Bourque Industries Inc (BORK)

[KZMike]

Sticky note #2 continues with a ‘reprise’, of posts which you should find useful in learning about Bourque Industries and getting familiar with some of the posted information on this blog. Again, it is highly recommended that you take extra time and review as many of the posts as is possible, so as to not duplicate postings. Many of the links in the I-Box above should prove informative also. A review of all four of the sticky notes below will also be beneficial and helpful. . . They are in no particular order.

Bourque Industries has three patents issued to Kryron, with more than a dozen more pending to fully secure the technology and its applications in the following applications:
« »Ballistic Armor« » • « »Electric Wiring & Components« » • « »Mining Equipment« » • « »Agriculture Heavy Equipment« » • « »Medical Technology« »

KZMike #7327

11/04/2011 "Tour Results" WHAT WE SAW

My 'goal'for requesting a tour was two fold, A] Find out what progress has been made at the new Drexel Site in the 30 +/- days since the Ribbon Cutting and to gather some information on several issues of concern for me and B]Respond to a request for a board member {PWron} for an opportunity to see the new mfg Site, as well as any other interested members/individuals.

The primary areas I wanted additional info regarding was 1] What if any QA systems are being employed in support BORK's mfg procols 2] Whats up with SRATS 3] GPGI precious metals extraction fact or fiction/Twifford's relationship to BORK.

PWron had some items he wished info regarding, so I will let him post his perceptions and info he felt was of importance for him.

Due to the info I had posted prior to the 'tour' and some lead time difficulties, PWron, his wife and I were the only 'participants'

Bourque has initiated security at the Drexel site which include NO Photos or Videos and the production area was ribboned off to preclude close examination of the equipment. . . something that both PWron and I believe is well founded and smart business.

The photos taken at the G.O./Ribbon Cutting give an accurate 'view' of the current foot print and the production area looks much the same. Some of the [G.O.] existing equipment [induction furnances] have been move to its 'permanent' position for production and several new pieces have been added including a hopper looking bin. . . the roller conveyors are in much the same configuration.

Automated production has not yet started due to a last minute upgrade to the induction furnace cooling systems has been deemed necessary. It was determined that the current systems, though designed [by third party firm] may not work properly during certain seasonal high ambient temperature situations. A switch to a new more efficient [liquid?] cooling system has been initiated to avert any high ambient temp situation that would shut down the induction furnaces. IMO a wise move prior to automated production.

Current 'custom' production has not been impacted. This production was out of view from our vantage point.

With only three 'on tour' I am quite pleased with the time and effort BORK and Andrew made available for us. In addition to Andrew, we were able to chat at length with Len Casebier [Chief Branding Officer, Jeff Saffer [General Counsel] and John Reddis [Production Engineer]. . . there was another gentleman one of the Sales team, but managed not get his full name. . . we called him Jack since he was busy doing everything but sales that day.

More on a following post. . . What I Heard/Learned

Regards

KZMike #7329

11/04/2011 "Tour Results" What I Heard/Learned

The primary Info I wanted to focus on during the tour was these three items.
1) What if any QA systems are being employed in support BORK's mfg procols 2) Whats up with SRATS 3) GPGI precious metals extraction fact or fiction/Twifford's relationship to BORK.

1)I am VERY gratified to learn that John Reddis [Production Engineer] has been in the process of learning to utilize and implement one of the ISO Quality Systems. He has picked one that is not always easily or quickly implemented, especially as a first System to implement. However, it is a good choice and will likely serve BORK well and will forgo a need to upgrade or switch down the road. John seems well situated with ISO and sound like he will be moving forward as quickly as events allow. He hopes to the system well in hand sometime in the first half of next year. . . a very ambitious time frame.

2) SRATS- As many of you may or many not have heard, in some sort of manner or fashion "SRATS has fallen in to the lap/hands of BORK".

At this point it is VERY difficult to characterize what the exact relationship is between SRATS and BORK due to the language Jeff Saffer [BORK's Lawyer] 'used' in describing this issue. To paraphrase his description as best I am able would be this 'The ongoing current discussion and negotiations have not been concluded nor has any agreement been reached in describing the relationship of the two companies'. My guess is that I used twice as many words as he . . . but it seems something will likely happen here.

Oshkosh is the company that SRATS has been working with for the vehicle described in the I-Box links. Interestingly enough, BAE is also mentioned in the 3rd SRATS link in the I-box

3 )There is no longer any business relationship with Mr Twifford and there is not any likelihood in the foreseeable future of reviving the precious metal extraction 'business'. At some point the Eloy Site will be sold, which indicates, that the aquifer below that site cannot/will not be utilized for precious metal extraction. {It was also mentioned that there were issues regarding the land and water usage. . .little details give other than ‘tribal issues’}

Recent comments made on the board were made from a prior post were misunderstood regarding precious metal extraction from mining operations and the post indicated that the GPGI process of pulling precious metals from water an may still happen. The prior comment was a statement made indicating the BORK or Kryron would be utilized in helping increase precious metal extraction. . . from current precious metal ores at current mine operations.

Kryron 'cathodes' will be able help recover a higher percentage/ratio of precious metals from ore deposits in comparison with equipment not utilizing Kryron.

