscal 2008 budget in October.
MRAP II testing has been moved from January 2008 to September 17, 2007. So I guess they may shift production contracts from MRAP I to MRAP II without skipping a beat.
Pentagon Concludes FY-07 MRAP Orders With Award to Force Protection
DefenseAlert - 8/10/2007
Aug. 10, 2007 -- The Pentagon today announced the final round of production orders of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles for fiscal year 2007, tapping Force Protection Industries to build an additional 125 vehicles in a deal worth $70 million.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/defensenewsstand_spclsubj.asp?s=ied
Barrons update:
Armored-Vehicle Maker Ready to Roll
By ALEXANDER EULE
FOR INVESTORS SEEKING TO SHIELD THEIR investment portfolio in a battered market, Force Protection and its line of mine-resistant vehicles may offer a safe way forward.
Force Protection, based in Ladson, S.C., has made a name for itself in the last five years by building a new class of mine-resistant military vehicles that offer U.S. soldiers vastly improved protection against roadside bombs, which now account for a majority of American fatalities in Iraq. Since delivering the first mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles to Iraq in 2003, Force Protection has sparked a burgeoning program that the Department of Defense now calls its "highest acquisition priority."
Despite the military's push for as many vehicles as it can get, Force Protection stock looks attractive thanks to investors who have nervously sold off shares as competitors sought a piece of its lucrative market. Force Protection has the only battle-tested vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan, with new entrants just beginning to deliver MRAP trucks under the Pentagon's program.
"Force Protection defined the market in the United States," Thomas Weisel Partners analyst David Gremmels says of MRAPs.
If the military has its way, the U.S. government will spend over $10 billion on MRAPs between this year and next. And industry observers say 2008 spending alone could ultimately approach $8 billion to $12 billion, as the armed services look to order as many as 23,000 mine-resistant vehicles. MRAPs have already become the Pentagon's third-largest acquisition program, behind only missile defense and the so-called joint strike fighter. Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and an assistant secretary of defense from 1981 to 1985, calls the program's rapid growth "unprecedented."
"Usually it takes a decade for something like this to happen," he says, noting that the missile-defense program emerged in 1983 and the joint strike fighter in 1993.
MRAPs enjoy nonpartisan support from congressmen clamoring to get behind a program free of offensive weaponry and singularly focused on saving U.S. lives.
At a Glance: Force Protection:
Stock Price: $16.26
52-Wk High:$31.16
52-Wk Low: $5.75
Market Cap: $1.11 billion
Est. 2008 EPS: $1.44
2008 P/E: 11.3
Est. Long-Term EPS Growth*: 30%
Est. ('08/'07) EPS Growth: 118%
Revenue (trailing 12 months): $340 million
Dividend Yield: None
Chief Executive: Gordon McGilton
Headquarters: Ladson, S.C.
* Based on analyst estimates looking ahead three to five years.
Sources: Force Protection Website, Thomson Financial/Baseline.
"There is no member of Congress who opposes increased funding for this program," says SunTrust Robinson Humphrey analyst Chris Donaghey, "even if they're opposed to our presence in Iraq."
As of Aug. 10, the U.S. government had ordered 1,963 vehicles from Force Protection, or 31% of its total MRAP procurement, according to Congressional Research Service. Still, after expecting the company to dominate MRAP sales, Wall Street has had to adjust its expectations with companies like Navistar International and Armor Holdings (now a subsidiary of BEA Systems) winning awards. As a result, Force Protection shares are down 48% from a May high, and the stock now trades at an undemanding 11.3 times analysts' earnings estimates for fiscal 2008.
Michael Alpert, managing director and portfolio manager of the J. & W. Seligman Small Company Growth Team, says the selloff has presented a buying opportunity.
Alpert calls investors' lack of faith "shortsighted" and says "huge funding" still exists for MRAP-related programs. Force Protection also got negative publicity from a recent Pentagon inspector general report that showed the company had missed delivery on promised vehicles back in 2003 and 2004.
"We had the founder's advantage but we also had the founder's injuries or pain," Force Protection Chief Executive Officer Gordon McGilton tells Barron's Online. Among early challenges, he cites ramping up capacity and teaching the government about the new class of vehicles and their potential.
McGilton says the company has now been "completely retooled." After producing 11 vehicles in all of 2003, Force Protection built 114 in July and says it will be at 300 per month by the first quarter of 2008. The company's 17-ton Cougar model sells for approximately $400,000 while the 23-ton Buffalo is around $800,000.
A third, lighter-but-faster vehicle called the Cheetah is in production, and the company says it anticipates making 2,000 of them in 2008. The Cheetah will go for about $300,000, according to Michael Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president for marketing and government relations.
Increased production capacity and the 8-ton Cheetah, which holds the promise of eventually replacing the Pentagon's 52,000 combat-configured Humvees, are helping to drive growth predictions. According to Thomson Financial, analysts project a long-term growth rate of 30% with earnings per share expected to be 66 cents in 2007 and $1.44 in 2008, up from 39 cents last year.
"The market has yet to really even give the company credit for the Cheetah vehicle," SunTrust's Donaghey says. Gremmels at Thomas Weisel, meanwhile, has assumed a conservative 800 Cheetah deliveries in his 2008 model.
Donaghey has a price target of $36, while Gremmels recently established a $22 target.
With competitors' vehicles coming due, McGilton says he's anxious to see whether they can meet their quotas but adds "we're very comfortable with the promises we've made."
Seligman's Alpert points out there's likely to still be volatility with the stock as the market reacts to Defense Department awards. And the possibilities of losing such awards or an expedited withdrawal from Iraq are risks for Force Protection.
On Wednesday, the Pentagon indicated its MRAP shipments to Iraq would be slower than expected, but the delays involve postproduction work and transportation logistics that shouldn't directly impact orders. McGilton expresses little doubt there will be a long-term market for the company's product. "The government will continue to take all the vehicles that we can build," he says.
"The army trains as though there's a war all the time," McGilton says, looking beyond Iraq. "And they will use the equipment that they need to go to war for that training."
FRPT: Short Interest UP 10.7% to 16.5M in Aug 2007
Friday , August 24, 2007 16:17ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 10.7% to 16,480,458 shares for the month ended mid-August, 2007.
SYMBOL JULY AUGUST CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 14,881,117 16,480,458 +1,599,341 +10.75% 8
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 2,102,655, it would require approximately 8 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
It may be time, institutional ownership is up too.
thanks amstocks82:
MRAP and MRAP II – Production and Quality Dilemmas
The military began purchasing small numbers of Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles shortly after the Iraq war began. MRAP vehicles proved to be very effective. In 2005, the Cougar and Buffalo MRAP vehicles manufactured by Force Protection had survived large numbers of IED and mine explosions with no fatal injuries.
In February of 2005, due to the increasing number of IEDs and mine related injuries, the marines requested 1169 MRAP vehicles. Instead of MRAP vehicles, the marines received more up-armored Humvees. Even with additional armor, the Humvee was no match for IEDs and mines. Therefore, in mid-2006, the marines forwarded the same request for MRAP vehicles to the Joint Chiefs. The Joint Chiefs approved the request and the MRAP program officially began.
The potential size of the MRAP program quickly grew from 1169 vehicles to 20,500 vehicles with a goal of acquiring over 4000 MRAP vehicles by the end of 2007 and to acquire the rest over five years. The main problem faced by the military in acquiring MRAP vehicles is that they wanted to purchase 4000 vehicles in 2007 but no one had the capability of manufacturing so many.
Therefore, the military opened up the MRAP program to competitive bids by any interested manufacturer who could make MRAP vehicles. The idea was to get industry involved and the industrial production of vehicles increased.
The two criteria for issuing MRAP contracts were:
1) The Contractor or Contractors vehicle systems that demonstrate the best overall performance in PVT testing (with survivability being the highest priority)
2) The Contractor or Contractors that demonstrate the greatest capability to produce and deliver vehicles with the shortest ramp up time and greatest maximum production capacity, in order to meet the urgent delivery requirements for these vehicles
Testing and Ordering MRAP vehicles
The Military soon faced another dilemma – if the military were going to acquire 4000 vehicles by the end of 2007, and was ordering prototype vehicles from the manufacturers towards the end of January 2007, how do they get the prototypes, test them and then order vehicles and get them in production fast enough to get 4000 vehicles by the end of 2007?
The only answer was to order vehicles from manufacturers that had a vehicle that the military thought would probably pass testing. In February 2007, they ordered 125 vehicles from Force Protection, 90 vehicles from BAE, 60 vehicles from PVI and 100 vehicles from Oshkosh and 20 vehicles from General Dynamics.
Complete testing of military armored vehicles would normally have taken several months but due to the need to build 4000 vehicles by the end of the year, testing needed to be fast. Therefore, the plan was that testing would last approximately 60 to 90 days. Much of the testing would be to test survivability of the vehicle but due to time limitations could not be comprehensive. The testing was further complicated because many companies delivered their prototypes late or with poor quality. Some of the vehicles when finally delivered required multiple changes to pass testing.
At the end of the testing, the military should have been able to on a priority basis order vehicles which were most survivable followed next in priority by manufacturing capability. But due to the priority of getting 4000 vehicles in Iraq, the military ordered all the vehicles that could be manufactured by 5 vendors whose vehicle was found to be suitable during testing.
The five vendors found suitable for follow on contracts after testing didn't include the vehicles from PVI and Oshkosh. It is unknown what the military will do with those 160 vehicles. The vehicles pre-ordered from BAE and GD required changes to be suitable for deployment. It is not clear if the vehicles from PVI and Oshkosh could be repaired.
The Navistar MaxxPro vehicle received the largest number of orders under MRAP. The MaxxPro design is based on putting a "V" hulled crew compartment on top of one of International's common truck chassis. (Navistar is a division of International Military and Government.) The use of a common truck chassis ensures manufacturability of the MaxxPro. The crew compartment uses less welding than other MRAP vehicles and is bolted together for ease of manufacturing. Its blast proof strength is provided by add-on-armor from Plasan Sasa.
Recently Navistar indicated that they could not get enough armor from Plasan Sasa and were ordering armor from various US manufacturers. Plasan Sasa is a well known armor manufacturer and the prototype MaxxPro vehicles were tested with that armor. Therefore, it is a concern that other perhaps inexperienced vendors will be providing the armor.
Navistar indicated that the armor supply problem would reduce the number of vehicles that they were going to deliver by the end of the year which means that the US government won't receive 4000 vehicles that they hoped to get. The new estimate is 3000 vehicles by the end of the year. But even this may be an over-estimate. Armored Holdings (now purchased by BAE) also received a large contract for their newly designed "Caiman" vehicle. The order for the Caiman was not received by AH until the middle of July and most MRAP manufacturers take 3 months to get some of the parts needed to manufacture their vehicles. Therefore, the production ramp-up for the Caiman will have to be extremely fast – faster than seems possible when compared to other vendors ramp-up speed.
Vendors for the MRAP program have a large incentive to overstate their production capacity. The more vehicle orders that they get, the less money left in the budget to order vehicles from another manufacturer. For manufacturers with new vehicles, getting large orders is extremely important to profitability and ramp-up rate.
If a manufacturers is dishonest in providing production capacity and ramp-up speed, they will get more contracts to fund the vehicle ramp-up and other vendors will get fewer contracts and will likely ramp-up slower. As a result, if there are dishonest vendors overstating their ability to manufacture vehicles, they have an advantage. This already brings up the question of whether or not Navistar knew Plasan Sasa could not provide sufficient armor on time to build the vehicles Navistar promised to the government?
There might be even more questions raised in the future about the orders. The Defense Department is behind on preparing new MRAP vehicles to be sent to Iraq. The military receives the MRAP vehicle and installs government equipment such as radios, weapons stations and etc. and then ships them to the combat area. Currently, the Defense department is taking longer than expected to install the military equipment even though almost all the MRAPs it has received are Cougars and Buffalos from Force Protection. When it starts receiving some of the new vehicles in large numbers, will it prepare the unproven vehicles such as the MaxxPro prior to proven vehicles such as the Cougar? And since all the vehicles can't be prepared, is it wise to order large numbers of unproven vehicles at least until comprehensive testing is done or the vehicle is proven in combat?
The Next Phase
The MRAP II program is a follow on program to the first MRAP program. In the MRAP II program, vehicles will face much more stringent testing including in depth testing of the armor that is used on the vehicles. An additional Explosively Formed Projectile (EFP) armor requirement was added.
The new MRAP program is open to current vendors and new vendors who have a vehicle. If new vendors get MRAP contracts, then the number and types of MRAP vehicles could grow in size to become unmanageable. The list of potential prime vendors for MRAP II contains the names of 20 companies.
It is also possible that the additional testing in MRAP II will uncover major issues with some of the vehicles that passed MRAP I testing but have not yet been in combat. The MRAP II program was announced prior to any of the new vehicles such as the Caiman, RG33 or MaxxPro being used in combat. If problems are found with any of these vehicle types, then the military may end up with hundreds of vehicles that should not have been purchased in the first place costing hundreds of millions of dollars.
For MRAP II, Force Protection has announced that their Joint Venture between General Dynamics called Force Dynamics will provide Cougars for their MRAP II CAT I and CAT II vehicle entry. Force Protection also indicated that they will directly bid the Cheetah for MRAP II. The Cheetah is Force Protection's newest vehicle that has been under development for several years. It is smaller and less expensive than other current MRAP vehicles but has the same type of mine and IED protection as the Cougar and Buffalo as well as available EFP protection. The Cheetah is seen more as a direct replacement for the Humvee due to the similarities in size between the two vehicles. The Cheetah is faster than other MRAP vehicles, smaller and more agile than other MRAP vehicles.
Some References:
Article from the, "Stars and Stripes" that discusses the vehicle ramp-up
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=48248
An article demonstrating incredible toughness of the Cougar when an unusually massive large mine explodes under the Cougar:
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=639508
Recent article indicating survivability of MRAP vehicles – the MRAP that the Marines are talking about is the Cougar. Casualties in MRAP vehicles tend to be concussions, blown ear drums or broken bones. In Humvees, casualties tend to be more serious including death, and permanent life changing injuries.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2007-04-18-marines-new-vehicles_N.htm
Link for the MRAP II solicitation
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/M6785407R5082/listing.html
An article about MRAP Delays:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070825/mrap_delays.html?.v=2
&
Force Protection, Inc. Facts Recent Stories & Links Page...
While much of this is old news to us many new investors may appreciate this info.
Here are some of the more exciting developments regarding FRPT...
Firstly, Mike Aldrich predicted 400%+ growth for Force Protection, Inc. in 2007. This kind of growth merits a much higher pps of at least $28- to $32- now.
The future growth of Force will be propelled by our "Cheetah" as General Conway loves them & expects to order them shortly. FRPT will produce 2000 Cheetahs in 2008 for minimal Revs of $660 million. With ILS (suppport) it will be $750 million. IF MSEFP Armor is added to these 2000 vehicles add approx. $300 more million. For a 2008 Rev increase of over 1 billion for just this vehicle line alone...
""""I'm excited about the latest addition to Force Protection's family of MRAP Vehicles, the Cheetah," U.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway told the Marine Corps News, an internal publication of the Marine Corps, after the visit."""
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/07/gen_conway_takes_a_test_drive.asp
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2879605&C=mideast
http://www.forceprotection.net/
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/cheetah/
Link to Full Page Barron's Article released this weekend:
"""FRPT - This War Horse Looks Like a Winner"""
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mid=2860442&pt=msg
*Story* "MRAP's now being tested at Aberdeen".
Since we are the only MRAP Manufacturer shipping vehicles...
Brogans comments about MRAP survivability were specifically
directed about our vehicles:
http://www.solanconews.com/Gov/Articles/2007/070826_MRAP.htm
We are the Only MRAP Manufacturer who has made a statement regarding being on schedule. As we know PVI, OSK & BAE had all made comments about them being late on deliveries:
"""Aldrich said Force Protection is not experiencing production delays and expects to stay on schedule the rest of the year.""" I expect NAVZ & AH & BAE to fail on their deliveries.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070825/mrap_delays.html?.v=2
FRPT 77% Institutional Ownership at Record Levels while large Share Blockholders also at a Record 427. Note last monthe we were at 66%. Also note Goldman Sach's is now reporting 7% Ownership of FRPT.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15837275?q=frpt
1 Billion Dollars Worth of Recent Orders For Force Protection:
http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/totals.asp?thisContractor=Force%20Protection
FRPT Products are so good we just sued a competitor for stealing our Trade Secrets:
Force Protection Inc. sues local rival Protected Vehicles Inc.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/aug/23/armored_warfare13741/
The British are Buying our "Mastiff Vehicles" and another order is expected shortly.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6950691.stm
We are awaiting an approximate "Sole Source Order" for our "Buffalo" Vehicle in the amount of $150 million.
This could happen any week now.
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/buffalo/
Defense Link Article on MRAP's with mostly Force Protection, Inc. Vehicles:
http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/2007/mrap/
The Night Of The Hunters - Story on MRAP's in Theater:
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=55436&archive=true
There is approx. 1000 Force Protection Vehicles in Theater that to be brought up to MRAP2 Standards & will need to be retrofitted with our MSEFP Armor Retrofit at approx. 150k each.
To sum things up Force Protection is busier then ever & will sell the DOD whatever it builds therefore the forward growth both short & long term is phenomenal, note 400% 2007 growth expected alone.
charts:
from IV board:
SWOT Analysis
As a long term FRPT investor, I like to try and understand all aspects of my investment. One way of doing that is by conducting a SWOT Analysis - reviewing the company Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats:
Strengths:
Products (Buff and Cougar specificly) with demonstrated success and a number of variants including the JERRV, HEV, ILAV, Mastiff and most recently the Cat I and Cat II MRAP plus the anticipated MRAP II program. In addition, EFP protection capabilities have been developed and the Cheetah appears to be entering production in 2007.
Growth Potential - backlog is substantial and growing and new market opportunites with GSTAMIDS ($1b+ market), MRAP ($10b+ market), and Cheetah (TBD but appears to be about as much as a $45b market oppty) being substantial.
People - in particular mgmt with the likes of GM, DW, RP, VJ, etc and a growing workforce. In addition, FRPT initiated a "share gain" program so that employees will share in the profits of the company
Production Expansion - although not yet fully proven, they appear to have a model that can be replicated. Recent months have seen production expansion near 100 vehicles / month vs a total of 44 for all of Q1 2006. The stated objective of the FD JV is 200 MRAP Cougars/month this summer and 400/month early in 2008.
Willingness/ability to partner - SPAR is proven, BAE for ILAV, Ultra is proven, AH exist but could be in jeopardy due to BAE acquisition and having their competing product, FD JV (with GD) looks substantial but GD appears to have been slow to ramp for MRAP, Textron is under development. Not clear if there will be any partners for Cheetah production.
Balance sheet - used to be a weakness but now with approximately $100m in cash and no debt looks to provide sufficient capital for growth and expansion
Reputation - has established reputation for excellence in close DoD/Military circles (particularly Marines but still developing repuation within Army, it appears) and this appears to be expanding to the investment community (witness ability to raise capital) and within the defense contractor community (witness partnerships).
Increasingly Diversified and Loyal Customer Base - US military, British, Iraqi forces, Canada - appears to be loyal to FRPT products and likely to expand given the opportunities summarized above. Even with the favorable customer base, the market oppty is too large for FRPT to be the only product company for programs such as MRAP
South African license agreements - recently renewed for 5 years but it is unclear exactly how this agreement protects the interest of the company
Weaknesses:
Still the little guy in DoD circles - this makes winner large contracts more difficult and also makes lobbying more challenging; the GD JV (Force Dynamics) in some respects appears to offset this for the MRAP opportunity although the size of he opportunity and timeline for delivery is letting competitors in the door
Some contract penalties / financial filing issues / other one time issues in the past - can they overcome these in future contracts?
Have not yet demonstrated strong profitability - last 4 Q's were slightly to moderately profitable and the most recent Q's demonstrated strong profitability and we should start to see the transition to even stronger profitability going forward
As with most growth, production ramp up has required significant capital
Opportunities (there are more comprehensive lists here for contract opportunities but to summarize):
MRAP - up to 5 years, 20,000+ vehicle, approx $15b market opportunity. To date, FD JV has won a substantial percentage of the awarded market and the competition will be fierce for the remaining market with wins likely coming thru increased production capability.
GSTAMIDS - $1b market opportunity
Cheetah - market of up to 150k vehicles; likely 15k initially to replace the Humvees at approx $300k each = $4.5b oppty. The Cheetah could be part of the longer term JLTV program, perhaps part of the MMPV program or even the MRAP II program.
Blast Manipulation Technology/EFP Technology - have not seen any signs of this being leveraged yet but something to keep an eye on. The EFP up-armor solution is estimated at $150k per vehicle.
ILS - long term revenue stream that gives FRPT a razor/razor blade business model. Some estimate ILS will, over time, yield revenue 5-15x that of the original vehicle
US as well as non-US customers who will recognize the excellence of the vehicles. As competing products make their way into production as part of the MRAP program, FRPT is likely to experience a smaller % of market share but with a larger and growing market - yielding a sustained growth rate over a longer period of time
Recent US Readiness Tests for domestic IED threats is further indication that the need to take IEDs serious as a long term threat to the US is real and the need for FRPT vehicles long term and growing (as unfortunate as that is for those of us who prefer peace)
Threats:
Potential partnership issues could develop. For example, BAE recently acquired AH so two partners are now one and its not clear how this will impact FRPT going forward
Given the dollar value of programs like MRAP, other defense contractors have taken considerable interest in the program and are developing competing vehicles. To date, FRPT vehicles have performed well in the field compared to other either less successful or yet to be proven solutions. However, there is no guarantee that the FRPT vehicles will continue to be the only strong performer.
The insurgents in Iraq have demonstrated the ability to develop an IED powerful enough to cause fatalities in FRPT vehicles (Buffalo specificly, as I understand it). This demonstates that the threat is growing and FRPT will need to adjust their technology to the evolving threat.
Ability to manage growth will be a challenge - particularly with multiple production partners, a growing workforce and a multitude of customers
Sufficient capital for growth - recent capital raise ($152m appears to address this issue but the rapid growth will continue to require significant capital and will eat into the $152m over time). In addition, the recent purchase of the Roxboro facility for expanded Cougar production and initial Cheetah production will utilize significant capital.
World peace could break out tomorrow - not likely anytime soon; witness the recent military movement toward the middle east, the expansion of troops in Iraq, and the proliferation of EFPs
While the future for FRPT looks bright, there are always the possibilities of bumps in the road. It's best for investors to understand those just as they need to understand strengths and opportunities as they collectively impact both near term and longer term share price.
All of the above IMHO and with best wishes to all regardless of your trading / investing approach.
chart:
JUST AWESOME !!!
Longer Term Aerospace & Defense Outlook Reviewed in Wall Street Transcript Report
Thursday August 30, 2:09 pm ET
67 WALL STREET, New York--August 30, 2007--The Wall Street Transcript has just published its Commercial Aerospace & Defense issue, a report offering a timely review of the sector to serious investors and industry executives. This 37-page feature industry commentary through in-depth interviews with 2 analysts, and top management from 7 firms. The full issue is available by calling (212) 952-7433 or via The Wall Street Transcript Online.
Topics covered Aerospace/Defense expectations, Air traffic demand, Commercial aerospace risks, Defense in the long term, Demand in Asia, Part Development, Alliances and Partnerships, Homeland security and Industrial readiness, Growth in the European Market, The growing security industry, Big Brother concerns, Stock Picks, Stocks to Avoid.
Companies include: Boeing (BA), Alcoa (AA), Precision Castparts (PCP), Embraer (ERJ), Bombardier (BBD:TO), BE Aerospace (BEAV), Spirit AeroSystems (SPR), GKN (GKNLY), General Dynamics (GD), Force Protection (FRPT), EDO Corporation (EDO), Alliant TechSystems (ATK), Ladish (LDSH), Rolls-Royce (RYCEY), HEICO (HEI), and Goodrich (GR). Analysts Include: Peter Arment, JSA Research, Inc.; J.B. Groh, D.A. Davidson & Co.
In the following brief excerpt from the 37-page report, Peter Arment discusses the longer-term outlook for the sector and for investors.
TWST: Let's shift over to the defense side. What's the longer-term outlook there? You mentioned resetting and refurbishing.
Mr. Arment: The budget continues to increase and a lot of that is tied to the global war on terror. Supplemental bills are not only funding the War, but addressing the repairing and replacement of equipment. The latter point is really focused on the Army and the Marines. Everything from vehicles, helicopters, precision weapons, ammunition, troop uniforms, body armor and other force protection equipment are on the list of receiving higher funding. Any company that has exposure to the Army is going to benefit regardless of a change in the administration in 2008. The political aspect of the defense budget will still exist, but in a post 9/11 environment, a strong national security theme still trumps social issues. A Democratic President is still seen to be weaker on defense spending by Wall Street, so some multiple compression is likely to occur. But given current valuations, the downside seems limited.
The biggest area of growth beyond 2008 is within armored vehicles. Humvees are going to be replaced along with a number of existing tactical vehicles. The Humvees that were utilized in Iraq have been found to be very vulnerable to the IEDs. As an interim step, the Army and the Marines have been buying MRAP (Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicles, which has become the Defense Department's number one priority. This has been a very fast evolving program that started with just demand for a few hundred vehicles back in 2004 and now the request is for well over 20,000. MRAPs cost anywhere from $0.5 million to over $1 million a piece. We are talking about a $20 plus billion program that's come out of nowhere from five years ago. There are only a handful of companies that are delivering these vehicles.
TWST: Who are the beneficiaries?
Mr. Arment: I think the primary one that we have focused on is General Dynamics (GD). They are as well positioned as anybody in the armored vehicle business. They are delivering direct and also with a joint venture partner, Force Protection (FRPT). Force Protection has been a very high flying company, essentially being the only MRAP company until this year. The joint venture is called Force Dynamics.
TWST: As talk increases about pulling out of Iraq or downsizing the force there, what does that mean for this space, if anything?
Mr. Arment: I think that's more of a headline risk when you are talking about public multiples. At the end of the day, you still going to need to repair this equipment or replace it. Otherwise you will be looking at a much smaller force in the future. A smaller force is not in any of the long-range plans at the Pentagon. It's just the opposite; we are expanding our Army and Marine troop levels over the next five years. The troop pullout of Iraq would be more a Wall Street event; spending levels other than war operations will still be maintained at or near record levels.
TWST: That would appear to bode well for the industry longer term.
Mr. Arment: Yes, absolutely, and that really gets back to the overall theme of having high exposure to companies that are supporting the Army and Marines. They have seen the lion's share of the losses in terms of equipment. As a result, they are ultimately going to see the lion's share of the gains as equipment gets replaced.
TWST: You mentioned General Dynamics. Who else would you look at?
Mr. Arment: A small cap name that we like that is also benefiting from force protection is EDO Corporation (EDO), which has almost $1 billion in market cap. They have a sole-source position on the jamming technology known as CREW 2.1. The jammers are utilized in armored vehicles and other support vehicles to jam signals being sent to IEDs. EDO's product jams frequencies and blocks the IEDs from being detonated from a remote source. They won a major competition among all of the large prime contractors. They were the only company that was selected, so they have a sole-source position. They really have a heritage in terms of being experts in what they call electronic cancellation. They are ideally positioned to see a lot of growth over the next few years from the procurement of these CREW 2.1 jammers. EDO will generate a little over $1 billion in revenues this year, but the outlook is very favorable with the potential for 50% growth during the next two years.
TWST: Are there any other names in this space to bring up?
Mr. Arment: Another name that we like is Alliant TechSystems (ATK). Everyone kind of knows them as the bullet company. They are the number one manufacturer of small caliber ammunition in the US. They also produce medium caliber ammunition and are quickly becoming a leader in precision weaponry. About a third of their business is tied up with NASA. Unlike 10 years ago, NASA spending is actually a growing opportunity for ATK as a lot of money has been awarded for the replacement of the Shuttle. They have won some significant share on the Ares rocket, which is replacing the Space Shuttle. So between NASA and ammunition demand, their visibility is quite good.
They are also a stealth play as a leader in composite structures and specialized composite tooling. This all evolved out of their work with NASA and the Defense Department. As a result, they have been working with the main aerostructure companies that are supporting the 787 aircraft program. Their composite business is actually doubling in the next two years, which is based on existing defense and space contracts and not the 787. Composite sales are about $250 million and projected to hit $450 million by the end of the decade. The composite expansion has added to the overall growth outlook for the company.
Wall Street is worried that if there is a draw-down in Iraq, ammunition sales will be hit. That is not the case. Post 9/11, we have changed all the training requirements and 90% of the ammunition that gets consumed in the small caliber category is for training. Those training requirements are very unlikely to change any time soon.
AGfn Rumors
Friday , August 31, 2007 08:49ET
Aug 31, 2007 (JAGfn.com via COMTEX) -- (FRPT) (GD) (LMT) Rumors persists that General Dynamics Corp. (GD) or Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) will make a bid for Force Protection Inc. (FRPT).
Copyright 2007 JAGfn.com All Rights Reserved
http://www.knobias.com/story.htm?eid=3.1.9e99535d066618596084ace3dc906c0f06f6411c034055a52b966854a9aa4100
This is September. No contract news until the Fiscal 2008 budget in October.
Predicting a slide waiting for good news. We are not in the budget yet, so the news could go either way as they argue the point.
The 5 billion plus already in 2008 are for program costs and only 1,520 vehicles. So the two ballpark numbers floated are 40 billion more above the present budget for all items.
And a seperate call by Biden for 15 billion for vehicles alone. Knowing the program will be stalled with only 1,520 vehicles in the budget so far.
Those are the high numbers anything less will be a compromise or an arguement to settle. As this is the third largest procurement program.
This is historic from every budget approval to include and fund MRAP because they do not want to compromise other priorities that are already agreed to.
Inside Defense....More this evening story
Pentagon acquisition officials are closely monitoring how well the five vendors awarded the bulk of MRAP production contracts to date are executing their shares of the program. According to internal Pentagon documents detailing vehicle deliveries obtained by InsideDefense.com and interviews with company spokesman, only two companies -- International Military and Government, Warrenville, IL, and Force Protection, Ladson, SC -- met MRAP production targets in August.
IMG delivered 77 vehicles and Force Protection -- with partner General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, MI -- exceeded production goals by 13 vehicles, delivering 107 MRAPs.
The Pentagon is seeking $5.8 billion in the fiscal year 2008 emergency supplemental spending bill to buy 1,520 vehicles, plus a substantial portion of the logistics support packages and government-furnished equipment required for the 6,415 vehicles ordered in fiscal year 2007.
In addition, the Pentagon is preparing another MRAP spending request worth $9 billion to $10 billion to finance the purchase of another 6,000 blast-proof trucks in FY-08, according to Pentagon officials. This order stems from a decision last month by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, first reported on Sept. 6 by InsideDefense.com, to cap the size of the MRAP program at 14,000 vehicles -- providing commanders in Iraq roughly half the total number armored trucks sought for Army units.
fyi from russia:
MRAP and MRAP II-production problem
(MRAP). Shortly after the outbreak of war in Iraq the United States Army has purchased small quantities of mine-protected vehicles (MRAP).
MRAP and MRAP II-production problem
MRAP proved to be very effective.In 2005 machines Cougar and Buffalo issued firm Force Protection, many times undermined by improvised explosive devices, without fatal consequences for the people living in them.
In February 2005, the number of landmine guerrilla attacks has increased dramatically, which led to an order for 1,169 machines MRAP Marines. But then, instead of specialized machines Marines had just Humvee with increased protection. But even after upgrading Humvee were virtually defenceless against mines. In mid-2006 the United States Marine Corps, repeated its request to the Joint Command. At the same time, the request was approved and officially started programs MRAP.
