Bourque Industries Inc (BORK)

[gotmilk]

I also "want Bourque Industries to be successful" as I hold a million shares of average under 2 cents.

But with a billion shares issued, and how many Bourque Industries treasury currently holds, especially in regards to "those 395 million BORKs [assigned to John Bourque that] were [returned] to Bourque Industries Treasury," is a question "we all" need to know so that one holding "not too many shares having an 2011 acquired average far in excess of the current one penny range" can adjust their investing strategy to perhaps average down.

This as we all hold as a "truth" that John Bourque will always instruct his puppets on the Board of Directors to "make it so" that John Bourque holds a voting majority.

That plus the unknown obligations made since John Bourque's return that allowed such status as described in the recent financial. Bourque Industries must relieve such with cash or royalties or issuance of shares from the Treasury or newly issued, which of course has a negative bearing on those presently holding shares.

But it has been the attitude of those that hold shares priced in 2011 that a successful Bourque Industries will place BORK's pps to those once high levels of 2011 where $5.85 once stood. But more likely as many averaged down in 2011 - 2012 or later they obtained an average between $1 and $4 hoping to see.

As for "as a stock holder you have a right to make recommendations" to all of those industries and users for which the Bourque Industries official web site sets forth as suitable for Kryron. Yes, but based on the last financial Bourque Industries has already set in motion external contacts that have resulted in possible application under consideration based on results of testing so described in the recent financial. So here one can fully accept that Bourque Industries is very much "on top" of activity that has the potential to result in sales far exceeding a few dozen ballistic plates being sold.

Based on this it makes no sense for me to question or "beat the bush" for my insistent complaints that company communication is lacking on an ongoing frequent time frame as its known that John Bourque has set in stone that he will not allow any hype up suggestions that will lead one to extrapolate an end result not yet determined. This as what was done in 2011 and perhaps Bourque Industries has been told quite well "between the lines" by regulators agencies that it will not be tolerated.

Now one can ask me: "What the fudge are you asking Bourque Industries to tell the shareholders when you know that information is "controlled by SEC rules."

I can simply reply that there are areas where Bourque Industries can communicate with the shareholders and not "hype up" or violate SEC rules.

To this I suggest to those that think a near total blackout from Bourque Industries is justified to rethink and itemize areas where Bourque Industries can communicate with the shareholders and reveal some signification activity Bourque Industries has taken in the past, some of which is still active, that will help shareholders determine better how they feel about this company.

As for any "hints from some on this board that John Bourque doesn't want the company to be successful is about the most absurd charge I have ever heard as he stands to make perhaps billions from this product." if directly towards me is only based on an echo of the 2011 environment where the truth of stated facts were false and not corrected by any official communication from Bourque Industries.

"What we need is some kind of networking not knee jerking from people on this site."

noguts has my e-mail address, which he can give you, and if so "some kind of networking" may be approached even thought having a John Bourque or Bourque Industries Chief Security Officer Juan Mendoza "networking" on the company web site would surely be preferred if the content was instructive to shareholders and not of the nature to hype or violate SEC rules.

Doug