3SOF

This little pup has run a nice 778.22% since 01/16/06
A good looking bullish uptrend....
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 ?

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 

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 

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.   
All history on a stock pick in 1 thread is awesome.   

Thank You....and good luck with all your trades....make some $$$   


I will leave you the chart while I am in this thread......Awesome....
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.

the saga continues

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..