Potential required machines MRAP quickly rose from 1169 to 20,500 vehicles, with the next order 4000 machines to be delivered before the end of 2007. The main problem faced by the programme is that in 2007 to 4000 to MRAP, but no producer would do so in such a short period of time.
Therefore, the military opened a program for any MRAP manufacturers interested in producing these machines. The idea was to encourage the maximum number of manufacturers, and thus increase output.
In issued contracts were two main criteria:
1) The Contractor shall demonstrate the best characteristics of tests (with the protection of the crew is given the highest priority)
2) Contractors must demonstrate the ability to produce maximum output in the shortest possible time, and begin delivery as soon as possible after receipt of order
MRAP Tests and order machinery MRAP
Shortly military faced another problem. They were ready to order 4,000 machines by the end of 2007, while in late January 2007, it was necessary to put experienced samples. How that could be a full test orders to begin production and release of the remaining months of the required number of machines?
The only possible response, it was possible to reduce the time of testing. Thus, in February 2007 ordered 125 machines for Protection Force, 90 from BAE, a 60-PVI, a 100-Oshkosh and 20 from General Dynamics.
Usually full armour test takes several months, but now that possibility did not exist. It was therefore decided that the test samples will be experienced during 60-90 days. Most of the tests were checking security. But even they could not complete because of the time limit. Additional problems with the tests was that the producers began to disrupt delivery schedule or supply samples with a large number of gaps. Some of the machines needed to return producer and a repeat tests.
After testing the military had to make choices, based primarily on the protection of machinery and production capacity manufacturer. But given the great need for MRAP army in Iraq, the military decided to order some of their suppliers.
After testing of five suppliers of the contractors have not reached PVI and Oshkosh. Unknown, that the military has already done with these firms produced 160 cars. For example, machinery and BAE GD before serving in the army were to be refined.
The biggest job was MRAP company Navistar, which has set up his car MaxxPro. MaxxPro a revised version of the truck, general International, in which a welded chassis with the V Corps figurative bronelistov location. Navistar is the joint property of International Military and State. Using serial chassis have confidence in the rapid razvorachivanii production. The office crew MaxxPro require much less welding than in the other car manufacturers. Where possible, take bolting compounds that significantly simplify production. Bronezaschita is booking invoice, which is the Israeli company Plasan Sasa.
The fact that Navistar faced with the fact that Plasan Sasa has not been able to deliver the desired level of bronedetaley, they CBC different from American suppliers.
Plasan Sasa-known manufacturer of armour, and the test sample was tested with MaxxPro booking of the company. And the use of armour from suppliers that have not been tested, had raised fears for its quality.
Navistar Company announced that problems with the supply of armour would affect the total issued vehicles, which meant that the U.S. government has received 4,000 machines by the end of the year as hoped. It is now expected that this number will be only 3,000. But most likely, and these expectations are too optimistic. ;D ;D
Armored Holdings (now bought BAE) also received a large contract for the development of its new-car Caiman. Caiman contract was received only in mid-July, so that other producers were compared with Armored Holdings additional three months to produce components for their vehicles. So Caiman production schedule to be extremely tight.
A producer on the programme MRAP has a lot of incentives to maximize their production capacity. What's more, they uspeyut issue, the less money from the program would flow to competitors. For the manufacture of new machines once it is essential to get a major order and master batch production. But the damage as a potential future loss of all contracts and the potential substantial damages. It is with this dilemma has already encountered Navistar, when it became clear that Plasan Sasa could not put bronedetaley necessary.
In the future, MRAP may have other problems. When Iraq was the first car Cougar and Buffalo, they have to refine, adapting to use in combat situations. It found a large number of specialized equipment, such as radios, military and other modules. When will I hear other machines, such MaxxPro is not known how they will be the same equipment, and how it will interact with already established. It may be that the army will be technology, which soon will require refinement. This problem is directly related to lack of testing conducted.
The next stage
Following the programme followed MRAP programs MRAP II. Machines that meet the requirements of MRAP II, to be a full test. Additional security requirements is another very common guerrilla weapon-shaped shells with explosives cored.
The new programme was opened for existing suppliers, and others, can offer its military machine. The list of potential suppliers MRAP II has up to 20 companies.
MRAP II program was announced before at least one car on the programme I MRAP (Caiman, RG33 or MaxxPro) test last fight. If you have any problems with the use of military machines of this type, the purchase may be interrupted, and hundreds of millions of dollars may be released to the winds.
For program MRAP II Protection Force announced the formation of the joint venture General Dynamics. It will be called the Force Dynamics and will offer vehicles in the performance of MRAP Cougar II CAT I and CAT II. Moreover, the very Protection Force to propose MRAP II machine Cheetah. This is the latest development Force Protection, which has been spent the past few years. This machine is smaller and cheaper than its competitors, but has the same level of protection against mines and shells exploded in the emerging core.
Cheetah is a direct replacement for the Humvee. It is easier, less mobile and all other machines MRAP.
link:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=109343&pt=msg&mid=2995103
Oliver, may be a false alarm but this looks like a bounce off a bottom of 15 with a possible trend reversal. It has crossed the 20 day moving average back upward.
Two things. If this is a reversal the short squeeze may be coming. One rumor of it is 16 million shares.
Second is that the probability of contracts in October is reinforced. There is supplemental legislation to fund the program if the Fiscal Budget is delayed. Many believe it will be late. And DoD has promised more contracts in October are in progress. To maintain production and allow vendors lead time to buy supplies and materials.
So the yearly September slump is seeing October where this thing notoriously takes off. I rode it for one point and took profits. But am definitely going back in before October.
I am invested again >:D >:D
FRPT: Jumps +3.32%; Vol +83%; Last 90 Min of Trading
Thursday , September 20, 2007 16:21ET
During the last 90 minutes of today's session, shares of Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) demonstrated a strong UPWARD close relative to its 13:30 ET statistics. "Strong Closers" are determined by proprietary Knobias calculations performed during the last segment of each trading day.
sym: FRPT @13:30 ET @CLOSE % CHANGE
---------- ----------- ----------- ------------
PRICE $16.85 $17.41 +3.32%
VOLUME 420,000 767,300 +82.69%
#TRADES 1,599 3,088 +93.12%
DAY-HI $17.04 $17.41 LATE-HI
DAY-LO $16.45 $16.45 N/A
very tight bollinger bands
zigged when I should have zagged again. I am pessimism. I thought we were stalled at a proposed 7,700 vehicles for next year. Then the news hit that the total is now 15,374 vehicles and I do not know if that includes last years 6,415 or that is 15,374 vehicles for Fiscal 2008. The article seems to me saying 15,374 for 2008.
Read it for yourself and get back to me. I am waiting for my last trade to clear before I can jump at the 17.50 crossing.
JROC Boosts MRAP Requirement; Congress Struggles To Arrange Funding
DDN 20 September 2007
By Jen DiMascio
The Joint Requirements Oversight Council recently approved a new requirement for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, pushing the Defense Department's total need for the hulking armored trucks to 15,374, according to congressional aides.
The amount reflects an increase of more than 7,000 of the vehicles needed, and an increase in the Army requirement to a total of 10,000 MRAPs, aides said.
The problem, said Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), is that the administration has not yet asked for the $11 billion portion of that anticipated amendment targeted for this next batch of MRAPs, and production lines for MRAP vehicles could run into trouble in February if the money is not available in October.
Taylor, the chairman of the House Armed Services seapower subcommittee, said he plans to communicate the need for a DoD request to Defense Secretary Robert Gates this week. Echoing comments he made in a July House Armed Services Committee hearing, Taylor said President Bush has the authority to direct Gates to order defense contractors to make these vehicles and added he will encourage Gates to do so.
A budget amendment to the Pentagon's FY'08 supplemental, widely expected to amount to about $50 billion, is expected to include funding for MRAPs. That amendment has been forwarded by the Defense Department to the Office of Management and Budget, though OMB is remaining mum about the details.
"Budget officials are analyzing the situation and [at] the appropriate time a request will be sent to Congress. I cannot speculate on time and amount at this point," wrote OMB press secretary Sean Kevelighan in a statement.
The request is no surprise. In July, John Young, who is in line to become the Pentagon's next chief weapons buyer, told lawmakers the administration would return with two more MRAP funding requests--one before the August recess and another in September. Later that month, the administration requested $5.3 billion for MRAP vehicles (Defense Daily, July 20).
Even though the administration has already asked for the additional $5.3 billion, Congress is not prepared to pass the supplemental--the vehicle that has been most often used to buy MRAPs-- before the end of the fiscal year.
Program officers and contractors have told congressional staff that DoD needs at least $5.3 billion by Oct. 1 to start buying the long-lead materials necessary to keep production lines running through February.
Appropriators are working to include that amount in a continuing resolution to fund basic Pentagon operations while Congress works to pass the defense appropriations bill for FY'08 as well as the supplemental, according to a congressional aide.
Earlier this week, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) introduced his amendment to the Senate defense authorization bill that would add $23.6 billion for MRAP vehicles.
The Joint Staff would not confirm the new number saying it is continually in flux based on the assessments of commanders.
Pentagon seeks enough MRAPs for all services
By Jeff Schogol, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Friday, September 21, 2007
ARLINGTON, Va. — Defense officials have authorized 15,274 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles for all branches of the service, nearly double their previous target, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Thursday.
Earlier this year officials had authorized 7,774 MRAPs for all of the services, including 3,700 for the Marine Corps and 2,500 for the Army. But the new authorization would allocate 10,000 MRAPs to the Army alone, Morrell said.
Morrell noted that the new requirement for MRAPs is subject to change.
"The idea here is that we think it's best to ask for as many as we may need, and if events on the ground change such that we need fewer of them, we could always off-ramp this and end up buying fewer. But we want to make sure we have enough to meet the needs of the force to best protect them," Morrell said.
The vehicles have V-shaped hulls that deflect blasts from underneath and have proved to withstand certain roadside bombs better than up-armored Humvees. The Defense Department plans to have 1,500 MRAPs in Iraq by the end of the year, Morrell said.
Earlier this year, the commander of Multi–National Corps–Iraq requested 17,700 MRAPs for the Army alone. On Thursday, Morrell said that figure was based on the idea of swapping all up-armored Humvees with MRAPs.
"We've done a closer evaluation, the joint chiefs have, and the evaluation has now suggested we need about 15,000 (for all the services)," Morrell said.
Morrell added that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has not yet signed off on the request, but said the Defense Department plans to ask Congress for funding for "many more MRAPs."
He declined to get more specific because the Defense Department's funding request has not yet been given to Congress.
Under the new authorized figure, the Marine Corps would still be allocated 3,700 MRAPs, the Air Force 697, the Navy 544, and U.S. Special Operations Command 333, Morrell said.
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=48909
looks very good for FRPT imho
cheers
Oliver
FRPT: Friedman Starts @ Mkt Perform; Sets Tgt @ $18; Analyst Notes
Friday , September 21, 2007 08:30ET
Issuer: Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT)
Analyst Firm: Friedman Billings Ramsey Group Inc.
Ratings Action: INITIATE
Current Rating: Mkt Perform
Target Price Action: INITIATE
Target Price: $18.00
Analyst Comments: As a leading manufacturer of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles, the company is well positioned to benefit from what has become the highest acquisition priority of the Department of Defense (DOD); however, the firm thinks that near-term production expectations are too high given emerging DOD funding issues. Their Our 2007 revenue and earnings estimates are $629.1 million and 60c, respectively.
&
FBR Research - FRPT: Navigating the Minefield--Initiating Coverage with a Market
Perform (Note)
Yesterday, we initiated coverage of Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) with a Market Perform rating and a 12-month, DCF-derived price target of $18.00 per share. As a leading manufacturer of Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) vehicles, the company is well positioned to benefit from what has become the highest acquisition priority of the Department of Defense (DOD); however, we think that near-term production expectations are too high, given emerging DOD funding issues.
* Yesterday, we initiated coverage of Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) with a Market Perform rating and an $18 price target. Our 2007 revenue and earnings estimates are $629.1 million and $0.60, respectively. Consensus information is limited, but both are lower than current consensus. Our 2008 revenue and EPS estimates of $1.38 billion and $1.49, respectively, are above consensus.
* FRPT is a key supplier of ambush-protected vehicles to the DOD's recently established Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) program. To date, the company has garnered approximately one-third of all MRAP orders awarded by the DOD.
* We believe that our current expectations for MRAP vehicle deliveries might be conservative since we are below the consensus, which we estimate at anywhere from 17,000 to 24,000 vehicles or more. The Army's requirement could, in fact, eventually exceed 15,000 MRAPs; however, that will be heavily dependent on the operational needs on the ground and the MRAPs' performance in the field.
* Our DCF-derived price target for Force Protection is $18, which implies a 6.2x multiple of our forecasted 2008 EBITDA. Our valuation is predicated on long-term revenue growth of 14.6% and operating income growth of 15.4%.
* We have leveraged the work of FBR's Washington defense policy analyst Scott Ellison in this report.
>:D
$50 Billion for Military Is Added to Budget
By HELENE COOPER
WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 — The Bush administration plans to increase its 2008 financing request for military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere by almost $50 billion, with about a quarter of the additional money going toward armored trucks built to withstand roadside bombs, Pentagon officials said Saturday.
The increase would bring the amount the administration is seeking to finance the war effort through 2008 to almost $200 billion. Much of that money will go to refurbishment of military equipment and to the purchase of new protective equipment for troops, officials said, an indication of the toll that years of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken on military vehicles, aircraft, weapons and other items.
Defense officials said earlier this year that the Pentagon would need a war budget of $141 billion in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. The additional request for nearly $50 billion, which was first reported in The Los Angeles Times on Saturday, will be presented by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Wednesday, the Pentagon said. Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte and senior military officials are also expected to attend the hearing.
Mr. Gates is to testify two weeks after Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, went before Congress to warn against a rapid reduction of troops in Iraq, and a week after a Democratic effort to limit troop rotations stumbled in the Senate. The financing request may serve to further sharpen partisan divisions over the Iraq war in general, and its soaring cost in particular.
About a quarter of the new money would go to build additional mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles, or MRAPs, Pentagon officials said. "We'd put in an original request for 7,000 MRAPS, but we're going to double that number," said a senior Defense Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly on the issue.
Members of Congress have criticized the Defense Department, saying it has been too slow to buy enough of the vehicles for troops in Iraq.
The vehicles, which cost around $1 million each, have a raised chassis and V-shaped underside that deflects explosions better than the flat underbelly on Humvees, which are used by most combat units in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Bush administration originally sought $2.6 billion for fiscal 2007 to buy additional MRAPs, but Congress increased the total by $1.2 billion. Acquiring MRAPs has become one of the Pentagon's biggest budget priorities.
Senator Joesph R. Biden Jr., of Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, reintroduced legislation last week to increase financing for the mine-resistant vehicles by $23.6 billion.
"We have no higher obligation than to protect those we send to the front lines," Mr. Biden said in a statement on Wednesday. "So when our commanders in the field tell us that MRAPs will reduce casualties by 67 to 80 percent, it is our responsibility to provide them."
Defense officials, conceding that increasing production of MRAPs so steeply could lead to bottlenecks, have said the Defense Department's leadership now agrees that the risk is acceptable in order to provide vehicles that can better withstand roadside attacks.
Before the Pentagon decided several months ago to buy as many MRAPs as could be made, the vehicles were provided primarily for units with such high-risk missions as clearing roads of bombs, officials said.
Mr. Gates ordered an acceleration in production in May after news reports said Marine units using the vehicles in Anbar Province had experienced a sharp decline in casualties from roadside bombs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/washington/23spend.html?_r=2&adxnnl=0&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1190568300-nmSTBssOmh0QtCUOt5lOHQ&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
&
Defense update article:
http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-3-07/feature_mrap.htm
Force Protection Names Two to Board
Monday September 24, 6:30 pm ET
Force Protection Appoints New Director, President
LADSON, S.C. (AP) -- Armored vehicle maker Force Protection Inc. said Monday it appointed both a new director and president.
John S. Day has become a director and Michael Moody, 61, has become president, effective last Tuesday.
Day spent more than 30 years in accounting and served as an audit partner at Arthur Anderson and a director of real estate and financial services at Deloite and Touche LLP. Moody has served as a principal for Westsource Financial Services Inc. and held senior management positions at several companies.
Force Protection shares fell 11 cents to $18.35 in afterhours trading.
la-onda,
Great company! Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
>:D >:D >:D
I know! it's awesome! I love candlesticks! I guess who doesn't? You must be making a killing. >:D >:D >:D Great job!
Got back in and started buying at 17.50.
Was confused when the number for next year went from 7700 vehicles to 15000 vehicles, but that is the JROC at DoD proposal. We must still see how congress is going to budget them. So far the proposal before congress is 1/4 of 47 billion for MRAP vehicles. Then there is Biden's 25 billion dollar proposal which gets debated today.
Lastly will they pass the budget by October or will they pass a bridge measure and fund them as they continue their debate of the Fiscal Budget. The next week may tell.
The good news FRPT and NAVZ are the only two in good standing delivering vehicles ready for more contracts. I hope it is first come first served like last year. Then maybe a slide when the competition gets their contracts.
19.57!!
Why? on yahoo finance the historical Prices for FRPT start with Aug 14th?? What happened to Aug 15th-today??
FRPT: Short Interest DN 7.2% to 15.3M in Sep 2007
Tuesday , September 25, 2007 16:17ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) DECREASED 7.2% to 15,301,967 shares for the month ended mid-September, 2007.
SYMBOL AUGUST SEPTEMBER CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 16,480,458 15,301,967 -1,178,491 -7.15% 17
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 903,010, it would require approximately 17 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
beautiful chart:
from IV (mrzippy):
SunTrust Robinson Humphrey on FPI - Why the recent move
We believe shares of FRPT have been strong recently due to the
positive potential impact of delays in the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
(JLTV) program and expectations that fall MRAP contracts will be awarded
soon. Not only do we expect FRPT to be a significant beneficiary of
these fall MRAP awards, but we also believe there is a high probability
that the number of vendors supplying vehicles under MRAP will be
narrowed from 5 to 3 with FRPT playing a major role.
*
Impact of JLTV Delay - According to InsideDefense.com, the
Pentagon recently decided to halt the competition for JLTV due to
skepticism about procurement strategy and timeline. In our opinion, this
move benefits FRPT in two ways. First, it likely extends the longevity
of the MRAP program which could mean MRAP production extends beyond
2008. Second, it allows more time for FRPT to complete the development
of its Cheetah vehicle, see it fielded domestically and internationally,
and continue the spiral development process to add capabilities.
Although Cheetah is not officially the JLTV, a delay in JLTV opens the
door for FRPT to begin capturing this market well before JLTV arrives.
*
Fall Awards Could Come Soon - The military is well aware of the
six month lead time associated with materials procurement for MRAP
vehicles. With industry expected to run out of backlog in February or
March 2008, we expect the DoD to award relatively small contracts early
in October to keep production lines hot in March and April with
substantially larger awards in November after the FY08 supplemental is
approved. To date, orders for about 6,400 vehicles have been placed. In
October, we expect to see awards for 1,500 to 2,000 vehicles followed by
awards for 7,000 vehicles in November. As mentioned, we expect FRPT to
be a significant beneficiary of these awards.
*
Narrowing of Competition Likely - With these new awards, we also
expect to see the competitive field narrowed to three vendors with FRPT
and Navistar likely as the dominant players followed by BAE as a smaller
third player. Consequently, FRPT's "market share" of MRAP should once
again increase, providing a significant positive catalyst for the stock.
We reiterate our Buy rating and recommend accumulating shares of FRPT
prior to these awards.
>:D >:D
A Force To Be Reckoned With (FRPT)
Wednesday, September 26, 2007 17:24ET
Glenn Curtis
Aug 15, 2007 (Investopedia via COMTEX) -- Over the last several years, countless American and allied troops have been killed in the field by roadside bombs. Thankfully, countless other American and allied lives have also been saved thanks to a company called Force Protection (Nasdaq: FRPT ). You may have never heard of Force Protection, but the odds are good you have heard about or seen some of the items that the company makes. Force Protection operates behind the scenes, fashioning trucks with armored plating and other security features meant to weather IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) and other man-made weapons of death. Every once in a while, the company will get a little bit of press, usually from an embedded journalist on a remote battlefield in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Forceful Fundamentals
The company recently turned in some pretty decent second quarter numbers, and on that note I think it deserves more than just a passing glance. The company generated $134.7 million in revenue, a roughly 140% increase over last year, and earned 14 cents per share during Q2. In addition, it managed to post a roughly 600 basis point improvement in gross margins thanks mostly to improved labor and material costs. Overall, it seemed to be a very solid quarter. The company has also reported some additional good news since its earnings were released on August 9. Force Protection has inked a contract with the U.S. Navy for 125 armored vehicles, said to be worth almost $70 million. Going forward, I suspect that Force Protection is likely to land similar contracts from both federal and state agencies.
More Than Just a Good Quarter
Of course there are other things that I like about the company. Over the past quarter the company was awarded contracts totaling $711 million to produce just over 1,400 security vehicles for the U.S. Marine Corps. The company is branching out internationally, where significant growth opportunities may lie. It announced its first Canadian contract, worth about $8.9 million, to produce armored and mine resistant vehicles for the Canadian Expeditionary Force Command. In July, the company was granted a $50 million credit facility by Wachovia Bank (NYSE: WB ) so it can continue to build its business and to help fill any voids caused by government payment schedules.
Future Earnings On Target
Based upon the recent inflow of business and expected shipments over the next year, Wall Street expects that the company will earn 63 cents per share this year and $1.42 per share in 2008. While it is a bit too early to say whether Force Protection can hit the 2008 target, I think it is a reasonable target given both the order volume and the improvement in margins the company has been experiencing. That said, there are still some big risks to this story. Governments are typically regarded as slow payers. Going forward, this could present the company with cash flow issues. Although, hopefully credit lines such as the one with Wachovia will help to alleviate any financial stress. As well, the defense industry is filled with deep-pocketed players such as General Dynamics (NYSE: GD ) who have a knack for garnering the biggest and the best government contracts.
The Bottom Line
Force Protection makes the stuff that our soldiers and security forces need to protect themselves. For this reason, I think the company is very well positioned for the future.
&
'Cheetah' Manufacturer to Bring 200+ Jobs to Roxboro
Posted: 19 minutes ago
Updated: 11 minutes ago
A military defense company manufacturing an armored car designed to counteract roadside bombs and minds will bring hundreds of jobs to Roxboro when it opens next month, company executives said Wednesday. South Carolina-based Force Protection will bring at least 270 jobs to the area, which, according to the North Carolina Employment Security Commission, has an unemployment rate of 6.9 percent.
County officials said the jobs are sorely needed.
"It's a real shot in the arm for our economy, as well as our county," said Person County Commissioner Larry Bowes.
The economy suffered about a year ago with manufacturer Collins and Aikman closed, leaving more than 800 people without a job, Bowes said. Force Protection is refurbishing the plant, which will be the only facility in the United States to build the Cheetah armored car.
"It feels very good, not just to be able to deliver a product that keeps our troops safe, but at the same time, to bring an employment opportunity to a county like this," said Dan Busher, Force executive vice president
Busher said he hopes the plant will be ready for limited production of the Cheetah by next month and that as many as 2,000 could be produced as early as next year. Force has already hired 12 people to work at the Roxboro facility. Company officials said they had 20 job interviews lined up for Wednesday..
* Reporter: Beau Minnick
* Web Editor: Kelly Gardner
link:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1866279/
chart:
Looks like a breather, maybe argueing continuation next week. Here is some ammunition for next week.
Senate Passes MRAP Amendment, Bringing Funding to $28.2 Billion
DefenseAlert, Sept. 28, 2007 -- The Senate last night passed an amendment to the fiscal year 2008 defense authorization bill that calls for boosting spending on Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles to more than $28 billion.
http://defense.iwpnewsstand.com/
From Avoid to Long and Jaywalk also rates a buy now.
Market Edge - Second Opinion
Recommendation
Stock is a Buy; Stock is Overbought; Wait for pullback to initiate new position.
Comments
Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) indicates a Bullish Trend.
Chart pattern indicates a Strong Upward Trend.
Relative Strength is Bullish.
Up/Down volume pattern indicates that the stock is under Accumulation.
The 50 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
The 200 day Moving Average is rising which is Bullish.
Stochastics indicate stock is Overbought.
Looking for an entry point. It may be too late with fall MRAP awards around the corner. I will wait patiently.
Cheers,
Analyst Upgrades Force Protection
Monday October 1, 4:07 pm ET
Analyst Upgrades Force Protection to 'Outperform,' Expects Vehicle Orders to Rise
NEW YORK (AP) -- A Friedman Billings Ramsey analyst upgraded Force Protection Inc.'s stock Monday, saying he expects the U.S. and other governments to place more orders for the company's armored vehicles. Force Protection shares climbed 17.9 percent last week, rising with other defense stocks after Pentagon officials requested nearly $190 billion in military funding in 2008, $42 billion more than previous estimates. Of that $42 billion, $11 billion would be used to order 7,000 additional mine resistant ambush protected vehicles. On Wednesday, analyst Patrick McCarthy upgraded the stock to "Outperform" from "Market Perform," and lifted his target price to $25 from $18. He said the Defense Department will order 1,500 more mine resistant vehicles this year, giving Force Protection a total of 8,000 orders to fill.
"In the near term, we anticipate an MRAP vehicle contract for at least 465 vehicles, but based on the company's production potential, we also believe that number could be materially higher," he said.
The British government could order more than 80 Mastiff vehicles over the next few months, he added, on top of an existing order of 110 vehicles.
Force Protection shares rose $1.56, or 7.2 percent, to $23.22 Monday
Can anyone recommend books I can read so I can learn how to interprete the charts that are posted here?
I jumped in yesterday at 23.29; looking for new vehicle orders over the next couple months.
Cheers,
"Can anyone recommend books I can read so I can learn how to interprete the charts that are posted here?"
Go to your favorite book store and browse. There are different levels and styles depending on your background.
About contracts. An analyst quotes small contracts in October for continueing production so they can order supplies and materials that have a lead time. Larger contracts in November which could include MRAP II testing results. I am hoping first come first served meaning FRPT and NAVZ as their production schedules are in order and are ready for their next contract. As we wait to see the results of the LRIP contracts that BAE, AH, and GD got. PVI has not been quoted as delivered yet either (60 vehicles).
And today, assurances that the 11 billion 15,000 vehicle proposal will be in the continueing resolution appropriation.
While Biden's 25 billion dollar amendment has been approved by the senate, needs to pass the house and get included in the 2008 Fiscal budget.
Stalling the Supplementary budget to block funding does not seem to be an issue as 11 billion dollars will keep the DoD buying every vehicle they can produce for a while.
We have just formed a Golden Cross.
classical sell on the news action today:
Force Protection, Inc. Awarded Additional ILAV Vehicle Contract
Monday , October 08, 2007 08:30ET
LADSON, S.C., Oct 08, 2007 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Leading armored vehicle manufacturer Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT) today announced that it has received a purchase order from BAE Systems for an additional 45 Iraq Light Armored Vehicles (ILAV). In addition to Iraq, approximately 18 of these vehicles are bound for Yemen. The order is worth an estimated $3.5 million and will be completed by February 2008. The combined enterprise of Force Protection and BAE Systems previously received awards totaling $180 million in 2006 to build 398 4x4 ILAVs, based on the proven design of the Cougar vehicle. In total, the contract authorizes production of up to 1,050 Cougar ILAVs. BAE Systems is prime contractor on the ILAV program, with Force Protection as subcontractor.
"We are pleased to continue to provide our life-saving blast protection technology in support of U.S. armed forces and their coalition partners," said Force Protection COO Raymond Pollard. "This new contract is further evidence of the many applications of our proven Cougar solution for American forces and their allies in the global war on terror." Force Protection's Cougar and Buffalo vehicles have an unmatched record of performance in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are the gold standard in troop safety and have protected thousands of troops during highly dangerous route clearance and explosive ordnance disposal operations since 2003.
&
U.K. to Buy 140 Armored Vehicles
Monday October 8, 6:12 pm ET
By Donna Borak, AP Business Writer
U.K. to Buy 140 Armored Vehicles for Soldiers in Iraq, Despite Plans to Withdraw 2,500 Troops
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The British government plans to buy 140 armored vehicles from Force Protection Inc. for its soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the same day Great Britain said it is negotiating with Force Protection to buy almost 12 dozen armor vehicles, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said his nation will reduce its presence in Iraq by half the next six months. Despite plans to bring home at least 2,500 soldiers by spring, "the safety and security of our armed forces remains our highest priority," Brown told the House of Commons Monday.
The British government has bought 100 mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles from the Ladson, S.C.-based company.
At least 11 nations have shown interest in purchasing MRAPs from Force Protection, one of several vehicle manufacturers under contract with the U.S. Pentagon to deliver MRAPs to U.S. soldiers overseas, Michael Aldrich, a vice president for the company, told The Associated Press in an interview at an annual military trade show.
The company and its partner Fairfax, Va.-based General Dynamics have received contracts worth over $1 billion to build more than 1,900 MRAPS, designed with V-shaped hulls to protect soldiers from improved explosive devices. IEDs have become the scourge of soldiers on the ground in Iraq. are built with a V-shaped hull to protect against explosive devices. Armored vehicle-makers can expect a string of new orders from the Pentagon in the coming weeks following a decision by U.S. lawmakers to budget $5.2 billion for the MRAPs in a temporary spending bill.
Wall Street expects the Pentagon to order up to 1,500 vehicles in the near term with Force Protection likely to get a sizable share. Friedman Billings Ramsey analyst Patrick McCarthy upgraded the company's stock to "Outperform" from "Market Perform" on anticipated orders and lifted his per-share price target to $25 from $18.
"We anticipate (an order for Force Protection of) at least 465 vehicles, but based on the company's production potential, we also believe that number could be materially higher," McCarthy wrote in a note to investors.
Separately, Force Protection said it received a $3.5 million order from the North American subsidiary of British defense conglomerate BAE Systems PLC for 45 light armored vehicles. Of those vehicles 18 will be delivered to Yemen by February 2008.
Still, the stock hasn't been doing all that well the past few months because competing MRAP makers are getting orders that some investors had thought would go to Force Protection.
Shares of Force Protection fell $2 or 8.3 percent to close at $22.10 Monday. In after-hours trading, the stock fell 10 cents to $22. The company's stock has been trading around $24 a share, a nearly 30 percent discount below its record high of $31.16 hit in May.
Nice rebound today! Wow, that was fast. I think we saw a lot of stops hit yesterday and folks away from their computers on the half holiday. Looking forward to the upcoming weeks...
Cheers,
from IV:
A synopsis of Tuesday's action for those who are interested:
1- FRPT up 9.23%
---- bounce from yesterday, tea-cup making, news/orders anticipated, head and shoulders having, short covering – or countersuit of FRPT's lawsuit realized as frivolous --- or normal buying pressure after normal correction? (Thanks everyone) I think I got it all.
2- New short numbers
September End Month 2007
15,404,281
September Mid Month 2007
15,301,967
3- Jaywalk consensus up again
2.4....6 Buys/ 3 Holds and 1 sell
4- 20 dma crosses the 200 dma
Traditional def: A crossover involving a security's short-term moving average (such as 15-day moving average) breaking above its long-term moving average (such as 50-day moving average) or resistance level. As long-term indicators carry more weight, the Golden Cross indicates a bull market on the horizon and is reinforced by high trading volumes. Additionally, the long-term moving average becomes the new support level in the rising market.
http://www.decisionpoint.com/TAcourse/MovingAve.html
Look for "How are moving averages used" fyi –short read.
