3SOF

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: 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: 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" 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 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 

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. 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.