5- BAE and Navistar team up
SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--October 09, 2007
BAE Systems and International Military and Government, LLC, an
affiliate of Navistar International Corporation, (OTC:NAVZ) will team
to produce a platform for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV)
program.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=BW&date=20071009&id=7602089
6- A battle won.... But a war to fight
Basically talks of British politics and confirms the order of 140 Mastiffs and why it was put of until now (basically these type of vehicles will be military standards for future operations --- also mentions that they are looking into a smaller vehicle --- "possibly" the cheetah --- with a clarification on what actual vehicles they are looking at within 2-3 weeks and "action" on that very shortly afterwards... Short of it is there is a possibility of a sizable Cheetah order coming from the Britt's within the month.
http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2007/10/battle-won-but-war-to-fight.html
Force Protection "buy," target price raised
Thursday, October 11, 2007 1:08:36 PM ET
Dougherty & Company
NEW YORK, October 11 (newratings.com) - Analysts at Dougherty & Company reiterate their "buy" rating on Force Protection Inc (ticker: FRPT). The target price has been raised from $25 to $30.
Key Points:
• We are re-iterating our BUY rating and increasing our price target to $30.00 from $25.00 based on expected awards and the strong likelihood of upside revisions to our FY08 estimates.
• We believe FRPT could win 750 – 800 in near-term MRAP awards and that the MRAP field could be reduced to three vendors from the current five.
• Funding for 7,000 additional vehicles could be passed by early November. In order for FRPT to meet our FY08 expectations (ignoring awards other than MRAPs), we believe FRPT needs to win 2,000 of the 7,000 expected MRAPs (29%), which could occur this November. FRPT currently has a 31% MRAP market share, a figure we believe could increase if the MRAP field is narrowed.
• We believe upside to our FY08 estimates in likely given the potential for MRAP market share gains, Cougar orders from foreign governments (Mastiffs, ILAVs, interest from several other countries), increased Buffalo production, and upside to our 1,000 Cheetah expectation.
• FRPT's Q307 financial results are likely to include vehicles produced by General Dynamics (GD, NR), see below.
We believe the GD impact will result in FRPT's revenue being reported above street expectations, but that its gross margin will be below expectations. If FRPT gives data showing its "real" production (ex-GD), it will likely result in revenue below the street, but with much higher gross margin.
I have sold FRPT and I have bought ASTI & SLP.
accounting problems have to be sorted out...
nice 33% gain locked (not as last time ;) )
Force Protection Warns on Accounting
Monday October 15, 9:48 am ET
Force Protection Finds Material Weaknesses in Accounting Which Could Result in Restatements
LADSON, S.C. (AP) -- Armored vehicle maker Force Protection Inc. found material weaknesses in accounting system, according to a filing Monday with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Shares fell 75 cents, or 3.1 percent, to $23.20 in morning trading. They have ranged from $6.35 to $31.16 over the past year.
Force Protection previously restated annual reports for 2003 through 2005 and amended its annual report for 2006. During those restatements, the company found personnel were not properly skilled in certain accounting procedures.
The company said the problems affect all financial reports after Dec. 31, 2006.
Force Protection said the problems could affect its management evaluations and annual audit, and could lead to restatements, delisting from the Nasdaq Stock Market, potential legal issues, and a loss of investor confidence.
The company also said it could take charges through the rest of the year and beyond, related to the hiring of new personnel and other efforts to shore up its accounting.
hit the sell button probably too early..
Force Protection's Ongoing Accounting Lapses
Evelyn M. Rusli, 10.15.07, 2:20 PM ET
In Force Protection's case, a financial restatement can have more bark than actual bite. Or so claims one analyst.
On Monday, shares of the armored vehicle maker plunged more than 14.4% in morning trading, amid investor anxiety over the company's latest Securities Exchange Commission filing.
In an annual report amendment, Force Protection (nasdaq: FRPT - news - people ) acknowledged accounting problems in 2006 and 2007. In one document, the Ladson, S.C.-based company said its "disclosure controls were not effective as of December 31, 2005 because of certain material weaknesses." Meanwhile, in another document, Force Protection also said that "internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31. 2006, because of certain material weaknesses." According to these reports, the central problem was an inexperienced staff that did not execute proper accounting procedures.
In Force Protection's words: "We did not maintain a sufficient complement of personnel with an appropriate level of accounting knowledge, experience with the Company and training in the application of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles commensurate with our financial reporting requirements. The lack of a sufficient complement of personnel with an appropriate level of accounting knowledge, experience with our Company and training contributed to multiple control problems."
Despite the steep, initial share plunge, Force Protection's stock steadily climbed back to a 6.8% decline, or $1.64, to $22.31 in afternoon trading.
As investors hit the panic button, Dougherty & Company analyst Joe Maxa said there was no real news in the reports and that the negative reaction was overblown. In the past, the company has restated reports for 2003 through 2005, also citing problems with the personnel handling accounting issues.
The filings, according to Maxa, simply add language to accounting problems that were already disclosed. "It is not a meaningful event," he said. He also believes Force Protection has taken steps to correct its problems.
According to one filing, the company has worked towards shoring up its accounting practices, by hiring a new chief financial officer in 2007, Michael S. Durski, and hiring a "professional service organization which specializes in the assessment and the enhancement of the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting." In addition, the company is also using computer systems to "enhance our processes and internal control environment, and change the manner of collection, reporting and management of accounting data." Maxa said that as long as these controls hold up, Force Protection should be able to proceed without any accounting problems in the future.
He remains positive on the stock, with a "buy" rating and $30 price target.
Over the past year, Force Protection's stock has been battered by competition, as unlikely rivals such as Navistar and General Dynamics (nyse: GD - news - people ) have won lucrative armored-vehicle contracts from the government. Under the government's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program, the Army is expected to award contracts to produce at least 23,000 armored vehicles in the next few years (See: "Force Protection Battered By Rivals." )
I was half way out the door when it rebounded above 22.35 and went all the way back in.
But you may be right yet. I am in for the rocket of contract announcements.
But the problem being since FRPT is new here, they are being pushed around and tested. And the panic, making mistakes. Mistakes they have to learn not to make. So now they are paying for corrective action. And we are hoping they do not find any big errors or mistakes.
But this is their first audit and they happen rarely. Audits are complex, large, and complete, so they are time consuming and expensive. And rarely do audits find nothing if they are doing their job. The audit found no errors, but a lack of controls to where errors and mistakes could happen. Again lets hope they do not find any big mistakes.
The only new problem I noticed is that they may have a hazardous waste problem. Which may cost them something. Including cleanup and legal costs.
Force Protection down on analyst comment
Tuesday , October 16, 2007 13:11ET
By Staff Reporter
NEW YORK, Oct 17, 2007 (AP via COMTEX) -- Shares of Force Protection Inc. skidded Tuesday after a Stephens Inc. analyst began covering the company with an "Underweight" rating, saying troop withdrawals from Iraq could cut sales of its armored vehicles in 2009 and 2010.
Tim Quillin said the stock will lose more than a third of its value over the next year, falling to $14 per share. He recommended investors sell the shares or take "short" positions, betting the stock will go down.
He said the company's mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicle is uniquely suited to fighting in Iraq, and because large numbers of soldiers could be withdrawn in 2009, he expects orders to decrease. That would lead to sharp decreases in the company's profit. Force Protection shares fell 56 cents, or 2.5 percent, to $22.14. The stock traded as low as $20.69 on the day. Quillin said the stock price is high because investors expect Force Protection to keep making large numbers of vehicles, assuming that the mine-resistant vehicle program will be extended, or that the company will win a large number of orders under a different program. He said that situation is "too-good-to-be-true." The company's profit margins could remain thin, he added, because Force Protection outsources much of its business and because of the makeup of Force Dynamics LLC, a joint venture with General Dynamics Corp.
WAKE UP.
The news hit after close yesterday and the stock is on the move already.
Force Protection, Navistar, BAE May Win Truck Awards (Update1)
By Edmond Lococo
Oct. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., Navistar International Corp. and BAE Systems PLC may win orders to build more blast-resistant trucks for the U.S. military as soon as this week, according to a report from the Stanford Group.
Each of the three companies may get awards valued at approximately $400 million for about 800 of the trucks, Washington-based Stanford said in a note to clients today. The report cited Congressional sources it didn't identify.
Stanford estimates the Pentagon will order 15,374 to 23,000 of the trucks for the Mine-Resistant Blast-Protected vehicle, or MRAP, program in fiscal 2008. The trucks have blast-deflecting, V-shaped hulls which the U.S. Marine Corps has said are four times better than flat-bottomed trucks at protecting troops from roadside bombs used in Iraq.
Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection rose 88 cents, or 3.8 percent, to $23.80 at 4:30 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. Warrenville, Illinois- based Navistar gained 55 cents to $71.50 in over-the-counter trading.
Stanford is a member of the Stanford Financial Group of companies, a network of closely held financial-service companies founded by Lodis B. Stanford in 1932. Stanford helps manage funds for high net-worth individuals.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected] .
Last Updated: October 17, 2007 17:13 EDT
fyi from IV (mrzippy)
Defense Department Background Briefing on Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPS)
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: (In progress from source) -- pleased to be here. Actually, I really am. Today, the MRAP Joint Program Office is placing orders for 2,400 additional MRAP vehicles through our existing contracts. The Defense Department has already ordered roughly 6,400 MRAPs. This will increase our vehicles on order to 8,800. This next step is made possible through a lot of work by Secretary Gates and Secretary England working closely with the Congress, and the Congress taking the remarkable step of providing $5.2 billion in the continuing resolution for this very important program.
The orders are being placed with three vendors. Category II MRAPs are the larger variants, typically six-wheeled vehicles carrying two crew and eight passengers. We will order additional Category II MRAPs from Force Protection Industries, FPI, and British Aerospace, BAE. Category I MRAPs are typically four-wheeled vehicles carrying two crew and four passengers. We will order additional Category I MRAPs from International Military Group and FPI. Again, we are presently ordering these types of vehicles from these vendors. These are additional orders. Indeed, the BAE Category II vehicle was also recently selected through a mini MRAP competition as the preferred design for 400 ambulance versions or variants which the department is now purchasing.
As we go forward, we are seeking to constantly improve the survivability of the MRAP design. Some of the explosively formed projectile or EFP armor enhancement concepts require significant excess payload capacity of the MRAP, though none of the current designs have as much payload capacity as the Defense Department would prefer. The BAE and FPI Category II vehicles provide the largest payload capacity in this class, the Category II class. Similarly, the IMG and FPI Category I MRAPs provide significant excess payload capacity for these armor enhancement concepts.
Further, two of these vendors are currently producing at high and growing rates of production. Indeed, the vendors have delivered some vehicles ahead of schedule. Consistent with the department's goal of building and delivering MRAP vehicles as fast as possible, it makes sense to concentrate our efforts on fewer, more capable vehicle variants. This approach provides several benefits.
First, the MRAP production capacity has reached the point where these three vendors can potentially produce the designs at a total rate of 1,200 MRAPs per month. Even at this rate, the department will have to manage potential conflicts in the demand for hardened and ballistic steel between MRAPs and other programs such as Strykers, Bradleys and Frag Kit 6 armor enhancements.
Second, we hope to succeed in the challenge of producing 1,200 vehicles a month. We are still working towards that goal. Those vehicles then must get radios and other items installed at the Navy's Space and Naval Warfare or SPAWAR Charleston (S.C.) facility. To improve the chances of modifying 1,200 vehicles per month and then quickly moving them to theater, we must reduce the number of MRAP variants moving through the SPAWAR production line.
Third, our current efforts are meeting the most urgent, initial requirement for roughly 8,000 MRAPs. However, we are building at least eight vehicle variants from five vendors. With unique Army and Marine Corps equipment installations, this means we are fielding as many as 16 different vehicle designs. Going forward, we need to reduce the burden for training, maintenance and spare parts on our deployed forces. We can now maintain production rates and shift to fewer variants in an effort to provide better support for fielded MRAPs and reduce the training, maintenance and logistics burden in theater.
Finally, this approach will mean our inventory in the end state has the highest quantity of the most capable MRAP vehicles. I want to note the continuing and near-heroic work of Secretary Etter, General Brogan, the MRAP program manager Paul Mann and the MRAP Joint Program Office. They have done a tremendous job here. And equally importantly, our industry partners have stepped up to the challenge and are meeting their delivery plans to date.
The MRAP program continues to face challenges. This is a highly unusual program. These orders obligate roughly $1.2 billion for 2,400 MRAPs, roughly two months of production. We will need the support of Congress for additional funds at the beginning of December in order to place additional orders to continue the production lines. At this time, we would expect to order roughly 6,500 MRAPs in December. This would bring our total orders to about 15,200, meeting the current stated requirement. The Defense Department continues to evaluate the MRAP requirement in light of the experiences and needs from commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan as relayed to us. But we will have the opportunity and the production lines in place to continue production if that is the requirement from the field.
With that, I'll take questions.
Yes.
Q Can you just clarify a few things? Fifteen thousand two hundred -- that number is the total number of MRAPs that will be produced?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I'm trying to use round numbers, but the current stated and endorsed by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council number is 15,274 vehicles.
Q Can you break down the dollar amount for each company, how much each contract is worth?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Actually, I think I can.
(Off mike commentary.)
We can give them the announcement?
(Off mike commentary.)
The announcement has the dollars and the numbers and the exact company names. Please check that, because I may not have -- like it's BAE Systems Land and Armaments. And I didn't get the exact company names. If you would please correct that, that would be great.
Q How many in Category I? How many in Category II?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I don't think this press release breaks it out, and that's the best way to let you get it if that's okay.
Q Do you know how many are in which category?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, IMG is being asked -- we're ordering 1,000 Category I vehicles from IMG. We are ordering 399 Category II vehicles from BAE and 112 of the MRAP Category II ambulance variants. So doing math on the fly does not work for me, so I'll just tell you what it says -- 553 Category I FPI MRAPs, and 247 Category II FPI MRAPs.
Q And this is all on that release?
(Cross talk.)
Sir, you said earlier that there were 16 different variants, and you said that could be a problem. Are you working to drop that number of variants?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I promise to come back to you.
Why are you shaking your head?
Q Because those numbers don't add up to anywhere near 6,400 do they?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No, because there's 2,400. We ordered 2,400 today. We already have 6,400 on order. That brings our total to 8,800. I'm sorry.
Q That's all right, sir. You've got 16 different variants, and you're saying that that could cause problems in the future.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: (Inaudible.)
Q All right. Are you working to bring that number down?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, obviously, by placing these orders, we will make a dramatic step in these vehicles. And to give you an example, the FPI vehicles have been in production for some time, and they are coming up the ramp pretty well. SPAWAR has had some success in processing those vehicles very quickly -- you know, seven to 10 day kind of timelines. Other vehicles are newly coming in to SPAWAR. It takes time to design the package to install either the Army package or the Marine Corps package, proof that, do some initial tests and then set that as a process. So other vehicles have taken longer periods of time to get through SPAWAR. We want to consolidate -- well, first and foremost, we're going to buy the most capable vehicles. And the fact that particularly the Category II vehicles have the largest excess payload capacity, that serves us well for the long term. Making that choice to give vehicles a payload capacity and limit it to those two types will let us then let SPAWAR focus on processing two types of vehicles through the facility. And in general, the Army -- I mean, this isn't -- the Army would like to have, for example, particularly some of the IMG Category I vehicles. The Marine Corps has bought the FPI Category I and II vehicles. But I want to be clear with you, that's not what's happening. Right now, there is a joint allocation board, and it is allocating the vehicles that are produced to the most important areas in theater irrespective of service. So you know, in some cases, a vehicle that might have been intended to the Army is going to the Marine Corps or a Marine Corps is going to the Army. They're going where the theater says we face a threat and we want the vehicles.
Q You mentioned increased payload and increased EFP type armor protection and it brought MRAP II to mind. So I wondered where this stands in relation to MRAP II. Is that a separate procurement line, or is this kind related?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: It's really a separate issue at this time. There are two things going on that are separate from this order process. The MRAP II competition which you're clearly aware of where we've gotten the proposals and we expect to get vehicles and get them in test, and then we've also allowed these existing vehicle vendors to propose changes to their vehicles that would try to bring them up to the MRAP II standard. And indeed, as we've put the vehicles we're buying today through additional developmental testing, we've found these vehicles have great capability and with some modest changes can get closer to that MRAP II standard or, more importantly, can be vehicles that provide us better protection. But there's a decision down the road as to whether we would shift and buy MRAP IIs. We will clearly make the decision, I think, if we can to cut in some of these change proposals. And again, consistent with what I said in the beginning, make the vehicles we are now ordering and then the ones we will order in December the most capable possible vehicles by cutting in change proposals that help their survivability.
Q You had talked about cutting down the number of variants going through SPAWAR. Has the program decided on two or three variants that it's now going to concentrate on; for example, the Cougar, the MaxPro and, say, the RG-33?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, that's what I told you today. We are, certainly with these orders, concentrating on the very vehicles I think you outlined -- the BAE Category II vehicle which is an RG-33, the FPI Category I and Category II vehicles which are Cougar derived and then the IMG or MaxPro Category I vehicle.
Q Is this going to be a continuing trend where you see that the future 6,500 that you're going to order, is it fair to say they will be distributed among RG-33s, Cougars and the MaxPro?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, we'll make that decision when we place that order. What will factor into that decision -- testing, theater feedback and a lot of different factors.
Q And I just didn't quite understand when you said you will be asking for more money in December for an additional 6,500. What is it that -- are you saying that that money's coming from another request?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Right. I believe that the department has drafted and is working with the White House to formally request the funds necessary to order those additional vehicles. And it should go over in the form of a budget amendment, you know. But the White House will make all those decisions in the final form.
Q And the 2,400, do you know when they are expected to arrive in Iraq?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can't tell you that.
Q (Inaudible) -- decision, would that allow you to continue the production beyond May?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: The orders we're placing today we expect, if we make the program plan -- and we have a lot who were cut out for us. People have done a tremendous job to this point. We produced 309 vehicles in September, and that was 34 vehicles ahead of the schedule for that month. And against the plan since February, we're four vehicles ahead of schedule. So we were behind in some months. We've now caught up, and we're on and really slightly ahead of the schedule. But the big months lie ahead of us. We have to produce 419 vehicles in October -- let me use round numbers -- just over 400 vehicles in October, almost 1,000 vehicles in November and 1,200 vehicles in December. That's a challenge that we've got to accomplish. If we meet that challenge then, to answer your question, these orders will deliver a few in February and the bulk of them in March and April. So that does get us to May. And that's why, given the roughly six-month lead time, we must order vehicles the first of December so that production lines can continue to march and deliver vehicles in May and out.
If we order that 6,500 vehicles in May, they should deliver out, and we should have that 15,200-plus number of vehicles by early October, have them delivered from the vendors to at least SPAWAR Charleston for outfitting.
(Off mike commentary.)
Of next year -- October of '08 -- sorry, 2008.
Q You had mentioned about 300 vehicles were produced in September of which 101 were flown to Iraq. Do you have estimates on --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I didn't say that.
Q I know you didn't say that. That's been previously reported. Geoff Morrell actually said that yesterday.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Okay.
Q So that's out there. Do you have estimates for October, November and December of how many you anticipate shipping to Iraq for those months?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Our current plan, which I reserve the right to adjust the plans to optimize things, is to fly vehicles to theater, to get them there as fast as possible, consistent with Secretary Gates' goal and my orders from him. And we will do that up to the capacity of airlift we have, which is roughly 360 vehicles a month.
Q However, contracts have been awarded to do that. We've got two long-term contracts with the two Russian freight carriers. Poland Air and -- (inaudible) -- have yet to be awarded.
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Right. I said our plan is to put in place the air capacity. We're using C-5s, C-17s. And then we will possibly contract for air. But TRANSCOM -- I can assure you I've talked to General Schwartz several times. He's making these decisions and plans. He understands the priority the secretary places on this program. And so we intend to -- until we get to 360 vehicles a month, they will go by air, and the intent under the current plan is that will continue. So roughly mid November, if we produce over 400 vehicles in October, allotting some time to outfit those vehicles at Charleston, in mid November we should broach this 360 number and start loading vehicles for sea lift into theater. And there's still a couple of different options being worked through, but we will send, you know, the production capacity above 360 a month. And certainly, if we make 1,200, it will get to that number by surface lift. And then we will transport them. The current plan is to transport the vehicles from port by airlift to the point where they can be de-processed, if you will, and put to use in the theater.
Q Not to belabor the point, what TRANSCOM says is they can fly 360 a month if they have 360 a month. They say what's happening is so many are transitioning through SPAWAR that they don't have those numbers to fly. How are you going to cut down on the time it takes them to transition through SPAWAR so you have that number to fly?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: That's a great question, and that's what I told you we're working through. The FPI vehicles, we're having some success in processing through SPAWAR in as few as seven to 10 days. Some of the other vehicles are new variants. We've got to get down the learning curve and process them through more quickly, and we'll do that. We're going through the growing pains, but there are two or three things that are happening in that regard. We've built a tracking tool that tries to let SPAWAR, the program office and TRANSCOM see when vehicles come in the door and immediately assign a prediction to when they will be done and ready for shipment. And that lets TRANSCOM plan for vehicle delivery.
The other thing is we're moving the program office -- Paul Mann and the team are doing a good job. We're trying to move from monthly delivery estimates to weekly delivery estimates and folk those into the contractual requirements, because we've had a problem with vendors -- and I don't even want to say it's a problem. Again, the great news is we are ramping up to rate fairly quickly. But in meeting that rate, in most months they delivered some of their vehicles at the very end of the month to make the quota. So we are moving to weekly quotas to help smooth the flow of vehicles. That helps level the workload at SPAWAR, and then that helps TRANSCOM do efficient planning, exactly to your question.
Q And my final question. Thank you for taking all this time. Is the goal still 1,500 by the end of the year?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I think we -- I don't want to say that is a goal. I want to say what I believe the secretary said today is we expect to have 1,500, and we hope to have more than that. We're going to do everything we can to get as many vehicles in theater as fast as we can.
Q (Inaudible.)
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Last time I gave you all an estimate on the fly, and it was wrong. And this is almost certainly what you should never do. Please don't quote the number I said on stage anymore. It was a bad estimate. I never should have done it. I made it on the fly on the stage. We can prepare an estimate, but it's very important to understand I have only built 309 vehicles in September. I've got to prove we're going to build 1,200 vehicles in December and roughly 1,000 in November. And if I do that, then I've got to try to get them there as fast and efficiently as I can. And so I don't want to create any false impressions.
But I do want to tell you everybody's working as hard as they can. They understand, from Secretary Gates down, he wants every vehicle that can be built, outfitted and shipped to theater there as fast as possible. And I think we will make 1,500. I think we will exceed 1,500. But you know, since that's become a sensational press story, I don't want to quote a number anymore.
Q Up until now, you've had five companies building MRAPs. You just named four right now that will get additional contracts, and I'm blanking on the name of the fifth that's been doing up until that. Does that mean you're going down to four?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: We're moving to three vendors. So two companies will not be getting orders today. But frankly, these two companies are involved in different ways in the production. We have existing orders with General Dynamics Land Systems for RG-31 vehicles. We won't order more from them, but General Dynamics has partnered with Force Protection Industries on the construction of those Cougar vehicles. We had ordered Armor Holding vehicles called Caimans, and we will continue to build those under the existing orders. Armor Holdings is paired with -- I believe British BAE has acquired Armor Holdings. I don't know the state of that acquisition, so I'd have to check. And indeed, BAE is building some of the RG-33s through Armor Holdings' facilities now modest numbers. I expect that when we don't order additional Armor Holdings vehicles, BAE will probably use that capacity to help build the RG-33s that we are ordering. But that's just something the company will have to decide.
Q When you get the 1,500, what is the total dollar amount going to be for the contract?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I should probably -- it's roughly -- I wonder if I should do this. I don't know if I have a money chart with me.
(Off mike commentary.)
Can we give you an answer for the record? I know about what the number is, but I'd rather give you a little better record number. You know, it's certainly -- the moves a little bit as services changes their mix and they change some of the outfitting. And then I've got to give you some caveats with the number, because the number generally includes the vehicles, the GFE, two years of support, spare parts, and now it includes the EFP enhancement kits that we're planning to add to the vehicles. [Sic: Total MRAP program cost (spent and known future requirements) is $24.5B. Note, this only estimates the sustainment cost in FY09 for 15,274 vehicles]
Q Did you mentioned an approximate amount when you were talking about what will be requested of Congress in December for the additional 6,500?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: We are trying to manage the program, frankly, in partnership with the Congress. And the Congress was tremendously helpful. You know, the $5 billion that they provided was hugely helpful, and it's what we needed in October to continue the production lines. And the bulk of that money, as you heard, we're using $1.2 billion of that money to place the orders today. The bulk of that money is to finish the 6,400 vehicles, provide the spares and logistics costs for those vehicles and the transportation costs to move those vehicles to theater. So that's one of those unique features of this program. We're cash flowing where we can in order to constantly order the maximum number of vehicles. The cash flow need of the program and the bulk of that money I believe does go to order vehicles in November, but some of it will be for spares and logistics again. But we believe to continue every aspect of the program -- spares, logistics and then orders -- we need about $8.2 billion on or about December the 1st.
Q So at what point will you start beginning to consider expanding beyond the 15,000 you have --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: That's dependent upon a bunch of different features. And the good news is as we reach a point where we have to make that decision, we'll have a lot of vehicles in theater, we'll have feedback on how those vehicles are performing, we'll understand more about how the theater mission is changing and evolving. I expect that -- so the first source will be the theater will articulate whether they want more vehicles, different vehicles. And they'll articulate that through the joint staff and the joint allocation board. And then I expect to hear from the joint staff if they plan to adjust that requirement. Right now, it's not obvious to me that requirement will be adjusted. I do believe we've met -- you know, the important point is the first joint staff requirement which emerged from theater was to get 8,000 vehicles urgently. We're well on our way to that. A significant portion of these additional vehicles, and we can probably get that for the record, are vehicles that go to the Navy, the Air Force and other entities. So we're starting to fill out both the theater requirements and then some service-specific requirements.
Q You mentioned -- EFP kits. Is that something that's going on old vehicles or, you know --
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Our intention right now is to design EFP enhancements and install them on all the vehicles. So our planning and budget numbers will include that cost.
Q Is that like a new kind of armor solution?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Those things that relate to helping the threat I'm not going to talk about. Sorry about that.
Q Just to be clear, the 6,500 you want to order in December, those are on top of the 15,000?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: That's on top of the 8,800 that we've -- so 6,400 on order now, 2,400 being ordered today to 8,800, and then 6,500 to be ordered in December, which will take us to 15,200.
Q (Inaudible.)
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I should have said 6,400 -- 64(00), 6,500, because the requirement's 15,274. This is a program that shouldn't be managed by onesies.
Q Can you explain in layman's terms why it takes different times for different vehicles to get through SPAWAR; for example, seven to 10 (days) for the Cougar and longer for others?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, yeah. They've been getting Cougars for several months now. So the first Cougars took an amount of time. I can only talk about that in general terms. You get the first vehicles and then you have to make installations in those vehicles -- radios and other items. You have to take the vehicle out and then test it for radio frequency interference. You have to drive it some, make sure you haven't changed any of the driving and performance properties of it. And I believe they actually take them to the test range for those driving. And so there is some time. So it takes several, several days to do the first install -- well, prepare the paper for the install, do the install, take it out and test it, verify the install's right, come back and change the papers if you decide to change things and then set that as the process that you want to make every one of those vehicles go through. So every vehicle's gone through those growing pains. It's just that the ones where we've gotten in quantity are through those growing pains.
And the good news is SPAWAR is successfully demonstrating that it can process vehicles quickly, you know, if they have a mature package, they get a consistent vehicle that's production-ready, if you will, then out it will go. These other vehicles are just coming in. You know, the IMG contracts were only awarded, I don't recall, but a couple of months ago. And so the first vehicles came in I think in August.
Let's see -- yeah, the first IMG vehicles came in August, so it's probably not a surprise here at mid October I'm telling you they've gone through their growing pains, and SPAWAR's starting to be able to process those vehicles faster. But one challenge we've got to get behind us is the number of variants we're putting through there and then the fact that we're still installing some unique Army and Marine Corps features on each vehicle. So it's almost like doing two different vehicles. We've (knocked ?) that down some. The Army and Marine Corps, to their credit, agreed on common turrets. And there are a few other things they agreed to be common. But we probably need to go back and look at that one more time to ease the burden on SPAWAR so they can consistently install.
Q And the average time then through SPAWAR is now 22 days?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, 22, 23 days. But you know, that's kind of a good -- it's a sampling of, you know, the recent set of vehicles. So within that mix, there are some that have taken longer, as you can guess, and then some that have taken shorter periods of time. But the goal is seven days.
Q For all vehicles?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: At a mature state. And frankly, we need it to be about that rate of processing when we get to 1,200 vehicles a month trying to go through there. Otherwise, it will become bottlenecked. And very anxious about that. SPAWAR's done a lot of work. I think we're going to continue to look at helping them and making sure we have every possible option to process 1,200 vehicles, because I haven't met the secretary's goal if I can't get those vehicles processed and into theater.
(Cross talk.)
Q (Inaudible) -- notification Congress regarding buying high hardened steel from foreign sources. Have you gotten any kind of response from Congress, or what's the status of that now?
SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, I believe that waiver was signed, because this is -- as I think I said in my statement, at 1,200 a month, we do expect to have manageable but some conflicts in the demand for high hardened steel and in ballistic steel. And so we've processed a waiver that lets us buy from essentially all the sources that globally can produce these qualities of steel, and we have to have that. Without those waivers and those procedures, we will struggle to deliver MRAPs. And we need to continue to work with the Congress on these issues. They are tough issues. We cannot hinder the war fighter over these kinds of provisions.
Thank you.
Force Protection
Wednesday, October 24, 2007 07:00ET
Roopak Chakravarty
Oct 24, 2007 (Zacks Investment Research via COMTEX) -- Force Protection is winning contracts left and right. It recently won the second biggest contract in its history. This is showing up in higher earnings. The company's second quarter beat expectations by almost 42%. Over the past month, next year's earnings estimates have risen seven cents to $1.53 per share. Analysts expect that earnings will soar over 151% next year. FRPT has no debt and a 17% ROE.
Full Analysis
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) and its subsidiaries engage in the manufacture of ballistic and blast protected vehicles. The company's products are used to protect personnel during transport, removal of unexploded ordnance, route clearance, humanitarian de-mining, and other missions that require protection from landmines and hostile fire.
Its products include The Buffalo series, which is designed for route clearing activities; and The Cougar series for troop transport, explosive ordinance disposal, command and control, artillery prime mover, recovery and ambulance duty, urban patrol, route clearance support, utility transport, and special unit activities. The company also offers The Cheetah series for reconnaissance, forward command and control, and urban operations.
Earlier this week, the company announced that it received a contract valued at $376 million to build 800 vehicles for the Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program. The order for the four- and six-wheel Cougar model vehicles is scheduled to be completed in April.
They will be built by Force Dynamics LLC, a joint venture between Force Protection and a division of General Dynamics Corp. Force Protection Chief Operating Officer Raymond Pollard said the order was second biggest in the company's 10-year history.
The company reported robust second-quarter results in early-August. Force Protection said it earned $32.8 million, or 17 cents a share, in the second quarter, up from $10.2 million, or a penny a share, a year earlier. Net sales rose to $134.7 million from $56.1 million. Analysts expected 12 cents per share.
FRPT also sold 212 of its medium-size Cougar trucks, used for troop transportation. Altogether, the company said it produced 229 vehicles in the recent quarter, compared with 285 produced for all of 2006.
The U.S. military has said it wants to purchase thousands of these trucks -- better known as MRAP, or mine-resistant ambush-protected, vehicles -- to use in place of the more vulnerable Humvee. Recently, the Defense Department requested the transfer of $1.2 billion in existing funds for an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, bringing the total size of its order to 6,415.
Rumors.......
Big chatter going around about a Lockheed buy out. Interesting if it's true.
Way oversold...
Looks like we got a Cup with Handle Pattern here.
Technicals
Stochastic - Bullish
Percentage Gainer
Last Price Quote is:
-5.66%below 13-day MA
-1.31%below 50-day MA
RS Rating: 89
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $1,362.11
P/E Ratio: 43.16
PEG Ratio: 1.09818
Next Earnings: 11/09/2007
Last Analyst Rating: Outperform
Below are the 6 month and 1 year charts.......
Force Protection is winning contracts left and right. It recently won the second biggest contract in its history. This is showing up in higher earnings. The company's second quarter beat expectations by almost 42%. Over the past month, next year's earnings estimates have risen seven cents to $1.53 per share. Analysts expect that earnings will soar over 151% next year. FRPT has no debt and a 17% ROE.
Full Analysis
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) and its subsidiaries engage in the manufacture of ballistic and blast protected vehicles. The company's products are used to protect personnel during transport, removal of unexploded ordnance, route clearance, humanitarian de-mining, and other missions that require protection from landmines and hostile fire.
Its products include The Buffalo series, which is designed for route clearing activities; and The Cougar series for troop transport, explosive ordinance disposal, command and control, artillery prime mover, recovery and ambulance duty, urban patrol, route clearance support, utility transport, and special unit activities. The company also offers The Cheetah series for reconnaissance, forward command and control, and urban operations.
Earlier this week, the company announced that it received a contract valued at $376 million to build 800 vehicles for the Marine Corps' Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program. The order for the four- and six-wheel Cougar model vehicles is scheduled to be completed in April.
They will be built by Force Dynamics LLC, a joint venture between Force Protection and a division of General Dynamics Corp. Force Protection Chief Operating Officer Raymond Pollard said the order was second biggest in the company's 10-year history.
The company reported robust second-quarter results in early-August. Force Protection said it earned $32.8 million, or 17 cents a share, in the second quarter, up from $10.2 million, or a penny a share, a year earlier. Net sales rose to $134.7 million from $56.1 million. Analysts expected 12 cents per share.
FRPT also sold 212 of its medium-size Cougar trucks, used for troop transportation. Altogether, the company said it produced 229 vehicles in the recent quarter, compared with 285 produced for all of 2006.
The U.S. military has said it wants to purchase thousands of these trucks -- better known as MRAP, or mine-resistant ambush-protected, vehicles -- to use in place of the more vulnerable Humvee. Recently, the Defense Department requested the transfer of $1.2 billion in existing funds for an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, bringing the total size of its order to 6,415.
setravis,
That LMT buyout rumor has surfaced three times, but it is being reported by only one source, the same source, JagFn all three times, including now. Does that sound reliable or insider?
LMT PR answered saying if it were true it would be confidential and he could not comment due to regulations. But he could say that "LMT is not looking at getting into the MRAP area". Case closed.
la-onda I am glad you are still interested.
Here is my take on it, but I am going in circles looking for confirmation. My basic complaint about this is that FRPT is a very high risk.
Think you missed it. Cramer thinks a large short position is a bad reason.
Some people think there is a short squeeze coming. The short position is being quoted to have increased from 11 million to 16 million on a trend reversal and now profit taking on good news. The good news being continueing resolution contracts of 2400 vehicles among and narrowed field of three vendors, with three contacts, for three vehicle types.
Next good news will be Q3 report mid November and contracts for December upon Fiscal 2008 budget approval in December for 6500 vehicles. And today DoD is considering additional funds for vehicles beyond that. Meaning the Supplemental and Emergency budgets being worked on. So the doubt is will they sell on good news like recently? Profit taking and getting ready for tax time?
So analyst estimates may go up if additional funds are approved beyond December. The last short squeeze though contrarian did happen. Narrowing bollinger bands and sideways trading then a straight up rise.
Todays rise was Zacks upgrade from Hold to Buy, GD reporting surprise increased earnings which include MRAP, and DoD considering additional funds and vehicles beyond The Fiscal 2008 budget.
The chartist was wrong last time and the suspicion paid.
The last recent pullback to 17 was about options expiration at 22.50 and 25 so the short squeeze was averted by sinking the stock. Amazing after option expiration it bounces to 20 again today. So next entry the Q3 report gamble.
I am invested again >:D
amstocks82 quotation:
Force Protection was Priced for FEAR and Failure - but the reality is RAPID GROWTH/PROFIT
There has been a HUGE amount of misinformation about how Force Protection is doing - about possible restatements and getting delisted because they would not file their 10Q, about not getting paid by the military, about running out of cash and needing to get $250 million and diluting by millions of shares ....
The news is out - FRPT's revenue and profit comes in about as expected. Force Protection did file their 10Q so won't be getting delisted. Force Protection has been getting paid by the military (which was running behind on payments last quarter) and have paid down their credit line to ZERO, and currently have $72.274 million in cash. They have over $182 million in inventory but Force Protection has told the military that they have $100 million in spare parts ready to ship to Iraq if needed. The new ILS contract and rapid delivery of new vehicles might start reducing that inventory as the parts get shipped to Iraq. Overall, Force Protection is growing fast - faster than any other defense company I know of and making a profit doing so.
&
New article form Lococo about Fidelity and FRPT
Fidelity Investments Triples Its Stake in Force Protection
2007-11-13 11:01 (New York)
By Edmond Lococo
Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Fidelity Investments tripled its stake in Force Protection Inc., the largest supplier of blast- resistant trucks to the U.S. Marine Corps. Fidelity holds 7.89 million shares, or about a 12 percent stake, as of Oct. 31, Boston-based Fidelity said in a regulatory filing today. That makes Fidelity the company's largest shareholder, according to Bloomberg data.
The U.S. Defense Department is rushing-blast resistant trucks to Iraq to protect troops from roadside bombs. The Pentagon has already bought 8,815 trucks. Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection has shipped 1,389 trucks as of Nov. 1, more than any other supplier.
The stake represents an increase from 2.62 million shares, or about 3.9 percent, of Force Protection that Fidelity had held at the end of June, according to Bloomberg data. Sophie Launay, a spokeswoman for Fidelity, declined to comment on the purchase.
Force Protection shares gained 39 cents, or 2.3 percent, to $17.26 at 11 a.m. in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. They had fallen 3.1 percent so far this year before today.
Chart:
trustthetape from IV:
What didQ3 earnings tell us?
1. The past 6 quarters, revenues continue to trend up (with a hiccup in 2006 Q3) as follows:
2006 Q2: $56m
2006 Q3: $42m
2007 Q4: $63m
2007 Q1: $100m
2007 Q2: $135m
2007 Q3: $173m ($206 including GDLS)
Interesting is that over the past 4 quarters, quarter over quarter revenue has grown by over $35m each quarter.
FRPT exceeded analyst expectations by $3m (ignoring the impact of the GDLS revenue) and by $36m including the GDLS revenue. Personally, I see the GDLS revenue as irrelevant to FRPT (since its just a pass thru).
Deferred revenue was over $52m compared to less than $6m last quarter. Perhaps indicating that Q4 is off to a good start.
2. Will Gross Margins continue to be solid? YES
Effective gross margins (again, ignoring the GDLS pass thru) were 23.5% which is exceptionally solid once again. There was some speculation that the reduced sales cost of the MRAP Cougars would negatively impact gross margins. That does not appear to be the case and the company continues to achieve exceptional gross margins.
3. In Q1 and Q2, FRPT made sizable (by comparison purposes) investment in R&D ($4.8m in Q1; $3.3m in Q2 vs $3.2m for all of 2006) for development of the Cheetah. Is FRPT continuing to make investments in product development, whether it be the Cheetah or other products (e.g, EFP technology)? What impact will the purchase and build out of the Roxboro facility have on the quarter?
The company continues to make investments in the Cheetah and the Roxboro plant with R&D coming in at $2.5m. IMHO, existing US and international orders for Buffalos and Cougars will provide solid revenue opportunities for the remainder of 2007 and for 2008 and perhaps into 2009. However, the Cheetah is the future of the company and the stock price will see an exceptional move once orders are received and Cheetahs are produced and sold.
4. In the past, FRPT has had a number of one time (non-productive, IMHO) charges. Will the company start showing discipline to get past these types of charges?
There was a one time charge of $820k for liquidated damages related to the prior private placement. IMHO, this PP was poorly managed by the prior acting CFO and cost the company and shareholders over $7m in capital that could have been better utilized.
5. Q2 was record net income of $9.6m. Will FRPT report record net income for the quarter?
Net income was over $11.3m, again setting a new record for the company.
6. Analysts EPS estimates vary widely from .10-.22 with an average of .17. How well did the analysts do in predicting FRPT EPS for the quarter?
Basic EPS was .17 and diluted .16, just outside of consensus analyst expectations.
7. In Q2, FRPT delivered a record 229 vehicles. Will Q3 establish a new production record and indicate a continued ramp up of production?
FRPT continues to set production records - delivering a total of 302 vehicles (excluding GDLS production of 62 vehicles). This included 21 Buffalo and 291 Cougar).
8. At the end of Q2, FRPT had a production backlog of approximately 1662 vehicles. Since then, the company has received a number of new orders and also issued orders to GD. What is the current backlog? In comparing production capacity to production backlog, how long will it take FRPT to work off the current backlog to put it in position for another MRAP order?
Production backlog continues to expand with a total of 2243 vehicles (including orders subsequent to the end of the quarter). Of the 2243, GDLS is scheduled to deliver 1106 leaving an effective FRPT backlog of 1137. At the October production rate of 135 vehicles, the company has approximately 8.4 months of production backlog. However, given the production expansion underway, it is anticipated that the backlog will likely be worked down in approximately 6 months.
So, for me, this quarterly report will again be telling to confirm the positive trend in revenue, production, backlog, net income, etc and then use that data to gain a better understanding of what to expect in subsequent quarters.
Again, a great quarter for FRPT. Strong production growth, revenue growth, solid (if not exceptional) gross margins, reasonable cost containment (e.g, G&A, R&D). Some other notes of interest:
1. Completion of the ERP system and better continuity in the financial dept of the company is critical to future financial reporting - both accuracy and timeliness. Something to watch for Q4. Even with these issues, the resulting report is as information packed as any past report - providing a good look into the financial results of the company and the JV with GDLS. For that, I'm pleased but the issues here are important to be addressed to avoid a recurring problem with quarterly reporting.
2. The company has $182m in inventory (work in progress, supplies and materials, etc). That is an important number as it indicates (along with the $52m of deferred revenue and the production ramp and the strong backlog) that future quarters will continue to show solid results. However, it also provides an indication to shareholders of how much capital it takes to run the business. To this point, should expansion continue at a rapid pace and with the expected ramp of Cheetah production, I'd anticipate the need for additional growth capital - either thru a lending instrument, equity offering, etc. I've run some models and would like to see the company raise $250-300m so that they can focus on running the business and not being forced to make operational compromises due to insufficient capitalization.
3. It appears that the tax loss carry forward from 2006 has yet to be applied to the expected 2007 tax liabilities. As a result, Q4 could have an upside EPS surprise of approximately 30 cents. Even more important, applying the tax loss carry forward will result in up to $23m of capital (that will be available instead of paying taxes with these funds).
nice news, bad chart
More Armor for U.K. Troops
MoD Seeks to Expand Cougar Fleet; Needs Pentagon To OK Vehicle Diversion
By ANDREW CHUTER
LONDON — Britain will more than double its protected patrol vehicle fleet by adding 148 Force Protection Cougar vehicles, whose purchase is now being negotiated with the U.S. government.
Under what is essentially a mirror image of the U.S. Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) requirement, the British military has already acquired 108 modified Cougars — which they call the Mastiff —for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now the British want more to fill an ur¬gent operational requirement to better protect troops fighting the Taliban in south¬ern Afghanistan, industry sources said.
The British Treasury is clamping down on spending on urgent requirements, but it ap¬pears the upcoming Cougar deal has been approved.
But the British requirement for rapid de¬livery could pose a different kind of problem.
If the British are to get their order quick¬ly, the Pentagon will need to allow Force Protection to divert vehicles from produc¬tion lines that are already red-hot from building vehicles for the U.S. military. The company has an MRAP deal to deliver more than 1,900 Cougar and Buffalo vehicles.
The Pentagon allowed such a diversion for the first British order, and the British hope it will again allow something similar despite the high U.S. priority on MRAP production.
So far there is no firm order signed for the additional six-wheel-drive Cougars, al¬though a deal may be imminent, industry sources say.
The contract is a government-to-govern¬ment agreement signed as part of the U.S. Foreign Military Sales process.
A British Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman declined to confirm interest in buying more Cougars.
A Force Protection spokesman said the company had no official information re¬garding further British interest in Cougar.
The first vehicles were ordered in July 2006, deliveries got under way in late December, and the last of the 108 arrived in Britain for modification in June. As of early September, more than 80 of the vehicles were in service.
The Mastiff is an uparmored version of the Cougar fitted with the Army's new Bowman tactical communications system and elec¬tronic countermeasures. The modifications were undertaken here.
Most of the early deliveries ended up in Iraq, but as the British draw down their ef¬fort in the Basra region of the country, the requirement has swung toward Afghanistan, where improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have caused several deaths.
One industry source here said Force Pro¬tection may also be providing Cheetah light tactical four-wheel-drive vehicles for a British special forces requirement.
The vehicle was displayed at the recent Defence Systems & Equipment Internation¬al (DSEi) show in London. Ostensibly, that was part of the company's effort to secure an order from the British for the Medium Protected Patrol Vehicle (MPPV) require¬ment. But it now appears Force Protection may have had a second requirement in mind when it exhibited Cheetah.
The British in April kick-started the MPPV requirement to purchase 180 mini-MRAP type vehicles of about 14 tons to sit between the Mastiff and the much lighter Pinzgauer Vector patrol vehicle.
Interest in MPPV High, but Some Confusion
The requirement attracted a huge amount of interest, with BAE Systems, Force Pro¬tection, JCB, Krauss Maffei-Wegmann, Mac¬Neilie, NP Aerospace, Rafael and Thales among the possible contenders.
One media report here this week said the MoD had decided to drop the MPPV contest in favor of buying 250 Cheetahs. That's been denied by the MoD spokesman here.
A narrowing of possible contenders had been expected at about the time of DSEi. That short list hasn't arrived yet.
Until further clarity is available on the MPPV requirement, there will remain suspi¬cions about the future of a project that still requires funding at a time when the British armed forces are facing serious cuts.
Whether the growing Mastiff fleet, which will number about 250 if the new deal goes ahead, will affect MPPV requirements is unclear.
One defense contractor involved in the MPPV competition said there appeared to be "ongoing discussion at the MoD whether a larger, more protected vehicle was needed or whether they should go for something lighter and more agile. The debate is ongoing, leav¬ing MPPV in a bit of disarray for the moment."
Others are more confident that MPPV is not on the ropes.
"We think they have a plan. They are test¬ing and evaluating what is in the gap be¬tween Mastiff and the Snatch Land Rover and may then decide whether to fund it," an¬other contractor source said.
Either way, if the British want the first vehicles in service by their stated date of 2009, somebody will have to decide soon on funding. å
I am being vocal tonight ;)
Thanks for all of your posts, charts and updates. You do an awesome job. I appreciate your bravery for posting...even when a stock goes down.
Keep up the great work.
???
FRPT: Thomas Weisel Cuts to Market Weight from Overweight; Cuts Tgt to $17 vs $22
Monday , November 19, 2007 09:49ET
Issuer: Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT)
Analyst Firm: Thomas Weisel Partners
Ratings Action: DOWNGRADE
Current Rating: Market Weight (from Overweight)
Target Price Action: DECREASE
Target Price: $17.00 (-22.73% from $22.00)
Analyst Comments: The firm lowered their rating and estimates to reflect a less aggressive ramp for Cheetah.
Chart:
Now down under $13 with no real support below :'(
Just fell through 12.50. Wondering if stock dilution to complete Roxboro their second production facility in Q4 is it. Suspecting it is contract dilution of the remaining 6,500 vehicles being divided among more parties instead of a few. To include Cheetah it would be more parties.
Uncertainty of whether Roxboro will pay for itself and paying for it now.
amstocks82 is back in town:
Force Protection, (FRPT) Hyper Growth Continues
Force Protection Inc. (FPI) is a rapidly growing manufacturer of vehicles that are generally called Mine Protected Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. In 2004, revenue was 10.2 million, in 2005, revenue grew over 400% to $49.7 million, in 2006, revenue grew to $196 million and in Q3 of 2007, revenue grew to more than $200 million. Force Protection's profit has grown along with increasing revenue and the company has made solid progress in building the business into a mainstream defense manufacturer.
Force Protection's potential competitors for the MRAP business have steadily decreased. For the current MRAP contracts, the number of companies making MRAP vehicles dropped from 5 manufacturers and vehicles to 3 manufacturers. Force Protection is well positioned for the second phase of MRAP or MRAP II. They have a new lighter vehicle type called the Cheetah which is undergoing testing by the US government and British government and a Cougar variant for the heavier types of MRAP vehicles. Force Protection is the only manufacturer to submit a small vehicle suitable for an interim replacement for the Humvee for the MRAP II competition.
The up-armored Humvee is a 7 ton vehicle which when up-armored is carrying more weight than it was designed to carry. Therefore, it is slow, has bad fuel economy and even with additional armor unable to withstand small IED and mine blasts. The Cheetah is an 8 ton vehicle that has the same approximate size as a Humvee with similar off-road capability. Unlike the Humvee, the Cheetah is able to withstand large IED and mine blasts, has good fuel efficiency and is able to carry additional armor if needed.
Force Protection is confident that they will get sales for their Cheetah vehicle and have been building a factory to manufacturer the vehicles. The factory should be ready to start production towards the end of 2007.
Force Protection is expected by most analysts to continue getting a large part of the MRAP contracts in 2008 and therefore, revenue growth is expected to continue to be strong. Most analysts have not yet factored in any additional revenue for the Cheetah because as of yet, there have been no contracts for this vehicle. However, the military has indicated several times that existing MRAP vehicles are too large and they need a smaller MRAP vehicle similar to the Cheetah. The military has also requested small design changes to the Cheetah which have all been implemented by Force Protection. This may be why they are confident of orders for this vehicle. Additionally, militaries from several other countries have indicated interest in the Cheetah. Therefore, Force Protection should receive both domestic and foreign contracts for these vehicles.
Even though FRPT is experiencing a period of hyper growth, has the next generation product that is most needed by the military, Force Protection's stock price has been decreasing. At the same time, Force Protection remains on the Regulation SHO list indicating that the number of shares short is greater than the legal limit and there are a large number of "naked short" shares. The Naked short shares are shares that were shorted but the underlying share was never "borrowed". Hedge funds and others are able to find Market Makers who will illegally short the shares because the current SEC rules with regard to illegally shorting are very difficult to enforce, prosecution for illegally shorting shares is rare but profits for doing this can be huge.
While the number of shares shorted has been increasing, the number of negative articles about Force Protection has also increased most of which contain errors – often major factual errors. See: http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=132&mn=125011&pt=msg&mid=3527092
Rumors that don't appear in the mainstream press have been spread about Force Protection such as the company will go out of business, that they are out of money, or that they will be unable to file their financial statements and be de-listed or that they have completed a secondary PIPE offering for millions of shares at a low share price.
Many believe that the spread of rumors has been done to allow those who have the huge short positions to cover before December when Force Protection is expected to get another large MRAP order. Those who have shorted Force Protection know that Force Protection is unlikely to get large orders before then and therefore know that the company is unlikely to report good news until December. Therefore, the theory is that the hedge funds and others who have the illegal short position in Force Protection are doing what they can illegal and legal to move the share price down.
The management of Force Protection has done little to help slow the spread of misinformation by taking the obvious step of conducting quarterly conference calls. Those calls would allow shareholders and analysts to ask questions that would put to rest rumors and speculation. Management has previously indicated that they will have an end of the year conference call for Q4 and therefore, next spring, shareholders and analysts will be able to ask questions. But that leaves months in which rumors and lies can be spread about the company and shareholders and analysts can't question management to learn whether or not they are true.
Force Protection's management has preferred to concentrate on increasing production of vehicles, making the best vehicles possible and instituting the necessary financial and supply chain processes necessary to grow the company into a mainstream military supplier. This is working and Force Protection is currently building MRAP vehicles and providing them ahead of the military delivery schedule. However, depending on the number of vehicle orders that Force Protection gets in December, Force Protection will likely need additional funds to continue the rapid growth. If so, they may have a secondary offering of shares. If management were to take minimal actions to help shareholders, this would increase the share price and reduce the dilution of shares.
Even without more information from management in the near term, Force Protection is one of the fastest growing companies listed on the Nasdaq with a very low forward PE. Force Protection is the only "pure play" MRAP manufacturer. The MRAP program is about the only program both Democrats and Republicans fully support and the MRAP program is the fastest growing military spending program. Force Protection builds the "Gold Standard" MRAP vehicle. So far, no marine riding in a Force Protection designed Cougar has died despite thousands of IED and mine explosions. No other MRAP vehicle has this record.
Lastly is the short position too big? Will it continue to hold FRPT down? Or will their be a short squeeze play coming?
Secondly the one year chart shows an awful plain head and shoulders. So are we in a downtrend or bottom and continuation?
After the competion is said and done will our market share be 30% like The Stanford group has estimated all along.
Management reality to send the stock back upward. Roxboro the second 100% FRPT production facility opens Friday. The approved budget has funds so the contracts to continue production can come over any time. And for the last hoorah the Supplemental budget may contain more funds for more vehicles in the Spring as in the completion of MRAP II testing.
There are four companies still in the running in MRAP II testing, FRPT, BAE, GD, and IMG. But FRPT has is the only one which has moved on into phase two operational testing where everyone else is still in developmental testing. So hoorah if it is first come first served at MRAP II contracts.
in my opinion an awesome buying opportunity:
FRPT: Short Interest UP 4.1% to 17.5M in Mid Nov 2007
Tuesday , November 27, 2007 16:18ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 4.1% to 17,456,944 shares as reported in mid-November, 2007.
SYMBOL END OCTOBER MID NOVEMBER CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
FRPT 16,772,310 17,456,944 +684,634 +4.08% 14
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 1,316,925, it would require approximately 14 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
&
General Dynamics signs new contract
Tuesday , November 27, 2007 15:31ET
STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich., Nov 28, 2007 (AP via COMTEX) -- General Dynamics Land Systems, a unit of General Dynamics Corp., said Tuesday it received a $47.2 million order for spare parts from Force Protection Inc.
The parts are for the U.S. Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle program.
It is the second contract General Dynamics has signed with Force Protection, a manufacturer of mine-protected vehicles. General Dynamics was previously awarded a $188.8 million contract to produce 401 vehicles for Force Protection's mine resistant vehicle program.
awesome buying opportuntiy imho:
more info:
http://www.3stocksonfire.org/trading/index.php?topic=7804.525
chart:
Up today, just wondering if we are going to get a follow through day Friday to confirm a market rally. Or it is the December contract news to live or die on at FRPT.
Force Protection Delivers 1000th Vehicle
Wednesday November 28, 2007 5:24pm Reporter: Patrice Smith Posted By: Katie Newingham
Ladson - They are a force to be reckoned with. Ladson based, Force Protection, reached a milestone Wednesday. This mine resistant, ambush protected vehicle marks the 1000th total vehicle delivery in Force Protection's global war on terror. This is the cougar, the 4x4 troop carrier. It will be delivered to the US Marine Corp.The buffalo is also rolling off the assembly lines. It's a 23-ton root clearance vehicle. Currently, Ladson based workers build the steel cocoon that houses the occupants. It's then sent to a Michigan chasey company, a business partner of Force Protection, to be outfitted with the dashboard, steering wheel and other components. Last it comes back to Ladson for final inspections. This new assembly line that will be running at full capacity in the near future, will make it possible to produce the entire vehicle in Ladson.
"We're taking out that trip back and forth to Michigan with an automated process here on the assembly line," said Michael Aldrich, a vice president with Force Protection.
Force Protection started in 2003 when they produced only eleven vehicles that entire year. Now they manufacture over 200 vehicles a month. Thousands of new MRAPS are needed since the enemy of the US has the deadly IED's.
"We expect to see IED's whereever the US goes until we have enough vehicles to defend ourselves," Aldrich said.
So the department of defense is ordering more MRAPS.
"We're expecting announcements in the first half of December for an additional 6,000 vehicles," said Aldrich.
Force Protection is one of three MRAP producers in the country and will get orders for several thousand more vehicles. The company is expected to deliver more than 280 of these life saving vehicles in the month of November.
&
FRPT: Short Interest UP 4.1% to 17.5M in Mid Nov 2007
Tuesday , November 27, 2007 16:18ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 4.1% to 17,456,944 shares as reported in mid-November, 2007.
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 1,316,925, it would require approximately 14 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
Force Protection Delivers 1000th Vehicle
Wednesday November 28, 2007 5:24pm Reporter: Patrice Smith Posted By: Katie Newingham
Ladson - They are a force to be reckoned with. Ladson based, Force Protection, reached a milestone Wednesday. This mine resistant, ambush protected vehicle marks the 1000th total vehicle delivery in Force Protection's global war on terror. This is the cougar, the 4x4 troop carrier. It will be delivered to the US Marine Corp.The buffalo is also rolling off the assembly lines. It's a 23-ton root clearance vehicle. Currently, Ladson based workers build the steel cocoon that houses the occupants. It's then sent to a Michigan chasey company, a business partner of Force Protection, to be outfitted with the dashboard, steering wheel and other components. Last it comes back to Ladson for final inspections. This new assembly line that will be running at full capacity in the near future, will make it possible to produce the entire vehicle in Ladson.
"We're taking out that trip back and forth to Michigan with an automated process here on the assembly line," said Michael Aldrich, a vice president with Force Protection.
Force Protection started in 2003 when they produced only eleven vehicles that entire year. Now they manufacture over 200 vehicles a month. Thousands of new MRAPS are needed since the enemy of the US has the deadly IED's.
"We expect to see IED's whereever the US goes until we have enough vehicles to defend ourselves," Aldrich said.
So the department of defense is ordering more MRAPS.
"We're expecting announcements in the first half of December for an additional 6,000 vehicles," said Aldrich.
Force Protection is one of three MRAP producers in the country and will get orders for several thousand more vehicles. The company is expected to deliver more than 280 of these life saving vehicles in the month of November.
what a hit on not confirmed news
Reduction is rumor and unconfirmed according to Gordon Force Protection Chief Executive Officer Gordon McGilton said today the company has not been informed of any change in the Marine Corps procurement plan.
Company executives met with Paul Mann, the head of the Marine Corps program, as recently as two days ago and no change was announced at that point, McGilton said.
Force Protection plans to seek clarification from the Marine Corps on the report, McGilton said.
``Never believe the first report,'' McGilton said in an interview at the company's new plant in Roxboro, North Carolina. ``You learn that on the battlefield, and in business.''
Update to Bloomberg Article
Marines Want to Cut Blast-Resistant Vehicle Purchases (Update2)
2007-11-30 16:34 (New York)
By Tony Capaccio and Edmond Lococo
Nov. 30 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Marine Corps said it wants to buy 38 percent fewer mine-resistant trucks than originally planned, partly in response to reduced violence in Iraq.
The Marines slashed the required number to 2,300 from 3,700 vehicles based on fewer attacks in the Al Anbar province and the desire of commanders to use more armored Humvees, which offer greater mobility, Colonel David Lapan said today in an interview at the Pentagon.
The military uses Mine-Resistant, Ambushed Protected vehicles, known as MRAPs, to defend against roadside bombs, the leading killer of U.S. troops. The request must be approved by
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the top U.S. commander in Iraq, according to Pentagon officials. The Marines are ``constantly doing assessments of our requirements,'' Lapan said.
``It's premature at this point to say there will be any reduction in the Marine's MRAP needs,'' Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said in an interview. ``There has not been a decision
made to reduce procurement at any level.''
Defense Secretary Robert Gates yesterday asked U.S. Central Command leader Admiral William Fallon and the top U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, ``to weigh in before any
decision is made,'' Morrell said.
``They have been asked to review the request and determine if it jibes with what they see are the operational needs on the ground -- from the overall mission perspective and not just the
needs of the Marines in Anbar,'' Morrell said.
``Although that is the express desire of the Marines, there are other considerations in play, including what the mission calls for in Iraq,'' he said.
Information Paper
In an ``Information Paper'' sent to congressional defense committees today, the Marine Corps said the requested reduction would save about $1.9 billion through fiscal 2009.
The paper praised the vehicles for providing freedom to move on the most high-risk roads but ``the relatively heavy MRAP cannot operate or pursue the enemy off-road, in confined areas
or across many bridges.''
``For these reasons we need to retain more'' armored Humvees vehicles in lieu of MRAPs ``for their greater maneuverability and mobility,'' said the memo obtained by Bloomberg News.
The MRAPs are providing effective protection from improvised roadside bomb attacks that ``are dramatically down over the past six months.'' The vehicles ``helped limit the potentially `game changing''' effect of these bomb attacks, the memo said.
Less Useful
Still, the vehicles are less useful for the Marines' current counter-insurgency tactics that require ``close interaction with the Iraqi populace in areas not accessible to MRAPs,'' the memo said.
At the end of September, the Pentagon saw the need for 15,274 MRAP vehicles, a 12-fold increase from the 1,185 vehicles it requested in July 2006. So far, 8,815 trucks have been
ordered, including 2,226 for the Marines, which will not be affected by the proposed reduction, Lapan said. The Pentagon now estimates the program has a total value of $24.5 billion.
The Marine request prompted shares of Force Protection Inc., the largest supplier of blast-resistant trucks for the U.S. military, to fall the most in more than four years. Other
makers of the trucks include General Dynamics Corp., BAE Systems Plc and Navistar International Corp.
The up-armored Humvee is made by closely held, South Bend, Indiana-based AM General and Armor Holdings Inc. Jacksonville, Florida-based Armor Holdings Inc. was acquired this year by BAE Systems.
New Plant
The report of reduced MRAP demand comes as Force Protection today opened a new plant in Roxboro, North Carolina, to build its third blast-resistant vehicle, the Cheetah. The Cheetah has
not been ordered as part of the MRAP program. The company is marketing Cheetah as a lighter, more mobile vehicle than MRAPs which still shares some of the same blast-deflecting qualities,
and may be a potential vehicle for replacing armored Humvee transports.
Force Protection has committed to spend $50 million on the plant to build its new Cheetah truck before announcing a single customer. After a delay from its original planned start date of
Nov. 1, the company intends to begin Cheetah production on Jan. 1, said Daniel Busher, executive vice president. The plant will have an annual production capacity of more than 2,000 trucks. Busher wouldn't comment on what production rate the company intends to use prior to receiving orders.
Potential Return
``I don't consider the commitments we've made so far to be very large if you look at the magnitude of the potential return,'' Force Protection Chief Executive Officer Gordon McGilton said today. ``We made a small financial commitment to lay the groundwork for what we think is a large financial opportunity.'' Force Protection currently makes two vehicles for the MRAP
program -- the Cougar and the Buffalo. At 8 tons, the Cheetah is less than half the weight of the 17-ton Cougar. The Cheetah has a cruising speed of 80 miles per hour, compared with 55 miles per hour for the Cougar.
The Cheetah addresses many of the mobility and transportation problems with the current fleet of MRAP vehicles, which are too large and heavy, said Alan Albrecht, a private investor in Granite Bay, California, who holds 350,000 shares of Force Protection. That may give Cheetah an edge when the military looks to replace the current fleet of Humvee transports in Iraq with a
better protected truck, yet which is not as cumbersome as current MRAP vehicles.
``Cheetah is lighter, more mobile and off-road capable, while giving the same protection as Cougar,'' Albrecht said.
``It's a closer replacement for the armored Humvee than any other MRAP vehicle.''
awesome:
http://news14.com/Video/video_pop.aspx?vids=61719&sid=83&rid=94
Along with the news that the Marines procuring fewer vehicles.
The short position is too big. I see a parallel now developed. The short squeeze was quoted to begin at 15.50 it was proceding to do that rallying with the market Thursday before profit taking sent it back down to 15. Then the Marine procurement news after the close, and here we are. The next level of support is now 8 if the bears and short sellers really are in control.
On the management reality. Roxboro is now open with production to begin in January, but has yet to receive its first contracts. The government is giving it two chances an early contract in December as Cheetah and FRPT vehicles are the only competitor moved into the second phase of MRAP II testing, so they may get a first come first served MRAP II contract. The second opening is officially the Supplemental budget when MRAP II testing is expected to be complete. And international orders until the govenment order comes through? The state department has not approved the Cheetah for foreign sales or export yet. Though they could after a contract request or approval.
So with earning falling off due to program cutback rumors waiting for official news from other than the Marines? DoD must remain silent to not give a competitive advantage to any of the vendors in the program.
Two live or die pieces of news in December. Contract announcements for production beyond Q1. And the Fed cut on December 11 because FRPT does rally when the the market rallies, but the program cutback rumors have dropped it from the general rally. Otherwise the suspense is killing FRPT.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/874941
BUYINS.NET: Naked Short Sellers Attack Force Protection (FRPT), Selling American Troops Short In Iraq. Approximately 51.7 Million Shares Shorted Since January 2005. Short Sellers Fail To Comply With Regulation SHO Buyin Deadline.
Monday, December 03, 2007; Posted: 03:55 AM
Dec 03, 2007 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- FRPT | charts | news | PowerRating -- BUYINS.NET, www.buyins.net, is initiating coverage of Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ: FRPT | charts | news | PowerRating) after releasing the latest short sale data to December 2007. From January 2005 to December 2007 approximately 672 million total aggregate shares of FRPT have traded for a total dollar value of nearly $10.45 billion. The total aggregate number of shares shorted in this time period is approximately 51.75 million shares. The FRPT SqueezeTrigger price of $15.55 is the volume weighted average short price of all short selling in FRPT. As of November there are 17,456,900 shares of Total Short Interest and $192 million of short covering that still needs to occur. A short squeeze is expected to begin when shares of FRPT close above $15.55. To access SqueezeTrigger Prices ahead of potential short squeezes beginning, visit http://www.buyins.net.
Month Total Vol Avg.Price Short Vol $Value
Jan 05 3,910,310 $3.15 301,094 $948,445
Feb 3,252,729 $2.57 250,460 $643,682
Mar 2,404,599 $2.01 185,154 $372,159
Apr 1,879,150 $1.76 144,695 $254,662
May 4,407,187 $1.94 339,353 $658,345
June 3,662,860 $1.70 282,040 $479,468
July 1,994,823 $1.50 153,601 $230,402
Aug 2,497,769 $1.50 192,328 $288,492
Sept 2,259,654 $1.42 173,993 $247,070
Oct 2,301,460 $1.16 177,212 $205,566
Nov 2,289,716 $1.01 176,308 $178,071
Dec 2,146,854 $0.85 165,308 $140,511
Jan 06 5,592,152 $1.11 430,596 $477,961
Feb 8,715,711 $1.72 671,110 $1,154,308
Mar 4,699,167 $1.97 361,836 $712,816
Apr 2,495,649 $1.98 192,165 $380,486
May 21,274,452 $2.88 1,638,133 $4,717,822
June 17,206,596 $5.34 1,324,908 $7,075,008
July 9,536,571 $6.32 734,316 $4,640,876
Aug 11,998,479 $6.17 923,883 $5,700,357
Sept 26,604,626 $7.63 2,048,556 $15,630,483
Oct 24,692,080 $7.72 1,901,290 $14,677,960
Nov 29,531,586 $9.44 2,273,932 $21,465,919
Dec 27,473,564 $14.79 2,115,464 $31,287,718
Jan 07 39,455,328 $19.20 3,038,060 $58,330,756
Feb 33,401,266 $17.69 2,571,897 $45,496,866
Mar 26,704,068 $16.93 2,056,213 $34,811,690
Apr 26,363,182 $20.90 2,029,965 $42,426,268
May 39,708,984 $25.38 3,057,592 $77,601,679
June 75,947,912 $24.73 5,847,989 $144,620,773
July 55,214,192 $18.89 4,251,493 $80,310,698
Aug 43,304,420 $16.43 3,334,440 $54,784,854
Sept 21,813,696 $19.05 1,679,655 $31,997,419
Oct 52,112,952 $20.59 4,012,697 $82,621,437
Nov 35,251,008 $14.57 2,714,328 $39,547,753
Tot 672,104,752 $15.55 51,752,066 $805,118,797
*short volume is approximated using exchange data and a proprietary algorithm.
**average short price is calculated using a volume weighted average short price.
***short volume is the total short trade volume and does not account for covers.
Force Protection, Inc. has been on the NASDAQ Naked Short Threshold list for 108 trading days and short sellers have been failing to deliver for 113 consecutive trading days. Regulation SHO took effect January 3, 2005, and provides a new regulatory framework governing short selling of securities. It was designed with the objective of simplifying and modernizing short sale regulation and providing controls where they are most needed. At the conclusion of each settlement day, data is provided on securities in which: 1) there are at least 10,000 shares in aggregate failed deliveries for the security for five consecutive settlement days, and 2) these failures constitute at least 0.5% of the issuer's total shares outstanding. SEC Regulation SHO, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, mandates that, if a clearing agent has had a fail-to-deliver position for 13 consecutive settlement days, that clearing agent, and the broker/dealer it clears for, must purchase securities to close out its fail to deliver position. To date, naked short sellers have failed to locate or borrow an estimated 8.7 million shares of FRPT stock. This violation of Regulation SHO and the amended Regulation SHO, which required buyins (forced covers) within 35 trading days of the October 15th, 2007 effective date, exposes short sellers to regulatory repercussion by NASDAQ, FINRA and the SEC.
Here are the facts on Force Protection. Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) account for 63% of soldier fatalities in Iraq. The Department of Defense currently has slated to purchase between 15,000 and 16,000 heavy duty Mine Resistant Ambush Protect Vehicles (MRAPs). This figure already includes comments from military officials to potentially curb or re-allocate 8% of the heavy vehicle purchases. Total contract value up for bid is north of $15 billion and analysts expect Force Protection to garner at least $5 billion in total orders (FRPT already has in excess of $1.5 billion in orders under contract.) Force Protection generates after-tax net income of approximately $36,000 per vehicle and is expected to deliver up to 5,000 vehicles under the current MRAP program. $180 million in after-tax profits on 68.25 million shares outstanding translates into approximately $2.64 cents per share in total earnings on US domestic orders for heavy MRAP vehicles. By mid 2008 Force Protection manufacturing capacity is expected to reach 1,000 vehicles per month, so it is highly likely that Force Protection can fulfill 100% of its production requirement in fiscal 2008.
In March 2008 the Department of Defense will begin awarding approximately $34 billion in contracts to upgrade, armor and replace the entire US Humvee fleet. Senior Army officials have previously okayed a $34 billion plan to refurbish and replace the service's truck fleet. Over the next 10 years, the Army is expected to acquire 70,000 new vehicles and upgrade more than 200,000 from the existing inventory.
According to National Defense Magazine, this plan, code-named "tactical wheeled vehicle fleet transformation strategy," would expand the Army's inventory from 235,000 to 280,000 trucks. The growth is attributed to the conversion of the Army's 10 divisions into 77 independent brigades. Each brigade will need to deploy with its own logistics assets, and no longer will rely on division- or corps-level support. The upshot is a sizeable increase in the number of trucks required to outfit each brigade, explains Army Lt. Gen. Claude V. Christianson, deputy chief of staff for logistics. The current fleet of about 120,000 Humvees has at least 74,000 that are 20 years old.
With 3 main suppliers of MRAP vehicles currently authorized by the US Government, the potential for any one supplier in this program could reach approximately $10 billion in new domestic contracts. If Force Protection wins these contracts it could generate an additional $360 million in after tax net income over the life of the new contracts, assuming similar after tax net income as the heavy MRAP program. Force Protection currently employs the highest corporate tax rate of 40% in its fiscal reporting. Proposed talk in Washington about lowering corporate tax rates could have a significant positive effect on FRPT's Earnings Per Share. A 10% reduction in corporate tax rates could yield a 16.6% increase in previously projected after tax net income figures.
Shares of Force Protection have been heavily shorted. Naked short selling shares of Force Protection when short sellers have already been failing to deliver for more than 13 consecutive trading days is an outright violation of Regulation SHO. The negative effect these phantom shares (shares that do not exist because they are sold without being legally borrowed) is multiplied in fast growing companies. Should a company rely on capital to meet exponential order demand, driving down a stock price increases cost of capital. While Force Protection has no long term debt and the ability to borrow the funds necessary to meet high demand for its products, the negative implications of a stock declining from naked short selling can have unintended consequences. Management can be distracted from day to day operations of protecting American soldiers in Iraq in order to deal with the negative publicity generated from reporters that either on purpose, or unwittingly publish negative sound bytes that are sometimes generated by short sellers. In late November reporters highlighted month old comments from military officials and spooked market makers into a self fulfilling prophecy of lower stock prices. Since market makers determine a stock price, they control how quickly or slowly a price moves up or down. In many instances market makers have or are closely affiliated with large proprietary positions and can aid in the manipulation of stock prices by moving a stock price to unrealistic levels.
In July 2007 the American Stock Exchange Disciplinary Panel fined Scott Arenstein and SBA Trading $3.6 million and ordered them to disgorge $1.4 million in ill-gotten profits resulting from naked short selling and suspended both entities from associating with any Exchange for 5 years. Also in July 2007 the American Stock Exchange Disciplinary Panel fined Brian Arenstein and ALA Trading $1.2 million and ordered them to disgorge $1.8 million in ill-gotten profits resulting from naked short selling and suspended both entities from associating with any Exchange for 5 years.
Both SBA Trading and ALA Trading were members of the Exchange and Registered Market Makers. Both engaged in naked short selling and attempted to avoid buyin requirements of Regulation SHO by claiming the options market exemption for bonafide market making transactions. The American Stock Exchange found that both firms were not acting as bonafide market makers and were attempting to avoid multiple buyin notices by entering into reverse conversion transactions using a complex array of married puts and flex options to create the appearance that a buyin had occurred when in fact it had not. Details of the exact method market makers are using to naked short sell stocks by manipulating exemptions can be found the in the following SEC filing:
http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-19-07/s71907-336.pdf
With nearly $2.8 trillion in global hedge fund assets and funds' ability to borrow up to 10 times their equity and margin positions an additional 2-4 times, the economic superpower wielded by trading firms in the 21st century is a fertile landscape for widespread manipulation and abuse. Updating regulations such as Regulation SHO is a start in the war against economic terror. But enforcement is everything. The SEC has started the ball rolling and the American Stock Exchange is to be applauded for being a first mover in monitoring the behavior of its participants and having the brain power to uncover complicated schemes to defraud investors in US companies.
With today being the deadline for naked short sellers to cover positions with failures to deliver, Buyins.net is beginning a fact finding mission to uncover the truth behind naked short sellers failing to deliver for 113 consecutive trading days when Regulation SHO clearly prohibits failures to deliver from exceeding 13 trading days. Shares of Force Protection were trading at approximately $24 when naked short sellers started failing to deliver. With the stock at $11, the loss in market capitalization has been approximately $887 million. In summary, Force Protection, a government contractor building out the highest priority military vehicle procurement request in recent history to save American soldiers' lives in Iraq, is attacked by naked short sellers on American soil costing the company nearly $1 billion in value and regulators have yet to fight back.
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. was the first to respond to the urgent need to bring lifesaving mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles to U.S. troops in combat. The Company is a leading American manufacturer of ballistic- and blast-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. The Company's specialty vehicles, the Cougar and the Buffalo, each have a proven track record where it matters most - in the battlefield. The Company's newest vehicle, the Cheetah, is designed specifically for reconnaissance, forward command and control, and urban operations, and combines state-of-the-art ballistic and blast protection with the mobility of a unique light-armored vehicle. These specialty vehicles, which the Company believes are in the forefront of blast-resistant technology, are designed to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). The Company is one of the primary providers of vehicles for the U.S. military's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicle program. For more information on Force Protection and its vehicles, visit www.forceprotection.net.
About BUYINS.NET
WWW.BUYINS.NET is a service designed to help bonafide shareholders of publicly traded US companies fight naked short selling. Naked short selling is the illegal act of short selling a stock when no affirmative determination has been made to locate shares of the stock to hypothecate in connection with the short sale. Buyins.net has built a proprietary database that uses Threshold list feeds from NASDAQ, AMEX and NYSE to generate detailed and useful information to combat the naked short selling problem. For the first time, actual trade by trade data is available to the public that shows the attempted size, actual size, price and average value of short sales in stocks that have been shorted and naked shorted. This information is valuable in determining the precise point at which short sellers go out-of-the-money and start losing on their short and naked short trades.
BUYINS.NET has built a massive database that collects, analyzes and publishes a proprietary SqueezeTrigger for each stock that has been shorted. The SqueezeTrigger database of nearly 1,650,000,000 short sale transactions goes back to January 1, 2005 and calculates the exact price at which the Total Short Interest is short in each stock. This data was never before available prior to January 1, 2005 because the Self Regulatory Organizations (primary exchanges) guarded it aggressively. After the SEC passed Regulation SHO, exchanges were forced to allow data processors like Buyins.net to access the data.
The SqueezeTrigger database collects individual short trade data on over 7,000 NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ stocks and general short trade data on nearly 8,000 OTCBB and PINKSHEET stocks. Each month the database grows by approximately 50,000,000 short sale transactions and provides investors with the knowledge necessary to time when to buy and sell stocks with outstanding short positions. By tracking the size and price of each month's short transactions, BUYINS.NET provides institutions, traders, analysts, journalists and individual investors the exact price point where short sellers start losing money and a short squeeze can begin.
All material herein was prepared by BUYINS.NET, based upon information believed to be reliable. The information contained herein is not guaranteed by BUYINS.NET to be accurate, and should not be considered to be all-inclusive. The companies that are discussed in this opinion have not approved the statements made in this opinion and have not paid for the report. Affiliated or related third parties, their family members or affiliates may own shares of the stock and may benefit from a rise in the share price. This opinion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. This material is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as an offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell securities. BUYINS.NET is not a licensed broker, broker dealer, market maker, investment banker, investment advisor, analyst or underwriter. Please consult a broker before purchasing or selling any securities viewed on or mentioned herein. BUYINS.NET will not advise as to when it decides to sell and does not and will not offer any opinion as to when others should sell; each investor must make that decision based on his or her judgment of the market.
BUYINS.NET and SQUEEZETRIGGER are intended for use by stock market professionals. As a member, visitor, or user of any kind, you accept full responsibilities for your investment and trading actions. The contents of BUYINS.NET, including but not limited to all implied or expressed views, opinions, teachings, data, graphs, opinions, or otherwise are not predictions, warranty, or endorsements of any kind. Please seek stock market advice from the proper securities professional, or investment advisor.
By visiting BUYINS.NET or using any data or services, you agree to assume full responsibility for the decisions or actions that you undertake. BUYINS.NET, LLC, its owner(s), operators, employees, partners, affiliates, advertisers, information providers and any other associated person or entity, shall under no circumstances be held liable to the user and/or any third party for loss or damages of any kind, including but not limited to trading losses, lost trading opportunity, direct, indirect, consequential, special, incidental, or punitive damages. As a user, you agree that any damages collected shall not exceed the amount paid to BUYINS.NET and/or its owners. As a website user, you agree that any and all legal matters of any kind are to be reviewed and handled in their entirety within the State of California only. By using the services of this website, you are consenting to the terms as outlined, and forfeit all legal jurisdictions in any other State.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future outcomes. Any and all examples are hypothetical and should not be considered a guarantee or endorsement of such trading activity. BUYINS.NET does not take responsibility for problems of any kind, including but not limited to issues with operations, data accuracy or completeness, contacting issues, technical issues, and timeliness. BUYINS.NET places great integrity on the data collected and distributed. This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. All information and data is provided "as is" without warranty or guarantee of any kind.
Please seek investment and/or trading advice, council, information or services from a securities professional. You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and BUYINS.NET undertakes no obligation to update such statements.
This release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. "Forward-looking statements" describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as "may", "future", "plan" or "planned", "will" or "should", "expected," "anticipates", "draft", "eventually" or "projected". You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a companies' annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the SEC.
CONTACT: Thomas Ronk, CEO, BUYINS.NET Tel: +1 800 715 9999 e-mail:
[email protected] WWW: http://www.buyins.net
M2 Communications Ltd disclaims all liability for information provided within M2 PressWIRE. Data supplied by named party/parties. Further information on M2 PressWIRE can be obtained at http://www.presswire.net on the world wide web. Inquiries to
[email protected].
MRAP program cutback rumor from Marines, though final decision is not theirs. And the stock is still heading down
10.53 at time of post.
Good news December contracts are coming. Bad news not as much as previously estimated.
U.S. to Buy 3,200 Blast-Resistant Trucks, Pentagon's Young Says
2007-12-03 13:16 (New York)
By Tony Capaccio
Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. military plans to order more
than 3,200 blast-resistant armored trucks within weeks and may
place bookings for the same amount in March, the Pentagon's top
acquisition official said.
The orders by mid-December would add to 8,815 Mine-
Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicles already on contract,
Undersecretary for Acquisition John Young said today in an
interview at the Pentagon. The orders are part of a $24.5 billion
program that eventually would produce more than 15,000 vehicles.
The new batch is being funded with $11.6 billion contained
in a $471.2 billion spending bill for fiscal 2008 that Congress
passed last month and President George W. Bush signed into law.
The pending orders are not affected by a Marine Corps proposal
disclosed Nov. 30 that would allow the military branch to cut its
earlier requirement of 3,700 vehicles by 1,400, Young said.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked commanders ``to make
absolutely certain the recommendation fits the strategy for the
whole theater,'' Young said. ``If there are changes, that will
come forward to us in our orders, but right now I don't think any
of that will change in December. The only thing that might change
is March'' if the overall requirement is reduced.
Navistar International Corp., Force Protection Inc., and BAE
Systems PLC each won an order in October to build more blast-
resistant trucks for the U.S. military, work that has a combined
value of $1.21 billion. Force Protection fell Nov. 30 by 28
percent, the most in more than four years in Nasdaq Stock Market
trading, after the Marine Corps said it wants to cut purchases.
The Pentagon has a requirement for 15,274 MRAP vehicles, a
12-fold increase from its initial request in July 2006. So far,
8,815 trucks have been ordered, including 2,226 for the Marines.
Editor: Kevin Miller, Will Daley
To contact the reporters on this story:
Tony Capaccio at +1-202-624-1911 or
[email protected]
it is getting ugly :-\
?
12.50 and 15.00 call options went on sale on heavy volume. Price recovery at upside resistance at 15.50 or a complete bust?
from Zacks Blog:
FRPT – Shares of Force Protection are still under pressure today following a report on Friday that the U.S. Marine Corps would be slashing their purchase of mine-resistant trucks by nearly 40 percent. Shares of FRPT are now trading at a 52-week low of $10.59, down 67% from its 52-week high set back in May of this year.
I believe this is an overreaction to the news, and that FRPT is setting up for a great trade. Force Protection has a long term growth rate of 31.67%, a PEG ratio of .69, quarterly revenue growth of 389.3%, and quarterly earnings growth of 1601%. To say these numbers are impressive would be an understatement. Yet the shares are trading at a psaltery 7.02 times 2008 earnings. I don't care if the Iraq war ends tomorrow, these are fantastic numbers and Force will continue to build armored vehicles in increasing numbers. This company is growth mode, period. In addition, 26.10% of the float has been sold short. The shorts are all over this one, and I believe it is for the purpose of accumulating call options. On Friday, 1,773 of the Dec. $12.50 and 1,706 of the Dec. $15.00 call options were traded. This is over double the open interest for the $12.50's and over half of the open interest in the $15.00's. The January Jan. 08 calls were also in play, with 1,945 contracts traded, almost four times the open interest. These aren't mom and pop retail investors buying these calls. These are big time buyers, and they picked up the contracts at between a 60%-80% discount to Thursday's closing prices.
Another factor that makes this a great trade is the management of Force Protection. They are pro-active and are defending the share price, or trying to at least. Since the original negative article came out, Force Protection's management has released two positive PR's, plus was profiled by Buyins.net, which I believe is an $800-900 paid service to expose the short's actions on the share price. This management cares about the share price and is trying to let the Street know the true story. I believe it will take time, but the short position will be covered, and a share price more reflective of this company's value will be realized.
I am currently averaging into a full position on FRPT. I long the stock and the January $12.50 and $15.00 calls. I am expecting a bounce on short covering of at least 20% in the next few days. I do plan to sell most if not all of the shares as well as the calls on the bounce; however I do feel this will make an excellent entry point for a long term hold as well.
Hi la-onda and others here on FRPT.
You probably know I was bullish on FRPT at $5, but turned bearish between $15 and $20 (even shorted it and covered for a small loss - shorting is a waste of time), just to see it climb to a high of $31. Yesterday it closed at $9.61.
The main reason that made me dislike the stock was that I saw heavy historical dilution and more of that as it went up ... let me check that again. Yes, look at FRPT's historical share count (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=frpt&lstStatement=10YearSummary&stmtView=Ann): 1.6 million shares in 2001, 6 million in 02, 10.2 million in 03, 19.4 million in 04, 36.1 million in 05 and 66.8 million in 06. The market cap rose 42 fold in five years just due to the increase in the number of shares outstanding.
When I read something like ...
«Another factor that makes this a great trade is the management of Force Protection. They are pro-active and are defending the share price, or trying to at least.»
... I get a feeling that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. My feeling gets confirmed when I read the following:
«I am currently averaging into a full position on FRPT. I long the stock and the January $12.50 and $15.00 calls. I am expecting a bounce on short covering of at least 20% in the next few days. I do plan to sell most if not all of the shares as well as the calls on the bounce; however I do feel this will make an excellent entry point for a long term hold as well.»
He likes the stock but will sell it on a bounce? And instead of the stock is holding calls? I'm sorry, but I believe this man will lose all the money he invested in FRPT, and he deserves it. Ok, perhaps I'm being too radical here and writing without full knowledge, double sorry on this.
Moving on to the story ... the first positive factor is that it seems dilution slowed considerably, since the current number of shares outstanding is 68.25 million against 66.8 million in 2006.
The company turned profitable, so it seems it doesn't need investors money anymore. But still, you know that if the company faces any financial troubles (like a few quarters of losses), this management won't hesitate in printing more and more shares. They've done it in the past in a heavy way, so they're not particularly interested in creating or sustaining long term value for shareholders. This will make shareholders suffer a double whammy, the stock will go down because results are poor and it will go down even more due to dilution.
I see FRPT is a low margin business. Revenues increased a lot in Q3 2007 (389% from Q3 2006) to $206.3 M, but EPS for the quarter still was just $0.16 (and it was a record on a normalized basis). If we annualize this we get $0.64, which puts the stock trading at $9.61/$0.64 = 15 times earnings.
But I guess the biggest challenge for FRPT is that the products it sells (war vehicles) last what, 20 or 30 years? And how many of them are needed? I feel demand for FRPT's vehicles will be cyclical ... it depends on wars, federal budgets and the replacement cycle of the vehicles. It isn't a long term growth story in my view. Revenues and profits will go up and down like a yo-yo, like it has been happening with GM and Ford over the last decades. FRPT's problem is that in lack of demand management will print shares for their money.
Obviously there's a lot more to cover about FRPT, but that historical dilution information (and I'm sorry if I'm repeating this too many times) makes me long term bearish on the stock. I believe it can and will probably go back down to $1 over the next few years.
I wish I'm wrong, good luck if you own FRPT :)
Quote from: David Randolph on December 04, 2007, 06:36:08 AM
Hi la-onda and others here on FRPT.
You probably know I was bullish on FRPT at $5, but turned bearish between $15 and $20 (even shorted it and covered for a small loss - shorting is a waste of time), just to see it climb to a high of $31. Yesterday it closed at $9.61.
The main reason that made me dislike the stock was that I saw heavy historical dilution and more of that as it went up ... let me check that again. Yes, look at FRPT's historical share count (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=frpt&lstStatement=10YearSummary&stmtView=Ann): 1.6 million shares in 2001, 6 million in 02, 10.2 million in 03, 19.4 million in 04, 36.1 million in 05 and 66.8 million in 06. The market cap rose 42 fold in five years just due to the increase in the number of shares outstanding.
When I read something like ...
«Another factor that makes this a great trade is the management of Force Protection. They are pro-active and are defending the share price, or trying to at least.»
... I get a feeling that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. My feeling gets confirmed when I read the following:
«I am currently averaging into a full position on FRPT. I long the stock and the January $12.50 and $15.00 calls. I am expecting a bounce on short covering of at least 20% in the next few days. I do plan to sell most if not all of the shares as well as the calls on the bounce; however I do feel this will make an excellent entry point for a long term hold as well.»
He likes the stock but will sell it on a bounce? And instead of the stock is holding calls? I'm sorry, but I believe this man will lose all the money he invested in FRPT, and he deserves it. Ok, perhaps I'm being too radical here and writing without full knowledge, double sorry on this.
Moving on to the story ... the first positive factor is that it seems dilution slowed considerably, since the current number of shares outstanding is 68.25 million against 66.8 million in 2006.
The company turned profitable, so it seems it doesn't need investors money anymore. But still, you know that if the company faces any financial troubles (like a few quarters of losses), this management won't hesitate in printing more and more shares. They've done it in the past in a heavy way, so they're not particularly interested in creating or sustaining long term value for shareholders. This will make shareholders suffer a double whammy, the stock will go down because results are poor and it will go down even more due to dilution.
I see FRPT is a low margin business. Revenues increased a lot in Q3 2007 (389% from Q3 2006) to $206.3 M, but EPS for the quarter still was just $0.16 (and it was a record on a normalized basis). If we annualize this we get $0.64, which puts the stock trading at $9.61/$0.64 = 15 times earnings.
But I guess the biggest challenge for FRPT is that the products it sells (war vehicles) last what, 20 or 30 years? And how many of them are needed? I feel demand for FRPT's vehicles will be cyclical ... it depends on wars, federal budgets and the replacement cycle of the vehicles. It isn't a long term growth story in my view. Revenues and profits will go up and down like a yo-yo, like it has been happening with GM and Ford over the last decades. FRPT's problem is that in lack of demand management will print shares for their money.
Obviously there's a lot more to cover about FRPT, but that historical dilution information (and I'm sorry if I'm repeating this too many times) makes me long term bearish on the stock. I believe it can and will probably go back down to $1 over the next few years.
I wish I'm wrong, good luck if you own FRPT :)
Everybody has their position & opinion and that is fine.
Let me quote what you say and please tell me how I can find anything credible/honesty about your writing
"even shorted it and covered for a small loss"
1. This just tells me that you are shorting the stock period, I dont know what prices and for all I know
your negative comments leaves me to belive you are probably still shorting to make back what you loss if you even loss.
2. If you say you loss by shorting and a waste of time, please put the transaction in full form posted here, that would lend credibility along with broker, trade times/dates so I can call & verify
3. I admire your opinion on whether you think its going to $100 or $1 dollar
4. Diliution is not always a bad thing right?? Especially with a hyper growth company???
5. WHy no mention of Cheetah, international orders, etc...
6. Your "examination" has so many holes in it that is generall a very bland look at FRPT in my opinion which doesnt really mean much.
But once you pointed to the obvious, I knew from reading the rest of the post that it would be NEGATIVE BIG TIME!!
You had me at hello!!
Good Luck whatever your position is except if its short!!
QuoteLet me quote what you say and please tell me how I can find anything credible/honesty about your writing
You don't know me. I have 9774 posts written in this website and I don't think anybody who knows me questions my honesty/credibility.
Quote"even shorted it and covered for a small loss"
Let me check the "Closed Trades (http://www.3stocksonfire.org/closed_trades_3fire.php)" of the 3 Stocks on Fire Portfolio, you can do that too. Actually it was for a small gain of 2.97%, I thought I lost a bit, since I usually lose when I sell something short.
No, I'm not short FRPT or any stock for that matter, nor am I trying to influence the price. I just stated that the market cap increased 42 fold due to the increase in the share count (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=frpt&lstStatement=10YearSummary&stmtView=Ann) and that's never a good thing ... if you owned a company, would you sell 42 times more shares to somebody else and start owning almost nothing? Only if you work for your salary, not to build shareholder's value. I wrote this because another guy was saying this management had great care for shareholders. I don't think that's true.
Anyway, you're right, I got so obsessed with this heavy dilution that I didn't dig much further ... and the rest probably is very positive, I don't know. Good luck for FRPT, either way it goes, my account balance won't change.
Hey la-onda, I guess you like FRPT, so I truly hope it goes up. Certainly you have good reasons to be bullish this stock and know it a lot better than I do. Good luck man, and thanks for all your help :)
I agree with you about upper management not caring about shareholders...with you 100%!!
The other guy definitely diliusional on that point. First, they carry no conference calls, shareholders have no idea of future, ramping up, prospects for Cheetah, international orders, etc...
I also agree with you that increasing shares is probably not a good thing but I think it just depends on the company...and it didnt seem to hurt it as it ran to 31 not too long ago with the increased shares.
You make very valid points to which I'm behind however, its hard for me to overlook the shorting interest you had. With that said, I wish that I had shorted based on the Naked Short Selling on stock and recent performance that has struck. I'm sure you wish you continued to short as well ;D
I see a couple of confirming patterns that are adding pressure to the stock.The 1st one is a Head n Shoulders top with the neckline at 15,the 2nd is an ABC Zigzag from the top @ 31,and 3rd the sentiment reading on the options open interest still reflects calls out numbering the puts at nearly a 3 to1 ratio, which to me indicates theres still either lack of fear or maybe all those naked shorts are not so naked after all.It could be the 40 week ma that the shorts are targeting as that could satisfy the target zones for both of the patterns above,thats where I think the rubber meets the road.
Top Marine Explains Cut in Purchase of Mine-resistant Vehicles
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5, 2007 – Improved conditions in Iraq and a desire to remain a light, mobile force caused the Marine Corps cut its order for mine-resistant, ambush–protected vehicles, a decision that included careful assessment of its effect on safety of deployed forces, the commandant of the Marine Corps said here today.
The Marine Corps has asked the Joint Requirement Oversight Council to cut the number of MRAP vehicles earmarked for the service from 3,600 to 2,300.
The safety of Marines and sailors in Iraq was paramount in planners' minds when making the decision, the commandant emphasized. "I am absolutely comfortable that no Marine or sailor will experience additional risk in Iraq as a result of the recommendation," he said.
The need to keep the Marine Corps light was part of the reasoning, he said. The vehicles weigh 48,000 pounds each, and the sealift and airlift needed for them would be excessive, he added.
Another part of the decision to reduce the Marine Corps' MRAP order has to do with changes in conditions in Iraq, Conway said.
The September 2006 decision to replace every up-armored Humvee in Iraq with an MRAP was "absolutely the right thing to do" at the time, Conway said. "It's a moral imperative to protect our people as soon as we can, as soon as we can get those vehicles built," he said. At the time, the insurgency was at its height, and improvised explosive devices were pandemic in Iraq.
"What's happened since September of 2006 has been absolutely amazing by most counts," he said. The surge and the so-called "Anbar Awakening" have cut the number and lethality of attacks against the coalition.
"We have not lost nearly the numbers of vehicles that we were experiencing, because attacks have gone down dramatically," he said.
Also, the heavy vehicles cannot handle some of the off-road work that needs to be done and cannot navigate some of the narrower confines in many parts of Iraq. "So what we found is that (commanders are) mixing their convoys and their patrols with some MRAPs, maybe as route clearance, but also with some ... 7-ton vehicles and also with some up-armored Humvees," the commandant said. "So, that mix has also driven down our requirement."
Conway said cutting the Marines' MRAP order may speed up purchase of the vehicles for the Army.
The Marines still have a use for the smallest variant of the vehicle as an engineer combat vehicle, even in an expeditionary environment, Conway said. The service has tried for 20 years to develop an engineer combat vehicle, he noted. The MRAP could fill that bill with 360-degree protection and its V-shaped hull, which directs shrapnel away from riders.
"It can wage into a fight and protect those young men and women, in some cases, deliver them to whatever the obstacle is and in some cases even breach it," Conway said. "So we're going to have to develop that vehicle to its fullest, I think, as an engineer and (explosive ordnance disposal) combat vehicle."
Conway said the change in the Marine Corps' MRAP order will not adversely affect industry. The service checked that the companies building the vehicles "hadn't laid in such quantities of steel and tires and transmissions that they were going to be left holding ... an expensive bag," he said. "So we're comfortable that our timing was pretty good and that no one is really being injured in the process."
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=48333
thanks amstocks82 ;)
TheSteet.com Versus Force Protection Inc
One of the strangest match-ups in history has to be TheStreet.com versus Force Protection Incorporated. Force Protection is a military manufacturer that has grown very quickly from a 10.3 million a year stock on the OTC exchange in 2004 to a company that had revenue of over $200 million last quarter.
Force Protection manufactures military vehicles designed to protect the occupants from mine and IED explosions. These vehicles are typically called Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. Force Protection's MRAP vehicles are the Gold Standard vehicle in Iraq and Afghanistan with a record of 3 deaths in 3000 mine and IED attacks. One of the soldiers killed was reportedly not wearing a seat belt and likely would have survived had the belt been worn. This is a very impressive record which no other manufacturer of MRAP vehicles can match.
Force Protection's new MRAP vehicle is called the Cheetah. The Cheetah is a smaller and more maneuverable MRAP vehicle that is faster and has more range than does an up-armored Humvee. It is able to survive large IED and mine attacks that would destroy up-armored Humvees. Force Protection has been building a new factory for the Cheetah vehicles and expects to begin production of Cheetahs early in 2008. Currently, the military is testing the Cheetah which is the only small MRAP vehicle being tested.
Although Force Protection has not yet gotten an order for Cheetah vehicles, Force Protection believes that they will sell many of them. They expect to begin getting orders after the vehicle has undergone sufficient testing to prove its capability. The British military has also tested the Cheetah and is reported to be interested in the vehicle as are several other countries.
Force Protection currently has $72 million in cash as of the end of Q3 and has a $50 million line of credit that is currently unused. Force Protection's market cap is $682 million and it has a PE of 16.6. The average analyst estimate is that Force Protection makes $1.45 in 2008 with revenue of $1.36 billion dollars. The forward PE is less than 7.
Although Force Protection provides a lifesaving vehicle to the military, it is still very small company. The small size, and fast growth have made it a favorite stock of both small retail investors and institutions who expect the fast growth to translate into fast growth of the stock but instead, Force Protection's price is close to a 52 week low.
Even though Force Protection's growth makes it seem an attractive buy to many, to those at TheStreet.com based on the coverage, it must be a "Most Hated" stock. The status of being a "Most Hated" Stock gives Force Protection exceptional coverage from TheStreet.com – unfortunately for Force Protection shareholders, the coverage is all bad! Looking at the headlines, at TheStreet.com, Force Protection gets more coverage than many large companies like Microsoft, Exxon, Intel, Cisco, Google, and just about any other large company that can be named.
So what is it about Force Protection that makes it a "Most Hated" stock at TheStreet.com? One might wonder whether they get exceptionally bad coverage anywhere else? The only other mainstream news organization that regularly covers Force Protection is Bloomberg. In the occasional mention on Bloomberg, it is clear that the view from Bloomberg is much different than it is from TheStreet.com.
The titles of Force Protection articles for the six weeks from TheStreet.com are illustrative:
Battle Wounds Worsen for Force Protection
Force Protection steps on a land mine
Cutback Report Shells Force Protection
Force Protection Fan Leaves Bull Herd
CEO's Outside Ties Choke Force Protection
Force Protection Hits More Bumps
Force Protection in Reverse
Navistar Shines in Mine-Resistant Vehicle Contracts
Downgrade Dents Force Protection
Force Protection's Wild Ride
Force Protection's New Battle
The coverage from TheStreet.com is not only negative but typically inaccurate and tends to use sources such as unknown web bloggers, analysts that don't cover the stock, unnamed employees from competitors and etc. It is not necessary to read very far in any of the articles from TheStreet.com to find a mistake. In the latest article, the first paragraph has a factual error. The article indicates that Force Protection announced plans to secure financing for its brand new Cheetah vehicle. But this never occurred and is the latest example of major errors in the coverage by TheStreet.com.
One question that might be asked is how does TheStreet.com cover competitors of Force Protection? This question is interesting because the coverage of competitors and potential competitors of Force Protection get very favorable mention. The large competitors of Force Protection such as BAE and Navistar get very positive coverage with respect to MRAP and so has the smallest competitor, a company called, "Protected Vehicles Inc". Despite the positive coverage from TheStreet.com, Protected Vehicles is going out of business.
Any balanced coverage of Force Protection will find that the company does have issues. Force Protection does not communicate very well with analysts and shareholders and needs to communicate better. Force Protection is a small manufacturer of MRAP vehicles with large competitors. They are dependant to a large extent on additional government contracts. The military is rapidly purchasing thousands of MRAP vehicles and will have completed the major part of the purchases probably in 2008. Force Protection's future is largely dependant on contracts for its new vehicle the Cheetah. The Cheetah is a potential replacement for the up-armored Humvee.
Without Cheetah contracts, and if the military completes most purchases of MRAP vehicles, then Force Protection's revenue would be mainly dependant on service revenue which might be $200 to $400 million a year with new manufacturing revenue perhaps on the order of $200 to $300 million a year. The military will likely continue to purchasing Cougars and Buffalos from Force Protection for many years but probably in much smaller numbers after 2008. But the service revenue is high margin revenue and therefore, Force Protection could end up with profits in 2009 only slightly less than in 2008.
Force Protection uses subcontractors to help them manufacture their vehicles. Perhaps as much as 50% of the labor for manufacturing Cougars is done by other companies in other locations. If the MRAP program were drastically ramped down, then Force Protection will not need other contractors and can build the entire vehicle in-house increasing their margins. Without a Cheetah contract, Force Protection is a much different company but still profitable with more revenue than they had in 2006. If Force Protection does get large Cheetah orders, then that would potentially add $400 million in 2008, and in 2009, the revenue would largely make up for the decline in Cougar orders.
One of the hallmarks of Force Protection is that they take few chances. Force Protection has ramped up production of vehicles in the past only when they know that they have sufficient contracts or will get sufficient contracts to use the new production equipment. Therefore, it was a surprise that Force Protection began building a new factory for the Cheetah even before they had orders.
But perhaps Force Protection is not taking much of a chance. Members of the military have indicated several times that current MRAP vehicles are too large for many of the operations that the military must undertake. Both the Marines and Army have indicated that they would like a smaller MRAP vehicle for some operations and a vehicle like Force Protection's Cheetah is what many have said that they need. Which makes one wonder whether or not Force Protection has not already been told that they will get orders for the Cheetah after it finishes military testing? Otherwise, Force Protection is taking a huge risk that is uncharacteristic of them.
In the "war" between TheStreet.com and Force Protection, the war is fought on two different battlefields. TheStreet.com publishes their anti-Force Protection articles for their own reasons – which might have something to do with the large short interest in Force Protection stock. Force Protection is on the SHO list indicating that is has been illegally shorted or more shares were shorted than there were shares available to be borrowed. Many believe that TheStreet.com publishes articles with a "slant" that is designed to help hedge funds friendly to TheStreet.com or to Mr. Cramer. The inaccurate and extreme negative nature of the coverage reinforces this belief. Force Protection fights their battle on the factory floor where they are manufacturing as many vehicles as they can and are ramping up quickly. They wage it by designing a vehicle that can survive explosions from IED and mines that weighed hundreds of pounds.
It is without doubt that all the negative coverage by TheStreet.com of Force Protection has contributed to pushing down the price of Force Protection stock. The question is whether the positive news from the factory floor (Force Protection is producing MRAP vehicles ahead of schedule and they are expecting large new orders for more vehicles in the next few days) will reverse the trend and once more make Force Protection shares a favorite of shareholders.
Consider FRPT a leading breakout candidate on fundamentals alone.
This company has been under a massive mis-information campaign and naked short selling.
Future Orders
RUMOR
The shorts play up the recent story that the Marines will cut back on future MRAPs orders.
FACT
a. What they leave out is that the Marines already placed almost a half billion dollars in orders with FRPT in Oct., before they considered cutbacks.
b. The apparent reason for the cutbacks on MRAP fuure buys is for the Marines to start buying FRPTs new Cheetah which will replace the hummer for safer statical missions.
Capitalization of new Orders
RUMOR
FRPT will have to go back to the capital markets to raise up to $150M by equity or debt.
FACT
So what? $150M is nothing in light of the $1.5 the government ALREADY owes FRPT on active Purchase Orders. Thats without counting the $2.3 Billion in DOD orders earmaked in Dec
Stock Dilution
RUMOR
Some pompus clown on this MB was mentioning that FRPT shares swelled from 1 million to 61 million in seven years. I suggest he go back and learn that this company was started with an OTC shell and not even in the same business.
FACT
FRPT has the same amount of shares today it had the day it opened on the NASDAQ.
FRPT went from no orders a year ago to have the leading market share in MRAPs. It did this beating some of the biggest names in defense.
Rumor
Iraq War will end in 2008
FACT
Iraq war will last until 2012 no matter who wins the white house
Afghanistan is not goin away either
Foreign Armys drool for genuine FRPT MRAPs
Scenarios
FRPT is a clear takeover target
FRPT is over-shorted (21% retail shorts following bad advice) and only so many will fit through the door when the buying starts.
FRPT has been on the naked short list for 101 consecutive days in violation of REG SHO.
FRPT could see a multi billion dollar order in a matter of days.
60 days from Q4 reporting that will reflect massive profits and the shape of things to come.
If you are not buying or adding, you will miss a huge gap up.
$10.00 is a artificially low price. Fidelity owns 12% of FRPT and added in the $20's
$30 remains the target for those of us who can separate fact from fiction.
Quote from: neonfreon2008 on December 07, 2007, 02:35:09 AM
Consider FRPT a leading breakout candidate on fundamentals alone.
This company has been under a massive mis-information campaign and naked short selling.
Future Orders
RUMOR
The shorts play up the recent story that the Marines will cut back on future MRAPs orders.
FACT
a. What they leave out is that the Marines already placed almost a half billion dollars in orders with FRPT in Oct., before they considered cutbacks.
b. The apparent reason for the cutbacks on MRAP fuure buys is for the Marines to start buying FRPTs new Cheetah which will replace the hummer for safer statical missions.
Capitalization of new Orders
RUMOR
FRPT will have to go back to the capital markets to raise up to $150M by equity or debt.
FACT
So what? $150M is nothing in light of the $1.5 the government ALREADY owes FRPT on active Purchase Orders. Thats without counting the $2.3 Billion in DOD orders earmaked in Dec
Stock Dilution
RUMOR
Some pompus clown on this MB was mentioning that FRPT shares swelled from 1 million to 61 million in seven years. I suggest he go back and learn that this company was started with an OTC shell and not even in the same business.
FACT
FRPT has the same amount of shares today it had the day it opened on the NASDAQ.
FRPT went from no orders a year ago to have the leading market share in MRAPs. It did this beating some of the biggest names in defense.
Rumor
Iraq War will end in 2008
FACT
Iraq war will last until 2012 no matter who wins the white house
Afghanistan is not goin away either
Foreign Armys drool for genuine FRPT MRAPs
Scenarios
FRPT is a clear takeover target
FRPT is over-shorted (21% retail shorts following bad advice) and only so many will fit through the door when the buying starts.
FRPT has been on the naked short list for 101 consecutive days in violation of REG SHO.
FRPT could see a multi billion dollar order in a matter of days.
60 days from Q4 reporting that will reflect massive profits and the shape of things to come.
If you are not buying or adding, you will miss a huge gap up.
$10.00 is a artificially low price. Fidelity owns 12% of FRPT and added in the $20's
$30 remains the target for those of us who can separate fact from fiction.
Thank you!! Makes me feel a little better about things :)
QuoteSome pompus clown on this MB was mentioning that FRPT shares swelled from 1 million to 61 million in seven years. I suggest he go back and learn that this company was started with an OTC shell and not even in the same business.
neonfreon2008, if you use this type of language again on this message board you'll be banned forever from it. What I wrote about the # of shares outstanding is an historical fact (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=frpt&lstStatement=10YearSummary&stmtView=Ann). I know FRPT comes from the OTCBB, I even recommended buying the stock when it was trading below $5 as I wrote "FRPT: a $1 B company in the making". La-onda knows about this.
Anyway, FRPT is going sharply down now and I know how losing money can make a man mad, but this can't be used as an excuse for disrespect. This isn't Yahoo MB, good luck with FRPT.
Quote from: David Randolph on December 10, 2007, 09:50:17 AM
QuoteSome pompus clown on this MB was mentioning that FRPT shares swelled from 1 million to 61 million in seven years. I suggest he go back and learn that this company was started with an OTC shell and not even in the same business.
neonfreon2008, if you use this type of language again on this message board you'll be banned forever from it. What I wrote about the # of shares outstanding is an historical fact (http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/results/statemnt.aspx?Symbol=frpt&lstStatement=10YearSummary&stmtView=Ann). I know FRPT comes from the OTCBB, I even recommended buying the stock when it was trading below $5 as I wrote "FRPT: a $1 B company in the making". La-onda knows about this.
Anyway, FRPT is going sharply down now and I know how losing money can make a man mad, but this can't be used as an excuse for disrespect. This isn't Yahoo MB, good luck with FRPT.
Welp, this stock can raise emotions out of people...I for one have a lot vested. Looks as if you were right! Good Call!! 16K shares at 11.46 average price with significant margin. About 20 cents away from a big ole margin call!!
QuoteLooks as if you were right! Good Call!!
Thanks, you're a gentleman :)
I just figured that if FRPT's management didn't have a problem in selling 60 million shares at prices ranging $1 - $5, they wouldn't have a problem in selling another 60 million in the $5 - $10 range, if the going got tough.
I say that a good part of the selling is being done by the company itself, as it dilutes shareholder's value, like it did in the past.
Anyway, FRPT is down 40% in just about a week or so, it should have a bounce ... even the seller doesn't want the stock to go down the way it's going.
Quote16K shares at 11.46 average price with significant margin. About 20 cents away from a big ole margin call!!
You're talking about $183,360 invested in one single stock, that's a lot of money. Nobody should invest on margin, much less you with the amount of capital you have to invest. You shouldn't be so greedy, slowly works better.
Good luck :)
We're gonna see if it'll bounce here: gap got filled,returned to a previous 4th wave,HeadnShoulders target area,ABC from the top,40 week ma,oversold across several, if not all time frames..
The stock has seen a .786% fib. retrace of the whole entire move up from 2006 @.70 area to the top @ 31.
Chartist reality. There is a 10% chance this downtrend is supposed to happen by
http://www.stockconsultant.com/consultnow/basicplus.cgi?symbol=FRPT#ttop
Probability - Excessive Down trend (1 month), not sustainable, occurs only 10% of the time, expect trend to turn sideways or higher.
The management reality has changed significantly in the last week. Total market is being adjusted downward from 15,000 vehicles. The army next must plan its reduction from 10000 of that 15000. EPS was based on 30% share of total market which has decreased pending official announcement.
So there is a possability that the second production plant which has yet to get a contract may not get one as the required number falls.
The good news of December contracts will only be for an increment of production beyond the present contracted through March. Meaning this business plan could end before the end of the year without reaching maximum or peak production estimates.
The expansion plan will be in negative cash flow if the December contracts are not large enough to provide operating and expansion cash after the first of the year. The rumored stock dilution and the beginning of this decline at the Q3 report where it was announced. Will the expansion pay for itself or be taken out of profits?
Going down for the third time. The Army weighs in for cutbacks and the Marines formally request their cut in vehicles from the JROC which has the final oversight.
Interim December contracts have been cut from 6500 to 3200. With Gates saying the cuts will be seen in March. Meaning they must complete their short term evaluation of current operational needs and get formal approval from JROC. The JROC also approved of the current 15000 vehicles.
So do we bet at picking the bottom and gamble on December contracts?
Or pick this back up at Penny Stock Picking?
Currently 5.80.
Capitulated volume but still no reversal candlestick :-\
FRPT: Stanford Group Starts @ Sell; Sets Tgt @ $5; Analyst Notes
Wednesday, December 12, 2007 07:36ET
Issuer: Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT)
Analyst Firm: Stanford Group
Ratings Action: INITIATE
Current Rating: Sell
Target Price Action: INITIATE
Target Price: $5.00
Analyst Comments: The firm expects the company will struggle to grow after 2008 due to its highly concentrated exposure to MRAP. They believe total MRAP demand is likely smaller than expected and that MRAP demand will peak in FY08.
"Although the company has delivered impressive growth over the last five years, we believe that Force Protection will struggle to grow after 2008 due to its highly concentrated exposure to mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) program," Stanford analyst Josephine Millward said in a note. Millward expects total MRAP demand to be smaller than expected through 2009, and peak in fiscal 2008. The analyst expects Force Protection will "unlikely" meet consensus revenue and earnings expectations for 2008 because of "overly optimistic" expectations of fiscal 2008 demand and market-share potential. Analysts polled by Thomson Financial, on average, estimate 2008 earnings of $1.45 a share on revenue of $1.36 billion.
At Collins Stewart, analysts lowered their 12-month price target on the stock to $12 from $32, citing a changing outlook for demand.
"The Marines have indicated they want to order only 2,300 MRAPs down from its previous stated need for 3,700 vehicles," Collins Stewart analyst James McIlree said in a note to clients. "The Army has indicated it too may not need the 10,000 vehicles previously stated as its requirement."
Collins Stewart cut its 2008 revenue guidance to $1.19 billion from $1.5 billion, but raised its earnings forecast to $1.56 from $1.40 a share because of "efficiencies in the manufacturing process."
I have sold with 40% loss @ 8.9$ :-X
I hope MPK1970 is alright? I don't know his personal situation, but his exposure in FRPT is a lesson in risk management for everyone without a doubt.
FRPT :Might be setting up for bounce play : JMO as always
I have no position
Reversal in progress. 29% gain so far.
Message from the Chief Executive Officer, Force Protection Inc.
While it is generally not the policy of the Company to comment on rumors or speculation regarding the Company, we believe that we need to address significant misinformation about the Company and to update our shareholders on Force Protection's financial posture and dispel unfounded rumors amongst the shareholder base, the investment community, and elsewhere:
FINANCES
The Company's current cash position is strong with over $60 million in liquid assets, virtually no debt, and a significant capacity to access debt capital as necessary. Given our recent growth, the Company does routinely explore a variety of financial instruments that provide greater financial flexibility and have historically supported our growth as an enterprise. We believe our public disclosures of financial performance are evidence that these decisions have led to effective use of capital. We believe concerns about investments in the development of our next generation of product, the Cheetah, seem shortsighted. We believe that no other contractor in our industry develops vehicles faster, or makes more efficient use of capital in the related production ramp up, than Force Protection. Our record thus far supports that belief, and we intend to carry that record into the future.
MRAP RESPONSE
Let me also re-emphasize our commitment to urgent operational need requirements as issued by major ground commanders in Iraq/Afghanistan and contracted by the MRAP joint program office. Not only is this the most important program in the United States Department of Defense, it is a program that our vehicles helped create. As early as July 2003, we were delivering Buffalo mine-protected clearance vehicles to the Army Corps of Engineers in response to urgent needs in Afghanistan. Our Cougar vehicles have undergone four separate upgrades in protection levels since their first fielding in 2004. In total, they have saved tens of thousands of lives, which would have been lost to IEDs or landmines, in a lesser vehicle. They have not just been tested – they have been proven against a vicious and determined enemy. When United States tactical wheeled vehicle fleets showed a vulnerability to blast attack, these vehicles stopped the bleeding. Requirements will rise and fall by theater, month-to-month, but until MRAP vehicles are integrated into all service units in significant numbers, the attacks will persist. We have just begun to make an impact, not completed the task.
Some have also said that Force Protection is too dependent on one customer, but let's take a closer look at that "one customer." Within the DoD, we are servicing all of the individual services with MRAPs and the joint EOD Rapid Response vehicle; the Army Corps of Engineers is the principal consumer of Buffalo MPCVs, but the Marine Corps now owns several dozen as well. A robust spare parts and support business is delivered through the Defense Logistics Agency as well as through each of the separate services and our international customers. In short, we have multiple customers with demand for both our vehicles and our services to support and sustain the vehicles after delivery. Foreign military sales have also been sponsored by DoD and generated deliveries to the United Kingdom, Iraq, and Canada. We are optimistic regarding further foreign military sales orders.
FORCE DYNAMICS
We have a strong and effective joint venture with General Dynamics Land Systems, called Force Dynamics. This joint venture now produces more MRAP vehicles in one month (300 +) than Force Protection delivered in all of last year (2006: 296 total vehicles). Force Dynamics is the documented and recognized leader in MRAP deliveries of Category I and Category II vehicles, while Force Protection alone continues ahead of schedule on its sole-sourced Category III Buffalo deliveries. We are standing by for more orders, and we can still do more.
CHEETAH
We are confident that the attributes of our Cheetah vehicle are consistent with those cited by senior military officials who set the requirements for the next generation of tactical, wheeled, blast and ballistic protected vehicles. These qualities and features, along with the existence of an operating manufacturing facility to produce them, once again puts Force Protection in an excellent position going forward.
FUTURE COMMUNICATIONS - GLOBAL MARKETS
No other company offers the range of choices in weight class, configurations, or mission-specific attributes to the multiple customers purchasing MRAP-type vehicles. No other company has demonstrated the production capacity equal to the Force Protection, Inc.-led network of companies. No other company's products even come close to the battle record of protection of both Buffalo and Cougar. In my next message, I look forward to discussing how our newest production success, Cheetah, will address future demand for the vehicles of Force Protection.
Looks like shorts is covering their butts
Shares Outstanding5: 68.25M
Float: 65.91M
% Held by Insiders1: 21.52%
% Held by Institutions1: 61.10%
Shares Short (as of 09-Nov-07)3: 17.46M
Short Ratio (as of 09-Nov-07)3: 15.8
Short % of Float (as of 09-Nov-07)3: 26.10%
Shares Short (prior month)3: 16.77M
Pentagon Plans 3,000-MRAP Order
The Pentagon plans to order about 3,000 more Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles the week of Dec. 17, marking the largest MRAP order to date, Pentagon officials said.
The 3,000 will be split up among the three main MRAP vendors chosen by the U.S. Defense Department during the down-select process in October: Force Protection, Navistar International and BAE Systems.
The order will substantially add to the 8,800 MRAPs placed on order thus far by the Defense Department. Overall, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council has approved the purchase of 15,374 vehicles.
In an effort to rev up production capacity, Pentagon leaders have set the goal of producing up to 1,200 MRAPs per month by early 2008. However, November MRAP production was only 805 vehicles, more than 100 below the monthly goal.
One analyst said the next order could have been substantially larger had the production goal been met.
"Because production fell short last month, it is likely the Pentagon will only be able to immediately order the production of approximately 3,000 vehicles, at a pace of 1,000 per month," said Jim McAleese of McAleese and Associates, a national security law firm.
"If contractor production had been able to credibly achieve 1,100 to 1,200 a month, this could have resulted in an immediate order of up to 3,500 vehicles," McAleese said. "Secretary [John] Young [Pentagon acquisition chief] has been a powerful advocate for protecting those specific contractors who are aggressively meeting their monthly production quotas."
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3252363&C=america
Force Protection Shares Bounce...(FRPT)
30% on CEO Comments
Friday's session saw a selloff in the waning hours of the market
as investors continued to be timid following the rise in consumer
prices which could bolster the probability of a recession in the
coming months and also the chance of another interest rate cut
by the Fed at next month's meeting.
In the small cap space, one Cinderella story turned disaster released news which attempted to set
the record straight. Force Protection Inc. (FRPT) which saw shares reach highs in the $30's have
seen a steady decline following reports of the armed forces cutting back on their orders for the
Company's Mine Resistant Armed Vehicles (MRAP).
Army Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said in a statement to the military newspaper Stars and Stripes,
"The number of brigades will reduce in the coming months and that reduces the need for the original
higher number (MRAP's)."
The Defense Department had originally ordered some 15,000 vehicles, of which 10,000 were to be
supplied through efforts from Force Protection. The multitude of roadside bombs and mounting casualties
caused the Marines to ask for more MRAP's in 2005. The government and military proceeded
to meet that need and have since seen the fighting in Iraq subside causing the lowered demand in
the vehicles.
Following the report of decreased orders, shares of FRPT fell from $25 in October to their close of
$5.26 on Thursday. Friday saw shares gained some of that market share back following a message
on the Company's website.
In the message, CEO Gordon McGilton said, "While it is generally not the policy of the Company
to comment on rumors or speculation regarding the Company, we believe that we need to address
significant misinformation about the Company and to update our shareholders on Force Protection's
financial posture and dispel unfounded rumors amongst the shareholder base, the investment community,
and elsewhere."
"The Company's current cash position is strong with over $60 million in liquid assets, virtually no
debt, and a significant capacity to access debt capital as necessary," continued McGilton in the letter,
"Requirements will rise and fall by theater, month-to-month, but until MRAP vehicles are integrated
into all service units in significant numbers, the attacks will persist. We have just begun to make an
impact, not completed the task.
McGilton went on to say that the concerns about investments in the development of their next generation
product, Cheetah, were shortsighted.
"We are confident that the attributes of our Cheetah vehicle are consistent with those cited by senior
military officials who set the requirements for the next generation of tactical, wheeled, blast and
ballistic protected vehicles. These qualities and features, along with the existence of an operating
manufacturing facility to produce them, once again puts Force Protection in an excellent position going
forward," noted McGilton in the message.
Investors responded with a renewed sense of optimism as shares gained over 30% on 15 million
shares traded. But as McGilton noted, requirements will rise and fall by theater. With the Iraq Theater
coming into the twilight of its existence, will their products be in such high demand? Probably not, but
as McGilton also noted, MRAP vehicles have to be integrated into all services for proper preparation
of another war which is certain to come. With that in mind, investors would be wise to watch.
Force Protection Shares Bounce...(FRPT)
30% on CEO Comments
Friday's session saw a selloff in the waning hours of the market
as investors continued to be timid following the rise in consumer
prices which could bolster the probability of a recession in the
coming months and also the chance of another interest rate cut
by the Fed at next month's meeting.
In the small cap space, one Cinderella story turned disaster released news which attempted to set
the record straight. Force Protection Inc. (FRPT) which saw shares reach highs in the $30's have
seen a steady decline following reports of the armed forces cutting back on their orders for the
Company's Mine Resistant Armed Vehicles (MRAP).
Army Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said in a statement to the military newspaper Stars and Stripes,
"The number of brigades will reduce in the coming months and that reduces the need for the original
higher number (MRAP's)."
The Defense Department had originally ordered some 15,000 vehicles, of which 10,000 were to be
supplied through efforts from Force Protection. The multitude of roadside bombs and mounting casualties
caused the Marines to ask for more MRAP's in 2005. The government and military proceeded
to meet that need and have since seen the fighting in Iraq subside causing the lowered demand in
the vehicles.
Following the report of decreased orders, shares of FRPT fell from $25 in October to their close of
$5.26 on Thursday. Friday saw shares gained some of that market share back following a message
on the Company's website.
In the message, CEO Gordon McGilton said, "While it is generally not the policy of the Company
to comment on rumors or speculation regarding the Company, we believe that we need to address
significant misinformation about the Company and to update our shareholders on Force Protection's
financial posture and dispel unfounded rumors amongst the shareholder base, the investment community,
and elsewhere."
"The Company's current cash position is strong with over $60 million in liquid assets, virtually no
debt, and a significant capacity to access debt capital as necessary," continued McGilton in the letter,
"Requirements will rise and fall by theater, month-to-month, but until MRAP vehicles are integrated
into all service units in significant numbers, the attacks will persist. We have just begun to make an
impact, not completed the task.
McGilton went on to say that the concerns about investments in the development of their next generation
product, Cheetah, were shortsighted.
"We are confident that the attributes of our Cheetah vehicle are consistent with those cited by senior
military officials who set the requirements for the next generation of tactical, wheeled, blast and
ballistic protected vehicles. These qualities and features, along with the existence of an operating
manufacturing facility to produce them, once again puts Force Protection in an excellent position going
forward," noted McGilton in the message.
Investors responded with a renewed sense of optimism as shares gained over 30% on 15 million
shares traded. But as McGilton noted, requirements will rise and fall by theater. With the Iraq Theater
coming into the twilight of its existence, will their products be in such high demand? Probably not, but
as McGilton also noted, MRAP vehicles have to be integrated into all services for proper preparation
of another war which is certain to come. With that in mind, investors would be wise to watch
nice article about naked shorting:
http://www.buyins.com/frptshortsqueeze12-14-07.pdf
also for all "free" 3SoF members:
nice article about naked shorting:
http://www.buyins.com/frptshortsqueeze12-14-07.pdf
FRPT: Friedman Cuts to Underperform from Outperform; Cuts Tgt to $3 vs $25; Analyst Notes
Monday , December 17, 2007 16:09ET
Issuer: Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT)
Analyst Firm: Friedman Billings Ramsey Group Inc.
Ratings Action: DOWNGRADE
Current Rating: Underperform (from Outperform)
Target Price Action: DECREASE
Target Price: $3.00 (-88.00% from $25.00)
Analyst Comments: Following recent conversations with contacts on the mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicle program, the firm feels more bad news could be on the way for Force Protection. Historically, the primary criterion for MRAP awards has been production capabilities. They understand, however, that the criteria for the next round of awards might shift to a focus on vehicle commonality and long-term logistics costs. Although this is speculative, they estimate that the majority of this week's MRAP awards will go to only two companies, and FRPT could potentially receive a smaller order than we had originally projected. Previously, the firm believed that FRPT might win as much as 40.0%or more of this award. As a result, the firm is loweirng their rating to Underperform.
Long-term needs lessen, but vehicles still sought
Digg del.icio.us Newsvine Reddit FacebookWhat's this?By Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY
BAGHDAD — When the new Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle rolled over a roadside bomb on Thanksgiving, the explosion shredded the right front tire, gouged the passenger door, destroyed the radiator and shattered the windshield's thick ballistic glass.
But Army Sgt. Peter Rosie, perched atop the vehicle in the gunner's turret, survived with only a minor concussion. No one else was hurt; Rosie returned to duty.
Rosie, 45, a New York City firefighter who re-enlisted after the 9/11 attacks, was glad he had not been in an armored Humvee, the standard combat vehicle since early in the Iraq war. "There would have been a lot more damage," he says. "I might have been killed. The MRAP saved my life."
MRAPs are designed to save lives. Their chassis, high off the ground, and their V-shaped hulls deflect the explosive force of roadside bombs away from the vehicles' occupants. Such bombs, often called improvised explosive devices (IEDs), account for at least 60% of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq, the Pentagon says.
In the past few weeks, the Marines have determined they need fewer MRAPs, and the Army has indicated it will probably follow, mostly because violence is down in Iraq and counterinsurgency efforts are taking hold. Where deployed, MRAPs are helping to tamp down IED attacks by making it safe for troops to move deeper into neighborhoods to find IEDs and the insurgents who plant them, officers in the field say. A USA TODAY team embedded with combat units here in early December found that the news from the Pentagon had not dampened the demand for MRAPs on the front lines.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Iraq | Baghdad | Pentagon | Marines | Infantry | Brigade | IEDS | MRAPS | MRAP | IED
Troops here will soon be getting more. The military services have ordered 8,815 MRAPs from four companies, and about 2,500 of them have been manufactured. Only 916 have been fielded in Iraq, according to the Marine Corps Systems Command, which coordinates the vehicles' development for the Pentagon. The Pentagon's goal is to have 1,500 MRAPs in Iraq by the end of the year.
Even with factories running flat out, it still takes a week, on average, to produce a vehicle like the one that saved Rosie. USA TODAY, in examining what it takes to get the new vehicles to troops in the field, found that bottlenecks lurk everywhere in the production process. Navistar's International Military and Government division, which made Rosie's MRAP, buys components from at least eight states and several foreign countries, including armor from Israel and tires from France.
The 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Rosie's unit, was the first Army infantry outfit to receive MRAPs. That's because its need was greatest and its casualties were high, says Col. Ricky Gibbs, its commander. The brigade lost 19 soldiers in June alone, 20% of the U.S. deaths reported countrywide that month. The troops patrol what were once some of southern Baghdad's most deadly neighborhoods, where large, deeply buried IEDs were commonplace.
Gibbs, whose brigade received its first MRAPs in October, now wants to swap out most of his Humvees for MRAPs. "The MRAP gives confidence to your soldiers," as well as protection on patrols, he says.
His 5,400 troops already are seeing positive results, Gibbs says. They are getting more tips from local residents about possible bombmakers. There are fewer IEDs, fewer casualties and a greater sense of security in the area, he says.
"I wish we'd had the MRAP a lot sooner," Gibbs says.
Gibbs didn't see MRAPs sooner because the vehicles' path to Iraq has been tortuous. The vehicles, first requested in early 2005, were blocked at first by top officials, both military and civilian, who were certain the war would be a short one.
More recently the MRAPs have been delayed by the logistical difficulties of manufacturing trucks tough enough to withstand bombs that have become bigger, more sophisticated and more deadly.
The program gathered momentum only after Robert Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld as Defense secretary late last year. Gates designated MRAPs as the Pentagon's top priority in May and ordered expedited production.
And, despite the recent notices that overall requirements will be cut — as many as 15,000 were once contemplated — Gates' spokesman Geoff Morrell said last week that MRAPs remain a major priority. "As it stands right now, we continue to buy as many MRAPs as can be produced, and that has not changed."
'Not business-as-usual'
MRAPs for Gibbs' brigade came from a company that didn't even make the vehicles at this time last year. For a long time, in fact, only one U.S. company made MRAPs. That pioneer, Force Protection Inc. of Ladson, S.C., was instrumental in proving the value of MRAPs but ran behind its production targets in 2005 and 2006.
Gates' decision to boost MRAP production changed the industry. On June 1, he gave the program a top priority rating to guarantee manufacturers access to critical material such as axles and armor.
John Young, undersecretary of Defense, last month praised the manufacturers for doing their best "to accelerate MRAP vehicle deliveries," even buying materials before receiving contracts. "This is not a business-as-usual process."
Exhibit A of the accelerated process: the MRAP that saved Rosie's life on Thanksgiving — MaxxPro Registration No. NZ1J83.
Officials at International first considered developing what turned into the MaxxPro after seeing similar vehicles at a convention in October 2006, president Archie Massicotte says. International won its first significant MRAP contract, worth $623 million, for 1,200 vehicles in May. Its MRAP plant in West Point, Miss., is on track to build nearly 3,000 by April 2008.
No. NZ1J83's journey to Iraq started about three months ago in Garland, Texas, when its chassis started down the line. Workers took the 7000-series chassis, normally used for commercial vehicles such as dump trucks, and attached a cab also made in Garland.
Under the hood, they installed engines from a company factory in Melrose Park, Ill. On each wheel, their power wrenches twisted the lug nuts for Michelin tires from France.
Young told the House Armed Services Committee last month that supply problems have dogged MRAPs. In August, the Pentagon said it was seeking an additional tiremaker; at that point only Michelin tires fit MRAPs. In January, the Pentagon expects to expand tire capacity to 17,000 a month; a new supplier, Goodyear, has joined the MRAP program, Young said.
From Texas, the frames for the MaxxPro are trucked 570 miles east to International's Mississippi plant. There, 753 workers on two assembly lines now bolt on the vehicle's thick armor, which comes from Plasan Sasa of Kibbutz Sasa, Israel. In the vehicle's windows, they place ballistic glass from another Israeli company, Oran Safety Glass.
Workers also spray the vehicles with desert brown paint and back them onto flat-bed tractor-trailer trucks bound for Charleston, S.C., and the Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, where electronic equipment is added.
This extra equipment can jack up the price of a Category I MRAP, such as the MaxxPro or Force Protection's Cougar, from its $528,000 base price by as much as another $522,000. At least 11 pieces of this gear — radios, anti-IED jammers, and global positioning systems — come from manufacturers in states from Texas to Massachusetts.
Like 'Battlestar Galactica'
The next leg of No. NZIJ83's path to Iraq is equally daunting and expensive.
Quick turnarounds are the rule at the 16th Airlift Squadron at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina. On Nov. 30, a team from USA TODAY flew from Charleston to Baghdad's airport with a crew delivering MRAPs. It took airmen less than an hour to roll three International MRAPs into the cargo bay of a C-17, one of the Air Force's largest cargo planes, and anchor them to the jet's floor with chains for takeoff to Iraq.
The cost to fly each MRAP from Charleston to Iraq: $135,000, Pentagon budget documents show. The Pentagon will spend up to $750 million this year to deliver MRAPs from all four manufacturers — Force Protection, International, BAE Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems Canada — to the theater.
(Ships can hold more MRAPs, and per-vehicle costs would be far less — $18,000, Pentagon records show. But shipping MRAPs takes 30 days, while the airlift gets the vehicles to Iraq within a day. About 300 MRAPs are en route to Iraq on ships.)
The C-17 roared down the runway late in the afternoon. In the cockpit, Air Force pilots Maj. Scott Berndt and Capt. Zach Hall plotted a course for Nantucket, Mass., where they rendezvoused with a tanker for midair refueling. It was a tightly choreographed dance 20,000 feet above the Atlantic ocean. Under a moonless sky, Berndt and Hall caught sight of the KC-10, its lights blinking and fuel-spigot boom extended behind.
"It looks like Battlestar Galactica," Berndt said.
Hall and Berndt can nose their jet within 6 feet of the tanker. Any closer, and suction could pull the jets together and send them tumbling into the ocean. They took on fuel and began plotting their course across the Atlantic to an Air Force base in Europe. Another crew flew the final leg of the MRAPs' journey into Baghdad.
"We're not wasting any time getting these to the guys," Berndt said of the trip, which took 17 hours. "It means we don't have to do a medevac later on."
First Army unit with MRAPs
The 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team was the second of the five "surge" brigades sent to Iraq earlier this year to bolster the counterinsurgency strategy pushed by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Gibbs' mission at Forward Operating Base Falcon: securing one of the most restive parts of a fractious city.
In the spring and summer, soldiers fought from house to house in some areas as they vied with al-Qaeda militants for control of neighborhoods. The toll was high: 80 troops killed, 600 wounded, Gibbs says.
These days, Gibbs travels around south Baghdad in a customized MRAP that serves as a mobile command post. In it, he can view video imagery in real time from drones that fly overhead, looking for insurgents and IEDs. Gibbs can stay in touch with his staff at brigade headquarters and relay orders.
The new counterinsurgency strategy here divides neighborhoods by 15-foot-high concrete traffic barriers. Exit and entry are controlled at checkpoints, in an attempt to deny insurgents the ability to move the munitions needed to make IEDs. Troops in MRAPs also provide a 24-hour presence, often leaving their vehicles to talk with people in their homes or shops.
Capt. Joe Schwankhaus, who commands a company in Gibbs' brigade, says the MRAP "does a lot for the guys' mental state," he says. "It's a huge motivational thing."
The big trucks also confuse insurgents, who don't know how to attack them or even how many troops they can hold, he says. "It at least makes insurgents. .. think twice. They have to be asking themselves, 'What the hell is going to come out of these things?' "
Throughout Iraq, the number of IEDs is declining, but they remain deadly. In November, 25 of the 28 U.S. troops who died in combat were killed by IEDs, according to the Pentagon. So far, in December, seven of 10 combat deaths reported were blamed on IEDs.
Although proven lifesavers — only a few troops have been killed riding in MRAPs — the vehicles are not failsafe. Armor-penetrating explosives, called explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, have breached them in Iraq.
Lt. Gen. Stephen Speakes, Army deputy chief of staff, says, "Whatever we put a soldier or Marine in, ultimately there is a bigger boom possible, something that can undo that particular design."
As the counterinsurgency strategy has brought relative security to parts of Iraq, new questions are being raised about MRAPs. Are they worth their price tag, $699,000 to $1.5 million each? And, in the long run, will they be of any use to the Marine Corps and the Army when the war in Iraq ends?
It is those considerations that have inspired both the Marine Corps and the Army to publicly discuss cutting their requirements.
On Nov. 30, Marine Corps Commandant James Conway said he would ask the Pentagon to cut the Corps' projected MRAP need to 2,300 vehicles from 3,700. On Dec. 8, Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the No. 2 military commander in Iraq, said the Army will probably need fewer than the 10,000 vehicles it originally sought but he has not decided how many.
Gibbs acknowledges the MRAP's limitations. He says the vehicle's turret, which rides more than 12 feet above the road, can rip through the low-hanging electrical wires that hang over Iraqi streets.
Its many advantages, however, are also evident.
Spc. Brian Wilson, 22, says its height also allows the gunner to peer over concrete traffic barriers to see insurgent activity on the other side. "It's a good investment for the Army," he says. "It will save lives."
It already has. Gunner Rosie, a British citizen with a U.S. green card, has no doubt about that. As he thinks about returning home to New York and to his career as a firefighter, Rosie says, "Anything that can give us better protection is really appreciated. It shows that people back home care."
(http://www.hotstockland.info/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=255;image)
If these are all of the December contracts FRPT just died, 4 in afterhours on heavy volume.
AP
Pentagon Buys 3,000 Armored Vehicles
Tuesday December 18, 6:09 pm ET
By Donna Borak, AP Business Writer
Pentagon Orders 3,000 Armored Vehicles From Four Suppliers
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon on Tuesday awarded a combined $2.66 billion deal to four manufacturers to build and deliver more than 3,000 bomb-resistant armored vehicles for U.S. soldiers in Iraq.
The winning vendors include Warrenville, Ill.-based Navistar International Corp., a subsidiary of International Military and Government LLC; Ladson, S.C.-based Force Protection Industries Inc., the North American subsidiary of British defense conglomerate BAE Systems Plc and Stewart & Stevenson Tactical Vehicle, a division of Armor Holdings Inc., which was acquired by BAE.
The orders included a $1.18 billion deal with Navistar International Corp. for 1,500 vehicles, a $377.8 million deal with Force Protection Industries Inc. for 358 vehicles, a $645.4 million deal with BAE Systems Inc. for 600 vehicles and a $458.1 million deal with Stewart & Stevenson Tactical Vehicle for 668 vehicles.
The latest order exceeds the $1.2 billion deal awarded in October to Force Protection, BAE Systems Inc. and Navistar to build and deliver 2,400 armored vehicles.
To date, the Pentagon has ordered nearly 12,000 vehicles from manufacturers.
The new vehicles will be delivered between June and July 2008, according to the Pentagon.
Wall Street analysts have expected an order of more than 3,000 mine-resistant, ambush-protected, or MRAP, vehicles to be distributed among Force Protection Inc., BAE Systems Inc. and Navistar International.
Force Protection's stock has been battered in recent weeks on concerns that the armored-vehicle maker would receive smaller-than-expected contracts from the U.S. military.
Also fueling fears are the Marines Corps' plans to reduce its requirement of the armored vehicle to 2,400 from the planned 3,700. And while senior Army officials have yet to revise their current strategy to purchase less than 10,000 vehicles, some adjustment is expected.
Shares of Force Protection fell $1.23, or 21.8 percent, to $4.64 in extended-trading, after falling 5 cents to close at $5.91.
Shares of Navistar fell $1.65, or 3.2 percent, to close at $50.05.
Force Protection loses ground to rivals (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/force-protection-loses-out-military/story.aspx?guid=%7B8A1E11A6%2D0F3A%2D4BEC%2D9D82%2D9733BD2D1549%7D&dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN)
Military weighs long-term costs over urgent need for armored trucks
Is that it? This news was already discounted by the market. I thought we would get a big private placement.
I think now is the time for the big rebound you've been talking about ... FRPT could bounce up to meet the 50 days SMA somewhere down the road. I wrote some bearish comments on FRPT when it was above $10 and that was just a few days ago ... it wouldn't surprise me if we went back up to $10 or so.
Good luck if you're into this :)
There is a reality to this.
FRPT got a small percentage of this 4 way split placing FRPT behind IMG and BAE, leaving FRPT in third place.
So with the Army purchasing the remaining vehicles FRPT's months are numbered, with this backlog May exactly. Of course there is one additional order scheduled for the spring to keep production open if necessary. Plus rumored international orders for hundreds of more vehicles.
FRPT's secret was the Marines bought every vehicle FRPT could make, not the Army which will be the only buyer from now on.
A criticism filtered down from the Army.
we intend to continue working with the Army to field the Cougar vehicle in a way that will meet the Army's objective of reducing sustainment and life cycle expense," said Gordon McGilton, CEO of Force Protection, Inc.
Quote from: David Randolph on December 20, 2007, 08:15:05 AM
Force Protection loses ground to rivals (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/force-protection-loses-out-military/story.aspx?guid=%7B8A1E11A6%2D0F3A%2D4BEC%2D9D82%2D9733BD2D1549%7D&dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN)
Military weighs long-term costs over urgent need for armored trucks
Is that it? This news was already discounted by the market. I thought we would get a big private placement.
I think now is the time for the big rebound you've been talking about ... FRPT could bounce up to meet the 50 days SMA somewhere down the road. I wrote some bearish comments on FRPT when it was above $10 and that was just a few days ago ... it wouldn't surprise me if we went back up to $10 or so.
Good luck if you're into this :)
FRPT's rebound has started, as the stock is up 18% as I write. The catalyst was the following press release:
• Force Dynamics, LLC Breaks Production Records in December (http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080102/20080102005401.html?.v=1)
Business Wire (Wed 9:24am)
This isn't materially relevant news in my view, but the stock had been down so much and so fast that at least a short covering rally was due. I don't appreciate this company as a long term investment because I don't see the longevity and sustainability of earnings, as it depends heavily on military orders which can fluctuate a lot with Wars and such more or less unpredictable events.
I believe the World will evolve towards less armed conflicts, not more.
But hey, it wouldn't surprise me to see FRPT kissing the 50 days SMA in the medium term future. I just don't buy stocks for a rebound or quick profit, I invest for the long term or not at all.
Good luck :)
Two long term obstacles. Both about future contracts beyond this spring.
MRAP II which will be the new standard in MRAPs thereafter. Only Ceradyne, and BAE have passed into pre-production testing and contracted with 6 full test prototypes. This initial contract includes options on LRIP production contracts upon completion of testing on pre-production prototypes submitted.
FRPT is still in the running with the Cheetah as "a competitive range bid" which will be looked at and worked with. But it did not pass blast testing which is why it is not with Ceradyne and BAE in MRAP II contracts. The other MRAP II candidate Cougar was being criticised for its apparent failure to meet Army standards in Sustainability and Life Cycle costs, a major requirement by the army with contracts of this size. In short the Army has placed it in third place which may be no place with the Army. For not doing it the Army way. Also, why no MRAP II contracts for full testing?
Foreign contracts seem to be less than 1000 vehicles and whether FRPT gets any or all of them is doubtful.
I think this may be a broken company because the competition keeps taking the lead, leaving FRPT following left with what?
I keep hoping for a turnaround too. But the reality is this is still heading downward. The next good news will be a contract in the spring. Anything else better be any good news. Because current backlog dictates current production ends in May, June, or July. And that expansion plan below just keeps bleeding the profits with no contracts.
Force Protection Slows Cheetah Production Schedule (Update2)
2008-01-04 14:17 (New York)
(Adds analyst comment in the fourth paragraph.)
By Edmond Lococo
Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., the largest
supplier of blast-resistant trucks to the U.S. Marine Corps,
plans a slower production schedule for its new Cheetah vehicles
as the company gauges sales opportunities.
Force Protection plans to start building the trucks by the
end of March at a new plant, which will have monthly capacity
for 200 by the end of 2008, Michael Aldrich, vice president for
government relations, said in an interview today. That's a
``much longer ramp-up'' than originally planned, he said.
The company hasn't received any Cheetah orders and will
initially build between 50 and 100 for demonstration, he said.
The original plan was to build 70 to 90 of the trucks starting
in the fourth quarter of 2007. At the time of that July
announcement, Aldrich said the intention was to build the
Cheetah without orders, in advance of demand, ``like Detroit
puts out a new car.'' That has changed, he said today.
``They are backing off the `Field of Dreams' strategy a
little because they haven't had any orders yet,'' said Timothy
Quillin, an analyst with Stephens Inc. in Little Rock, Arkansas,
who rates Force Protection shares ``underweight'' and doesn't
own any. ``Even building 50 to 100 demo models seems excessive
to me. It might be prudent to wait for orders.''
Force Protection, based in Ladson, South Carolina, fell 32
cents, or 6.4 percent, to $4.69 at 1:45 p.m. in Nasdaq Stock
Market composite trading. The stock has dropped 85 percent from
the record close of $30.27 on May 30.
The slowdown follows the decision last month by the U.K.
Ministry of Defence to purchase a truck based on the company's
existing Cougar vehicle instead of the Cheetah, Aldrich said.
The Pentagon said Dec. 17 Force Protection may sell the U.K. 170
trucks, which would be valued at as much as $147 million.
More Prudent
The Cheetah was in the running for the U.K. order and that
was the best prospect for a quick sale of the new truck, Aldrich
said. While there remain opportunities to sell the Cheetah in
the U.S. and to allied nations, none of those orders is likely
to come in the next 30 days, Aldrich said. He didn't identify
any potential buyers.
``We're taking a more financially prudent approach to
Cheetah production,'' Aldrich said. ``The acceleration will be
gauged on near-term sale opportunities.''
Force Protection bought a 430,000 square foot building in
Roxboro, North Carolina, for $3.5 million in July, and plans to
spend a total of about $50 million to equip the new facility to
build Cheetah trucks, the company said in a Nov. 13 regulatory
filing. About $10 million was spent through Sept. 30. Force
Protection may need to issue new stock or debt early this year
to fund the expansion, the filing said.
`Cheetah is Everything'
The Cheetah is crucial to Force Protection's efforts to
maintain growth because the U.S. military is cutting back
purchases of some of the larger, heavier trucks it bought to
protect troops from roadside bombs in Iraq as part of the Mine-
Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicle, or MRAP, program, Quillin
said.
As the war boosted demand, Force Protection ramped up
monthly output of its existing Cougar and Buffalo vehicles more
than sixfold in the past year, to 350 last month, from 55 in
December 2006. It teamed with Falls Church, Virginia-based
General Dynamics Corp. to boost Cougar output.
The Marine Corps in November said it would cut by 38
percent planned MRAP purchases to 2,300 trucks from 3,700. The
reduction was in response to both reduced violence in Iraq, and
because of the need for greater vehicle mobility.
At 8 tons, the Cheetah is less than half the weight of the
17-ton Cougar. The Cheetah has a cruising speed of 80 miles per
hour, compared with 55 miles per hour for the Cougar.
``Cheetah is everything,'' Quillin said. ``The key for this
company is establishing a long-term, sustainable revenue base,
which is going to be largely related to their success with
Cheetah.''
--Editor: Will Daley, John Lear
Hi,
Been a bull and a cheerleader here. Sold in December for a loss of 52% for the year. But it started a 10 bagger for the year so I have no complaint.
The president of FRPT has been replaced by an investment banker. Clue of what this company is worth before bankruptcy.
For closure here there is only one milestone between here and bankruptcy. Roxboro and Cheetah. It is still in for next generation MRAP II testing after modifications with production delayed until Q2 with no contracts. With the delay Roxboro now has a rated production capacity of 750 vehicles in 2008, all which could still be MRAP II and foreign contracts. But again no word from the pipeline about "firm" interest.
Production is slated to end May-July with one more contract budgeted for the spring. But FRPT is third on the list behind favored IMG and BAE who have a much longer performance history with DoD than FRPT, a DoD contract policy of "past performance by contractor" status. Something the one vehicle "Cougar" wonder does not have. It was a Marine favorite and has not earned an Army nod because Army standards for long term sustainability and life cycle were not designed into Cougar. These standards are defacto standards at the Army that the Marines overlooked because of their urgent need at the time. So between the competition and money being diverted to MRAP II vehicles the possability of not another contract in the spring is in the cards.
The near fatal blow is BAE won as the sole source contractor for MMPV, where Cougar and Cheetah were in the running. This is the long term multi-billion dollar contract for vehicles to be retained in inventory to do basically what the Cougar and Buffalo were urgently rushed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
MMPV was an FRPT future which is now BAE's.
The US Army's MMPV EOD/Engineer Vehicles
10-Jan-2008 20:02 | Permanent Link
Related stories: Contracts - Awards, Americas - USA, Trucks & Transport, BAE, Transformation
RG-33L
(click to view full)At the beginning of June 2007, BAE sat in 4th place in the US MRAP competition with orders for just 90 vehicles – 2.8% of the total. It had to be a humbling experience for the firm that went into 2004 as the world leader in the field. The climb back has been slow and consistent, involving a major $4+ billion acquisition and a slow ramp-up of orders for its flagship RG-33 family of vehicles, which built on BAE OMC's 4 decades of experience in blast-resistant vehicles in South Africa. By December 2007, BAE had reached second place in the MRAP production race with 3,569 direct orders, plus some orders via General Dynamics' entry of BAE OMC's earlier RG-31 model. In January 2007, the firm made its comeback complete, regaining its spot as the leader in the field.
The total $2.288 billion MMPV program will buy up to 2,500 vehicles for use by U.S. Army Engineers and Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams through 2015. U.S. Army engineers will use to conduct route and area clearance missions, command and control, mount mine clearing systems, and conduct explosive hazards reconnaissance. MMPVs will also be used by Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams to neutralize Improvised Explosive Devices, mines and other unexploded ordnance. BAE has just been picked as the sole-source winner...
Contracts & Key Events
Travel position
(click to view full)Jan 9/08: BAE Systems announces that it has been selected by the U.S. Army to be the sole producer of the new Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV), based on their 6×6 RG-33L design. The firm has been awarded an initial $20 million delivery order for 9 MMPV test vehicles, test support, armor testing packages, and vehicle basic issue items such as first-aid kits and repair tools, training, various contract data et. al. are due for delivery between May – August 2008.
Under a strategic Public/Private Partnership Agreement, BAE Systems and the Letterkenny Army Depot (LAD), PA will perform automotive and final assembly production operations of these vehicles in facilities on and adjacent to the LAD facilities.
AFTER HOURS - TOP STORY
Shares of Force Protection Tumble
After Announcing Annual Report Filing Delay
Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) announced that it will delay the filing
of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2007. The Company intends to file its Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 with the SEC promptly
upon the completion of the audit of the consolidated financial statements
for the year ended 2007. The Company will also be providing
a restatement of Form 10Q for the period ended 9/30/2007. Force
Protection shares tumbled $0.86 or nearly 21% in After Hours, early
on Friday evening.
This stock is probably well priced even if it looks cheap and trading with a low P/E...
According to Thomas Weisel Partners research posted today, FRPT's price target is $3.50, main reasons for this target is the reduced market share and limited visibility:
(http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/5631/frptix6.th.gif) (http://www.3stocksonfire.org/trading/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=43918)
Went below 2.00 today.
After Hours: 1.78 -0.01 (-0.56%) - Mar 14, 7:56PM ET
The bottom? With bankruptcy still in the picture I think this will test .50 like Lucent did.
FRPT did test .50 once, after it did the 11 to 1 RS brought it to 2.00 to begin with.
Will the company still be in business? Most people ILS or vehicle support for as long as they are deployed and retained in inventory. They are still the vehicle of choice by the Marines.
Also there is a long lead contract for 180 Buffaloes for the MMPV GSMTIDS escort vehicles.
The Buffalo is the sole Cat I MRAP vehicle by any manufacturer.
Why it went below 2.00 today.BAE, Navistar Truck Orders Shut Out Force Protection (Update2)
By Edmond Lococo
March 14 (Bloomberg) -- BAE Systems Plc and Navistar International Corp. won 99 percent of a $1.1 billion Pentagon order for blast-resistant trucks, all but shutting out Force Protection Inc. in a decision that surprised analysts.
Force Protection won just 29 of the 2,243 vehicles ordered today for delivery by November, the Defense Department said in a statement today after the close of U.S. markets. London-based BAE received orders for 1,471, almost two-thirds of the total. Earlier awards have been split more evenly between the three.
``This is pretty bad news for Force Protection,'' said Tim Quillin, an analyst with Stephens Inc. in Little Rock, Arkansas, who rates Force Protection shares ``equal weight'' and doesn't own any. ``I'm surprised they were almost completely shut out of this round of orders.''
The trucks, used to protect troops from roadside bombs in Iraq, have blast-deflecting V-shaped hulls that are four times safer than flat-bottomed transports. Today's orders add to the 11,891 Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, previously purchased and don't yet fulfill the Defense Department's plan announced in September to buy 15,274.
Ladson, South Carolina-based Force Protection's awards were valued at $17.5 million. Its shares fell 26 percent today, the most since Dec. 12, before the order was announced. The stock dropped 62 cents to $1.79 in Nasdaq Stock Market trading, below its May peak of $31.16.
Warrensville, Illinois-based Navistar was unchanged at $56.75, and BAE earlier rose 2.75 pence to 486.75 in London.
Order Values
BAE's order was valued at $715.9 million, including orders placed with its Armor Holdings unit, which was acquired in July for $4.53 billion. Navistar's order was for 743 trucks valued at $410.7 million.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates made MRAP vehicles the highest priority acquisition program in May to improve troop safety. In November, the U.S. Marine Corps began reducing requirements for the vehicles, saying they lacked the ``maneuverability and mobility'' that is needed ``to pursue the enemy off-road, in confined areas or across many bridges.''
At 17 tons, Force Protection's Cougar truck built for the program weighs more than three of the M1151 armored Humvees built by AM General LLC. The company builds the Cougar in a joint venture with Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics Corp.
Today's orders were mainly for the U.S. Army, which announced in December it planned to focus on purchases of the BAE and Navistar vehicles, said Michael Aldrich, Force Protection's vice president for government relations.
``This is the logical continuation of the course the Army set back in December,'' Aldrich said in an interview after the decision. ``From December we stopped ramping up because they don't need it currently.''
The Marine Corps and the Army are now planning a contest for June to purchase a new truck called the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, which is intended to offer better protection than the current fleet of Humvee transports, while being more mobile than MRAPs.
To contact the reporters on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at
[email protected].
Last Updated: March 14, 2008 19:44 EDT
CONGRESS APPROVES $94M UK CONTRACTS: Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) announced
that Congress has approved two Cougar Foreign Military Sales to the United Kingdom. The first
contract for six Cougar Category I Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles and associated
services was awarded on April 29. The second contract for 151 Cougar MRAP vehicles
and associated services was awarded on May 1. The total value of the contracts for the 157
vehicles, named Ridgebacks by the British, is approximately $94 million. These contracts are not
subject to the terms of Force Protection's joint venture.
CONGRESS APPROVES $94M UK CONTRACTS: Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) announced
that Congress has approved two Cougar Foreign Military Sales to the United Kingdom. The first
contract for six Cougar Category I Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles and associated
services was awarded on April 29. The second contract for 151 Cougar MRAP vehicles
and associated services was awarded on May 1. The total value of the contracts for the 157
vehicles, named Ridgebacks by the British, is approximately $94 million. These contracts are not
subject to the terms of Force Protection's joint venture.
Here's an excerpt of an analysis published March, 25, 2008:
FRPT: Lowering Estimates; Outlook Remains Highly Uncertain
• Force Protection hosted a conference call to discuss recent company events. Our view on the company's prospects remains unchanged as the company continues to struggle filling its business pipeline and with continuing accounting problems.
• While new management is trying diligently to improve the situation, a delisting notice by Nasdaq due to delay of its 10-K filing will likely pressure the stock due to restrictions for holding a delisted stock. In addition, the company's auditor resigned due to lack of necessary internal controls to complete its audit and pending class action lawsuits remains an overhang.
• As we anticipated, Force Protection doesn't expect to receive any MRAP awards as the Army consolidated its orders down to BAE Systems (BAESY, Not Rated [NR] and Navistar (NAVZ, NR) in the last round of awards. The Army is holding back FY08 MRAP funding for 1,000+ units of vehicles and has not decided on how many vehicles to purchase; decision will likely be made before June based on MRAP II testing and its long-term fleet strategy.
• We expect the company to ship its entire backlog by year-end. It shipped 264 vehicles through February this year and has a remaining backlog of 870 vehicles with a value of $450
million as of February 2008. We expect the service and sustainment to be the major contributor to revenues in 2009, as the potential of sizable foreign military orders remains suspect
and its new Cheetah vehicle is in our view unlikely to gain much traction.
• We lower our 2008 and 2009 sales estimates to $692 million and $285 million and EPS estimates to $0.53 and $0.13 based on lower profitability on its joint venture with General
Dynamics (GD, NR) and uncertain outlook. We reiterate our SELL rating and lower our price target to $1.50 from $5. The company has $1 cash per share and $3.5 in book value.
And this other one out yesterday, after the UK order news:
FRPT: $91 Million UK Award
- $91 Million for 151 MRAPs to the UK
A sale of MRAPs to the UK MoD (Ministry of Defense) has been in the works for some time and was awarded last night. Force received an order for $91.5 million to deliver 151 MRAPs to the MoD. Work will begin in July of this year and be completed by July of 2009. This order has been in our estimates for some time. This order is in addition to the $115 million order for 174 vehicles awarded in February of this year.
- International Key Revenue Source in 2009
We look at our revenue estimate for 2009 in five buckets: service and support, international, remanufacturing, Buffalo and Cheetahs. We have higher confidence now, in the service, international and Buffalo buckets. Remanufacturing orders we expect later this year. Cheetah is the wild card. The latter two comprises about $47 million of our $265 million estimate. We believe there could be upside to that estimate.
- Valuation
The shares are cheap on our 2009 estimates, but given the lack of audited financials and recent management turnover, we'd remain on the sidelines.
My comments:
- Analysts expect revenue to drop 59% in 2009 and EPS to be just $0.13 in that year, so there's this cloud on the future of FRPT;
- The UK order just announced was already embedded in analysts estimates, it wasn't a surprise.
So my take is FRPT's 20% rise on Friday was a short term thing, there wasn't any meaningful catalyst to change the previous situation. Perhaps FRPT will be able to close the gap at $4.02 but I would be surprised to see it run much further than that ... it doesn't look like it on a medium term chart, but the stock is up 250% from the low set six weeks ago.
updated chart look...
JLTV+MRAP II Brits sending more troops to Afghanistan, War with Iran...
Well things are moving. stock has to break the $4-5 wall
From there to $15ish, there isn't real concrete resistance since it was a sharp fast drop.
There's buzz about 400 vehicles for Italy. we'll see.
The restatement by the new top accounting firm will be interesting.
The value of the stock without sales is around $7
The backlog of orders and revs is HUGE reaching $2Billion !!!
The stock trades at 1/8th of its revs.
This current deal with UK DOD is purely for FRPT also: no sharing with GD
The patents they now have will change the MRAP market...
Technicals
Percentage Gainer
Last Price Quote is:
12.12%above 13-day MA
21.22%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 97
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $275.04
P/E Ratio: 6.54
PEG Ratio: 0.166667
Next Earnings: 08/07/2008
Last Analyst Rating: Hold
are you invested setravis?
FRPT: Short Interest UP 1.3% to 5.5M at the End of May 2008
Tuesday , June 10, 2008 16:17ET
According to new short interest data from NASDAQ, short interest for Force Protection, Inc (NasdaqSC: FRPT) INCREASED 1.3% to 5,484,566 shares as reported at month-end May, 2008.
Based on FRPT's 20-day average daily share volume of 741,915, it would require approximately 8 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
&
FRPT: Volume Spike; 25% > 20-adsv, Stock +13.24%
Monday , June 16, 2008 12:20ET
This is the 1st VOLUME alert for FRPT in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Force Protection, Inc (NASDAQ SC: FRPT) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 12:20 ET, the stock had already traded 915,650 shares via 1,874 trades. The cumulative volume is 24.72% above its 20-day average of 734,165. Normally the stock experiences around 2,217 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net rise in FRPT's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $4.563, up $0.533 (+13.24%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $27.060. The price has declined more than 83 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session FRPT has traded in a range between $3.900 and $4.290 and is currently trading 83.25% below its 52-week high of $27.250 set on June 18,2007 and 343.05% above its 52-week low of $1.030 from March 17,2008.
In the previous 3 sessions, FRPT trading has displayed a mixed trend. Closing results have been as follows:
June 13, 2008 --- closed at $4.030 up $0.060 (+1.51%) on 302,300 shares
June 12, 2008 --- closed at $3.970 down $0.050 (-1.24%) on 779,500 shares
June 11, 2008 --- closed at $4.020 down $0.080 (-1.95%) on 574,500 shares
The Company last released news on June 05, 2008:
"Force Protection Marks Delivery of 200th Buffalo Vehicle"
A very simple answer to that...Yes !! ;D ;)
looks nice ;D
look s nice ;D
hi waxweazle,
i applaud you... great find...BUT personnally, i will waiting for a pullback for buying this stock..
You have find a stock in phase 1 as stein weinstein defines it...
Have good day and thank you for this one... :)
G-20 Lifts Street...
Navistar fell 14% at the close, after the military vehicle maker filed a complaint with the Pentagon on the evaluation of its vehicles. Investors dropped the stock on concern that the issue could jeopardize Navistar's contracts. Rival Force Protection (FRPT) was up on the news, adding 24% at the close.
Look out ahead good things starting to happen. Financial look great, 80 mil cash, possible orders looming.... recovery should value us above $10.00.
52wk Range: 1.70 - 7.22
Volume: 2,955,957
Avg Vol (3m): 951,910
Market Cap: 417.81M
P/E (ttm): 8.79
EPS (ttm): 0.69
Div & Yield: N/A (N/A)
Technicals
Percentage Gainer
Last Price Quote is:
12.23%above 13-day MA
13.29%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 70
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $397.03
P/E Ratio: 8.35
PEG Ratio: 0.526667
Next Earnings: 06/14/2009
Last Analyst Rating: Hold
thanks for the update setravis!
Spartan Chassis, Inc. and Force Protection, Inc. Announce Service and Sustainment Partnership
Wednesday, April 01, 2009 09:21ET
CHARLOTTE, Mich. & LADSON, S.C., Apr 01, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Spartan Chassis, a subsidiary of Spartan Motors, Inc. (NASDAQ: SPAR), and Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ: FRPT), today jointly announced that they have entered into a Contractor Team Arrangement and will combine service capabilities and infrastructure to more effectively support future customer needs related to spare parts and sustainment for Force Protection's fleet of Cougar vehicles. The two companies noted that each would commit key staff, facilities and information systems to speed response capability on critical programs.
John Sztykiel, president and CEO of Spartan Motors, said: "We are proud of our partnership with Force Protection in rapidly delivering key components for over 3,000 Cougar vehicles under the MRAP program. This new work structure will strengthen that relationship, create enhanced capabilities for the customer, and ensure that the service, upgrades, and spares parts this fleet of vehicles will need throughout its lifecycle are delivered and executed with excellence."
Michael Moody, Chairman and CEO of Force Protection, Inc., commented: "It is a strategic priority for our Company to build the relationships and partnerships that provide the highest possible level of customer experience. Over the course of the MRAP program, Spartan has been a key partner, met difficult production requirements in short spaces of time, and executed with excellence. We are very pleased to formalize our relationship, further enhance our combined capabilities and position ourselves to capture the increasing need for service and support work."
&
FRPT: Volume Spike; 43% > 20-adsv, Stock +25.46%
Thursday , April 02, 2009 13:05ET
This is the 1st VOLUME alert for FRPT in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Force Protection, Inc (NASDAQ SC: FRPT) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 13:05 ET, the stock had already traded 1,259,363 shares via 4,779 trades. The cumulative volume is 42.99% above its 20-day average of 880,705. Normally the stock experiences around 4,811 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net rise in FRPT's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $6.110, up $1.240 (+25.46%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $2.380. The price has gained more than 156 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session FRPT has traded in a range between $4.730 and $5.990 and is currently trading 15.37% below its 52-week high of $7.220 set on January 13,2009 and 259.41% above its 52-week low of $1.700 from October 24,2008.
In the previous 3 sessions, FRPT trading has displayed a mixed trend. Closing results have been as follows:
April 01, 2009 --- closed at $4.870 up $0.070 (+1.46%) on 1,149,500 shares
March 31, 2009 --- closed at $4.800 down $0.410 (-7.87%) on 1,272,000 shares
March 30, 2009 --- closed at $5.210 down $0.520 (-9.08%) on 830,800 shares
Force Protection Receives $158 Million Contract from United States Marine Corps... ;) ;D 8)
LADSON, S.C., Apr 09, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT, Trade) today announced that it has received a modification to contract M67854-07-D-5031 not to exceed $158 million from the United States Marine Corps Systems Command to supply Force Protection Cougar Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles with the Oshkosh Corporation (OSK, Trade) TAK-4 Independent Suspension Kits. This contract modification is subject to definitization.
Force Protection, Oshkosh and MRAP Joint Program Office engineers collaborated to successfully integrate the TAK-4 independent suspension onto the Force Protection Cougar vehicle. This suspension modification enhances the Cougar's mobility and maneuverability to enable improved performance in the rough terrain of Afghanistan, while continuing to provide MRAP levels of protection. Work is expected to be completed by December 2009.
Michael Moody, Force Protection Chief Executive Officer, said, "We are pleased to be able to deliver this meaningful upgrade for our armed forces. With the incorporation of this independent suspension, we will demonstrate the Cougar can meet the operational needs of the war-fighter in Afghanistan, which is home to some of the most challenging terrain anywhere on Earth. This upgrade is an excellent illustration of our strategy to focus on continued research and development, to develop strong industry partnerships, and to continually improve customer satisfaction with our products. This effort, which involved close coordination with Oshkosh and the Joint Program Office demonstrates that we can create urgently needed, cost-effective, mission enabling products and enhancements that extend and amplify the usefulness of the Cougar platform while providing the war fighter with the best possible equipment."
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. is a leading American designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions, predominantly ballistic- and blast-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. Force Protection's specialty vehicles, the Cougar, the Buffalo and the Cheetah, are designed specifically for reconnaissance and urban operations and to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Force Protection also is the developer and manufacturer of ForceArmor(TM), an armor package providing superior protection against explosively formed projectiles (EFPs), now available for a wide range of tactical-wheeled vehicles. Force Protection is one of the original developers and primary providers of vehicles for the U.S. military's Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicle program. For more information about Force Protection and its vehicles, visit www.forceprotection.net.
Force Protection, Inc. Safe Harbor Language
This press release contains forward looking statements that are not historical facts, including statements about Force Protection's beliefs and expectations are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on beliefs and assumptions by Force Protection's management, and on information currently available to management. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and Force Protection undertakes no obligation to update any of them publicly in light of new information or future events. A number of important factors could cause actual result to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Examples of these factors include, but are not limited to, Force Protection's ability to fulfill the above order on a timely basis, the ability of the subcontractor to perform on a timely basis, Force Protection's ability to effectively manage the risks in its business; the reaction of the marketplace to the foregoing; and other risk factors and cautionary statements listed in Force Protection's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risks set forth in the Company's 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
SOURCE: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc.
Tommy Pruitt, 843-574-3866
Senior Communications Director
or
Investor Relations:
ICR, Inc
James Palczynski, 203-682-8229
Principal and Director
Copyright Business Wire 2009
;) ;D 8)
Force Protection Receives $158 Million Contract from the United States Marine Corps Systems Command....
Force Protection is a "cheap" stock - trading around $6.96 a share at the close today. But it also had excellent value fundamentals which is what truly attracted me to the company.
"Cheap" or low priced doesn't always equal "value". Buy value first. Your portfolio will thank you.
52wk Range: 1.70 - 7.22
Volume: 3,102,477
Avg Vol (3m): 914,659
Market Cap: 482.25M
P/E (ttm): 10.15
EPS (ttm): 0.69
Div & Yield: N/A (N/A)
Technicals
Gap Up
Last Price Quote is:
23.09%above 13-day MA
28.38%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 81
Fundamentals
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $418.51
P/E Ratio: 8.80
PEG Ratio: 0.646667
Next Earnings: 06/14/2009
Last Analyst Rating: Hold
your Watch List : (1 of 268) sorted by Price %Change in descending order
Symbol Last Change %Change Volume Vol %Change Added How
FRPT $6.96 0.96 16.00% 3,102,777 276.37% 01/16/06 setravis's watch list
%Change
589.11%
Buysignals 8$ break will bring 10$
(http://www.privattraders.com/images/1million/frpt270509.jpg)
(http://www.privattraders.com/images/1million/frptweekly270509.jpg)
;D
Lets see 10$ ++++
updated chart look...
38.2% Fib Retrace...
Facts are facts.
http://www.therobinsgroup.biz/files/06_08_09_FRPT_Update.pdf
52wk Range: 1.70 - 10.03
Volume: 2,779,957
Avg Vol (3m): 1,164,090
Market Cap: 591.06M
P/E (ttm): 12.25
EPS (ttm): 0.69
Div & Yield: N/A (N/A)
Technicals
Percentage Gainer
Last Price Quote is:
-2.21%below 13-day MA
9.19%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 78
Fundamentals
Analyst Upgrade to Buy
Key Data:
Market Cap (M): $609.96
P/E Ratio: 12.63
PEG Ratio: 0.94
Next Earnings: 08/10/2009
Last Analyst Rating: Buy
Let's take a look at the history movement.......
Force Protection (NASDAQ: FRPT): Deja Vu of Deja Vu All Over Again
April 3rd- 2004 it was a $.25 stock at the time...that's right, a mere quarter.
The reverse split adjusted price would have been $2.50. Of course, we were bashed when the stock traded to $.81 in January of 2006. To make a long story short, right idea, but wrong timing.We're often in too early on these sorts of ideas.
In May of 2007 the stock traded to $31. Wow! That's right...$.81 to $31 in 15 months...quite a run.
This defense contractor that makes all sorts of proprietary hardware for protecting military vehicles then ran into some headwinds. Accounting scandal, rumored SEC investigations, and the raging bear market sent this stock on a round trip. $31 in May of '07 to $1.25 this past March. Quite a chart...
However, all this supposed scandal and investigation kind of fizzled into nothing, and the stock turned around and started getting very healthy again...until June 30 when the company failed to land a big contract that was rumored to come their way.
They lost the contract to competitor Oshkosh Corp, and it was a $1.06 billion Army deal. The stock got hammered. In my view, the market is often emotional in the short term, and often over reacts to events. This was an over reaction in typical stock market fashion.
A very smart analyst I know believes the company will earn at least $.33 EPS this year. He also believes Oshkosh will sub out a significant portion of the contract to FRPT. He tells me they have to...they don't have the required technology.
Since the huge gap down, the stock has since made a bottom and started a recovery phase. If it breaks above that gap down to $6.00...watch it run back to $10 as all the non believers have sold out...and bargain hunters come back on. Friday's closing price of $5.20 seems like a great entry level to me...don't load up on margin...my SSL is $4.50...that would be a new low. Upside this year...$10.
Force Protection Receives $14.5 Million Award for Field Service Support...
LADSON, S.C., Aug 19, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection Industries, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Force Protection Inc. (FRPT), a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions and provider of total life cycle support for those products, today announced that it has received a firm fixed price modification to existing contract M67854-07-D-5031 with a total value of approximately $14.5 million for continuing Field Service Representative ("FSR") support work and Standard Consumable Kits to support Operations at Vehicle Support Facility-Afghanistan and conduct general maintenance. All work under this modification is expected to be complete by July, 2011.
Randy Hutcherson, Chief Operating Officer for Force Protection Industries, Inc., said, "Maintaining the installed Cougar fleet of vehicles is very critical to current operations. We are proud of the performance of the vehicles in the field and appreciate the continued trust and confidence our customer places in us to perform vital field service support in Afghanistan."
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. is a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions, including blast- and ballistic-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. The Company's specialty vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar and related variants, are designed specifically for reconnaissance and urban operations and to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices ("IEDs", commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Complementing these efforts, the Company is designing, developing and marketing new vehicle platforms (including the Ocelot & JAMMA) that provide increased modularity, speed, mobility and concealment with enhanced levels of blast- and ballistic-protection. The Company also develops, manufactures, tests, delivers and supports products and services aimed at further enhancing the survivability of users against additional threats. In addition, the Company provides long-term life cycle support services of its vehicles that involve development of technical data packages, supply of spares, field and depot maintenance activities, assignment of highly-skilled field service representatives, and advanced on and off-road driver and maintenance training programs. For more information on Force Protection and its products and services, visit www.forceprotection.net .
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward looking statements that are not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs and expectations. These statements are based on beliefs and assumptions of Force Protection's management, and on information currently available to management. These forward looking statements include, among other things: the growth, demand and interest for Force Protection's services and vehicles, including the Cougar; expectations for future modernization and service-related contracts for the Cougar; the benefits and suitability of the Cougar; the ability to meet current and future requirements; the Company's execution of its business strategy and strategic transformation, including its opportunities to grow the business; and, the Company's expected financial and operating results, including its revenues, cash flow and gross margins, for future periods. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any of them publicly in light of new information or future events. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Examples of these factors include, but are not limited to, ability to effectively manage the risks in the Company's business; the ability to develop new technologies and products and the acceptance of these technologies and products; and, the other risk factors and cautionary statements listed in the Company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risks set forth in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 and as updated in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
SOURCE: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc.
Media Contact:
Tommy Pruitt, Senior Communications Director
843-574-3866
[email protected] or
Investor Relations Contact:
Wes Harris, Investor Relations Director
843-574-3892
[email protected]
Good value...
to the upside, expect this to be back to $10 by year end.
Force Protection Announces Results for 2010 Second Quarter
Q2 Net Income Increases to $4.8 Million ($0.07 Per Share) from $0.4 Million ($0.01 Per Share) in 2009
Additional Orders for Vehicle Deliveries and Modernization Services Provide Increased Visibility to Expected Strong Second Half of 2010 and Into 2011
Press Release Source: Force Protection, Inc. On Tuesday August 3, 2010, 4:05 pm EDT
LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ: FRPT - News), a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions and provider of total life cycle support for those products, today reported financial results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010.
Michael Moody, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Force Protection, Inc., said, "Our solid financial performance during the 2010 second quarter was a direct result of successfully executing on our strategy to build on our base business. One significant highlight of the quarter was a much improved gross margin, and we remain focused on driving incremental efficiencies that are sustainable for the long-term."
Mr. Moody continued, "For the first seven months of 2010, we have secured approximately $480 million in new awards for vehicle deliveries and modernization, as well as spares and sustainment services. In addition, based on the continued needs of our customers, we expect additional contracts in all categories of revenue in the coming months. This bodes well for a strong second half of 2010 and provides important momentum as we move into 2011."
Second Quarter Comparison
In the second quarter of 2010, the Company reported net sales of $137.1 million versus $187.1 million in the second quarter of 2009. Contributing to the decrease were lower spares and sustainment sales, which were partially offset by increased modernization revenues.
Operating income was $7.3 million in the second quarter of 2010 as compared to $0.6 million in the prior year period. The combination of a higher gross margin and lower general administrative expenses contributed to the year-over-year increase.
The Company was pleased to record a 23.1 percent gross margin during the 2010 second quarter, which was primarily associated with improvements in program cost management and related contract negotiations. The Company notes that its gross margins can fluctuate quarter over quarter due to the mix and timing of contract negotiations and contract awards. As such, the Company continues to target a long-term gross margin of approximately 20 percent.
Net income for the second quarter of 2010 was $4.8 million, or $0.07 per diluted share, as compared to $0.4 million, or $0.01 per diluted share, for the 2009 second quarter.
Year to Date Comparison
For the six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company reported net sales of $272.0 million versus $371.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009. Contributing to the decrease were lower spares and sustainment and vehicle sales, which were partially offset by increased modernization revenues.
Operating income was $9.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to $12.1 million in the prior year period. The 2010 year-to-date decrease was primarily associated with lower net sales, although at a higher gross margin percentage, which was partially offset by a reduction in general administrative expense during the current year period.
Net income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was $5.9 million, or $0.08 per diluted share, as compared to $7.8 million, or $0.11 per diluted share, for the comparable prior year period.
Financial Position
As of June 30, 2010, the Company's cash and inventories were $120.8 million and $72.9 million, respectively. In addition, accounts receivable was $147.5 million and accounts payable was $60.5 million as of June 30, 2010.
The decline in the Company's cash position from December 31, 2009 was primarily associated with the timing of final contract negotiations, product deliveries and customer billings. The Company expects this trend to reverse in the second half of 2010.
Randy Hutcherson, Chief Operating Officer of Force Protection, Inc., commented, "As we expected, our second quarter financial performance reflected an improvement over the 2010 first quarter, and our outlook for the remainder of the year remains strong. Driving our progress is a steadfast focus on ensuring that we exceed our customers' needs by providing top-quality vehicles and related services, which has resulted in substantial awards for new business that will carry well into next year. Complementing these efforts, we are aggressively pursuing additional vehicle and service programs both internationally and domestically."
Significant Business Development Initiatives
The Company's Ocelot platform has performed well in its testing and offers unprecedented levels of survivability and maneuverability for a vehicle of its size and weight. The vehicle remains in competition for the United Kingdom Ministry of Defense (U.K. MoD) Light Protected Patrol Vehicle (LPPV) program, with a selection by the U.K. MoD of the preferred bidder expected in September. The U.K. MoD has stated the LPPV program is an Urgent Operational Requirement, with an anticipated initial buy of at least 200 vehicles and related long-term support with production scheduled to begin in early 2011.
The Ocelot was recently down-selected to continue competitive prototyping in the Manufactured and Supported in Australia option for that military's Protected Mobility Vehicle-Light Land 121 Phase 4 program. The program is designed to optimize Australia's long-term core fleet, and could lead to a manufacturing contract for up to 1,300 vehicles, trailers and related extended services. A decision as to the next down select could come as early as 2011 with production beginning no earlier than late 2012. The Company is also pursuing other international and domestic requirements for the Ocelot given its unique operating characteristics.
The Company's Joint All-Terrain Modular Mobility Asset (JAMMA) vehicle is undergoing testing in advance of the upcoming Air Force Material Command's Guardian Angel Air-Deployable Rescue Vehicle program. The JAMMA is a unique armor-ready, four-occupant, hybrid, high-performance vehicle certified to be internally transportable in the V-22 Osprey. It also has the highest power-to-weight and payload-to weight ratios available on the market. Beyond the Guardian Angel program, the Company believes the vehicle will meet the requirements of special operations forces for a number of militaries worldwide.
In addition to pursuing substantial opportunities for its new vehicles, the Company is enjoying continued progress in business development efforts surrounding its established fleet of vehicles. The Canadian government has recently down selected the Cougar 4X4 and Cougar 6X6 as potential solutions for the Tactical Armored Patrol Vehicle program in support of enhancing its core fleet of military assets. The procurement is for up to 600 vehicles and related long-term support services, with a contract award to the final selected bidder expected in 2012 and resulting production beginning in 2013.
Outlook
Mr. Hutcherson continued, "The Buffalo and Cougar vehicle families continue to be highly-sought assets that we expect will remain in the core fleets of a number militaries worldwide for many years to come. In addition, the Ocelot and JAMMA are gaining substantial global attention due to their unique and valuable operating characteristics. As such, we continue to anticipate orders well into the future for vehicles not only from our current base of customers, but from others that value the unparalleled level of protection and sustainability offered by our products.
"Complementing our vehicle design, development and production efforts, our decision in 2009 to establish a formal Total Life Cycle Support organization to support the long-term operations of our customers has proven extremely beneficial. While our near-term spares and sustainment revenue is being impacted by previous years' buildup of inventory when initial vehicles were ordered, our modernization business has benefited and is expected to grow throughout 2010. We expect modernization, as well as spares and sustainment, will remain important components of our revenue in the future. This places us in a strong position for the remainder of the year and provides important visibility in 2011 and beyond."
The Company currently estimates that more than three-quarters of its internally targeted revenues for the second half of 2010 are either under contract or nearing completion of agreement to terms. For 2011, the Company expects the high level of operational tempo in Afghanistan to continue throughout the year. The Company anticipates its significant base of operations related to Buffalo and Cougar vehicles and modernization, spares and sustainment should support $400 million to $500 million of recurring revenues.
Mr. Moody concluded, "Our solid second quarter results and positive outlook are clear indicators that our strategic initiatives to maximize our product offerings and drive increased efficiencies are working. Our current business provides a significant platform of annual recurring revenue that extends well beyond the current military campaign in the Middle East, and we are taking important steps to build on this base by aggressively pursuing additional vehicle and related support programs that leverage our investment in innovative development surrounding existing and new products.
"Complementing these efforts, we are evaluating opportunities to broaden our portfolio of marketable survivability solutions through prudent acquisitions, investments and partnerships. This will provide an even further increase in the predictability and visibility of our business, with the underlying premise of driving increased long-term value for our shareholders."
Enhanced Investor Relations Website
In order to provide additional content and easier access to information of interest to investors, the Company has enhanced the "Investor Relations" section of its website --- www.forceprotection.net. Please visit the website to review the Company's SEC filings, governance, ownership data, detailed financials, fundamentals, interactive charting, event calendars, analyst coverage/estimates, downloadable presentations, and other important information. Investors can also sign-up for email alerts for related to the Company's SEC filings, news and calendar events, as well as RSS feeds.
Conference Call Information
The Company will hold a conference call today at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time to discuss these results. The call will include comments from Michael Moody, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Charles Mathis, Chief Financial Officer; and, Randy Hutcherson, Chief Operating Officer. A question and answer session will follow the management commentary portion of the call.
To listen to the call, dial (866) 804-6926 (for international, dial (857) 350-1672) five to ten minutes prior to the scheduled start time and provide pass code 82975186. A live Webcast will also be available at that time on the Company's website, www.forceprotection.net, under the "Investor Relations" section. Please visit the website at least 15 minutes prior to the call to register for the webcast and download any necessary software. A replay will be available two hours after the end of the call through midnight Tuesday, August 17, 2010. To access the replay, dial (888) 286-8010 (for international, dial (617) 801-6888) and enter pass code 81570978, or visit the "Investor Relations" section of the Company's Web site.
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. is a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions, including blast- and ballistic-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. The Company's specialty vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar and related variants, are designed specifically for reconnaissance and urban operations and to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs, commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Complementing these efforts, the Company is designing, developing and marketing new vehicle platforms (including the Ocelot & JAMMA) that provide increased modularity, speed, mobility and concealment with enhanced levels of blast- and ballistic-protection. The Company also develops, manufactures, tests, delivers and supports products and services aimed at further enhancing the survivability of users against additional threats. In addition, the Company provides long-term life cycle support services of its vehicles that involve development of technical data packages, supply of spares, field and depot maintenance activities, assignment of highly-skilled field service representatives, and advanced on and off-road driver and maintenance training programs. For more information on Force Protection and its products and services, visit www.forceprotection.net.
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward looking statements that are not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs and expectations. These statements are based on beliefs and assumptions of Force Protection's management, and on information currently available to management. These forward looking statements include, among other things: the growth, demand and interest for Force Protection's services and vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar, Ocelot and JAMMA; expectations for future modernization and service-related contracts; the ability to meet current and future requirements; the Company's execution of its business strategy and strategic transformation, including its development initiatives and opportunities to broaden its platform; and, the Company's expected financial and operating results, including its revenues, cash flow and gross margins, for future periods. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any of them publicly in light of new information or future events. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Examples of these factors include, but are not limited to, ability to effectively manage the risks in the Company's business; the ability to develop new technologies and products and the acceptance of these technologies and products; and, the other risk factors and cautionary statements listed in the Company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risks set forth in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 and as updated in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Contact:
Force Protection, Inc.Media Contact:Tommy PruittSenior Director, Communications843-574-3866tommy.pruitt@forceprotection.netorInvestor Relations Contact:Wes HarrisDirector, Investor
[email protected]
LADSON, S.C., Oct 20, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection Australasia, a Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) group company, today announced it had reached agreement with the South Australian Government to manufacture and support its Ocelot vehicle in Adelaide, if it is successful in securing the contract to manufacture up to 1,300 next-generation protected mobility vehicles under the 'Land 121 Phase 4' program.
Chief Executive Officer, Michael Moody, said that following discussions with the State Government and potential suppliers, South Australia offered the most suitable manufacturing base for the Ocelot.
"Since we first met with the Government and potential suppliers in 2009, it has become clear that South Australia can provide the essential ingredients we need to successfully manufacture and support the Ocelot," Mr Moody said. "This view was confirmed during my recent discussions with Premier Mike Rann.
"The South Australian Government has been very supportive and highly professional in its discussions with us. South Australia's reputation as Australia's 'Defence State' is well-founded. I certainly believe that with our Ocelot, the strength and capability of Force Protection and our collaboration with South Australia, we will have a compelling offering for the Commonwealth of Australia."
Force Protection has identified a site within the Edinburgh Parks precinct, in Adelaide's northern suburbs, as a suitable location for its proposed vehicle manufacturing base.
He said today's announcement strengthened Force Protection's commitment to operating in Australia, and looked forward to making further announcements about the company's plans.
This is a significant step forward in the potential development of the Ocelot in Australia.
It also follows an announcement last month that the UK's Ministry of Defence (MoD) had selected Force Protection Europe as preferred bidder to supply its Ocelot for the MoD's urgent operational requirement for the Light Protected Patrol Vehicle program (LPPV).
Mr. Moody concluded, "The Ocelot now has a first class endorsement from the United Kingdom and is ideally suited to the Australian requirement."
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. is a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions, including blast- and ballistic-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. Force Protection's specialty vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar and related variants, are designed specifically for reconnaissance and urban operations and to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices ("IEDs", commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Complementing these efforts, Force Protection is designing, developing and marketing new vehicle platforms (including the Ocelot and JAMMA) that provide increased modularity, speed, mobility and concealment with enhanced levels of blast- and ballistic-protection. Force Protection also develops, manufactures, tests, delivers and supports products and services aimed at further enhancing the survivability of users against additional threats. In addition, Force Protection provides long-term life cycle support services of its vehicles that involve development of technical data packages, supply of spares, field and depot maintenance activities, assignment of highly-skilled field service representatives, and advanced on and off-road driver and maintenance training programs. For more information on Force Protection and its products and services, visit www.forceprotection.net .
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward looking statements that are not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs and expectations. These statements are based on beliefs and assumptions of Force Protection's management, and on information currently available to management. These forward looking statements include, among other things: the growth, demand and interest for Force Protection's services and vehicles, including the Ocelot; expectations for future contracts for the Ocelot; the benefits and suitability of the Ocelot, including its survivability; the ability to meet current and future requirements, including expected work commencement and completion dates; and, the expectation that there could be significant demand for the Ocelot in the future. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any of them publicly in light of new information or future events. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Examples of these factors include, but are not limited to, ability to effectively manage the risks in the Company's business; the ability to develop new technologies and products and the acceptance of these technologies and products; and, the other risk factors and cautionary statements listed in the Company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risks set forth in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 and as updated in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
SOURCE: Force Protection
Force Protection, Inc.
Media Contact:
Tommy Pruitt, 843-574-3866
Senior Communications Director
[email protected] or
Investor Relations Contact:
Wes Harris, 843-574-3892
Investor Relations Director
[email protected]
FRPT Force Protection to Announce Third Quarter Fiscal 2010 Resul...
LADSON, S.C., Oct 21, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Force Protection, Inc. (FRPT) today announced that it will release financial results for its third quarter ended September 30, 2010, on Wednesday, November 3, 2010, after the market close. A conference call to discuss those results will be held at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time that same day and will include comments from Michael Moody, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Charles Mathis, Chief Financial Officer; and, Randy Hutcherson, Chief Operating Officer. A question and answer session will follow the management commentary portion of the call.
To listen to the call, dial 800.901.5213 (for international, dial 617.786.2962) five to ten minutes prior to the scheduled start time and provide passcode 49649751. A live Webcast will also be available at that time on the Company's website, www.forceprotection.net , under the "Investor Relations" section. Please visit the website at least 15 minutes prior to the call to register for the webcast and download any necessary software. A replay will be available two hours after the end of the call through midnight Wednesday, November 17, 2010. To access the replay, dial 888.286.8010 (for international, dial 617.801.6888) and enter passcode 29837135, or visit the "Investor Relations" section of the Company's website.
About Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc. is a leading designer, developer and manufacturer of survivability solutions, including blast- and ballistic-protected wheeled vehicles currently deployed by the U.S. military and its allies to support armed forces and security personnel in conflict zones. Force Protection's specialty vehicles, including the Buffalo, Cougar and related variants, are designed specifically for reconnaissance and urban operations and to protect their occupants from landmines, hostile fire, and improvised explosive devices ("IEDs", commonly referred to as roadside bombs). Complementing these efforts, Force Protection is designing, developing and marketing new vehicle platforms (including the Ocelot and JAMMA) that provide increased modularity, speed, and mobility. Force Protection also develops, manufactures, tests, delivers and supports products and services aimed at further enhancing the survivability of users against additional threats. In addition, Force Protection provides long-term life cycle support services of its vehicles that involve development of technical data packages, supply of spares, field and depot maintenance activities, assignment of highly-skilled field service representatives, and advanced on and off-road driver and maintenance training programs. For more information on Force Protection and its products and services, visit www.forceprotection.net .
SOURCE: Force Protection, Inc.
Force Protection, Inc.
Investor Relations Contact:
Wes Harris, 843-574-3892
Director, Investor Relations
[email protected] Media Contact:
Tommy Pruitt, 843-574-3866
Senior Director, Communications
[email protected]------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technicals
Last Price Quote is:
4.83%above 13-day MA
15.03%above 50-day MA
RS Rating: 88