What else did I learn?

a] The reason Basalt can be utilized to strengthen other materials at a lower cost is due to the fact that basalt fibers are 'rich' in carbon fiber and can be utilized in a much less expensively when processes can be made more effectively. . . i.e. increase volumes. Currently these fibers are being used in some sport equipment. . . . tennis rackets are and example. Processes need to be improved before large scale utilization will at BORK

b]Beyond Armor, the three primary 'sectors' BORK is likely to focus on will be Electrical, Mining and Agriculture. If one thinks about it, these three areas are often related and intertwined. The cathodes I mentioned previously. . . electrical/mining. Much equipment/tooling in agriculture has applications in mining and visa versa. . .

These three sectors will likely out pace armor sales/mfg in the not to distant future. Body Armor Sales in total are something in the neighborhood of $1 Billion

c] Manufacturing production - As currently configured with its current foot print the current equipment will support the production of 1,000 armor plates, running 3 shifts. . . once the new cooling system is installed [Aprox 3 weeks +/- new equipment lead time is about 2 weeks out]

John [Reddis] says that an additional 4 production lines can be added with the existing floor space . . . There is a portion of the building that is walled off from the production area and I believe this is where R&D will occur, though I did not ask that specifically.

d]OTC . . . paper work to bring BORK to current status is being processed and to look for additional progress with the OTC status mid-month. Initially BORK had been told that Current Status would happen with the previous paperwork package sent to OTC. . . It did not happen and there was no indication why they were told that info and not to have the expected result.

slicknhow
Re:5452
Investing in BORK, has it's risk, yes, like any investment in any stock. Due diligence, particularly of a PK {Pink} stock is the responsibility of the potential stock purchaser.

NOT ONE POSTER/{member} on this board is exempt from that basic standard.

So, IMHO, no one on this board has been mislead, or is misleading anyone about ANY aspect of the BORK product patents, KRYRON capability, orders, mfg. start up / capability, lead time etc.

That would be egregious.

Surely, as part of your DD you read all the past messages including the "sticky note" and intro message. That is after all the responsible thing to do so you may be welcomed as a valued, educated contributor to this board.

That being so, I'm surprised you're just now "informed" with information about JB, the inventor, as the holder of the patents and consider that "might pose a problem" for you !

Additionally:
If you or ANY poster (much less stockholder, as I'm sure you must be) has ANY misgivings about BORK, please express them based on the history of their {BORK’s} actions.

Question:
Your "time will tell" reference to a potential "siphoning of funds" in a "short time" is based on what BORK history, exactly?

Surely, you MUST have SOME factual basis for putting that particular bit of expansive hyperbole in writing, for a board of educated, knowledgeable investors to read and ponder your contribution and intentions.

It also makes me wonder if your financial investment in BORK is really the right place for you at this time, in light of your heightened concern, sir.

I can't wait to be enlightened re: what we all missed....or do you wish to retract your comments?


Edge1 #5471
RE #5470
And does anyone question the fact that the DD they espouse is regurgitated posts on this site. How is reading a message board REALLY DD. There are some who I think have done a great job of DD like JonETrader and KZMike and others who have gone offline for their information. But even those posters have to rely on some of these posts as there is very very little LEGIT info out there. Hence the risk we all take if we want the possible gain.

But some take these posts from anonymous people with no idea what their agenda at face value. They will allow posts that are full of spin on PRs to pass by without challenge, but if it has a hint of negative {opinion} or already asked and answered {information} then be ready {for quick/swift, and sometimes negative responses} for asked and answered than here.

Gotmilk#5028

For those that purchased BORK shares at prices higher than the current level, they need to ask themselves the level of certainty they are comfortable with that the following post by Bama2 will reflect a BORK valuation equal to or higher than the past high near six dollars.

"What I am getting at is that the NIJ approval is in the bag, no problems and whether it comes in two weeks or six weeks will not effect anything. The manufacturing facility will be up and running and products going out the door before year end. They are working on the Skull and Crossbones but cannot guess at the date it will be solved at this time."

As for thoughts of doom & gloom like "no news from anyone in the company" has a strong impact on this board, the important place where obtaining day-to-day updates is not on an avenue towards BORK shareholders at this very early time, but towards putting this company onto a path to generate a revenue stream, and that focus is to deliver current status to those that will purchase the alloys, as these people in the government(s) and private enterprise need reasons to believe the promise, this rather than investors of holding BORK of the share price value.

BORK currently points to a start-up company, not to the internal process of starting this company into manufacturing production to satisfy orders, as the process to generate orders is the communication between the company officers and clients, as that is what is now so important as to over-shadow and put aside as not important to take any time-slices of an already under allocated resource towards orders based on confidence of clients that the produce is real with sufficent manufacting ability to deliever.

Doug

Sojomy #5023
Re: #5003

I read this board and 2 other penny stock boards every day because I'm invested in them. I don't say much, but the b*tching and whining is getting to be almost unbearable.

No, you are not part owner of a company just because you buy stock in the company. The only right you have is to a percentage vote in what happens when they take a vote. Some of you might think that 25K shares is a lot because it was all of your savings, but you still only have 0.05% of the outstanding shares! As an individual stock holder, you are still are minuscule "part" compared to the "whole".

Everyone here seems to think they know what's best for the company, and what needs to happen now, and how long everything should take and what the CEO should or shouldn't do - but be honest, if you had all of these answers, wouldn't you be starting your own company instead of investing in someone else's?

I wish everyone would quit complaining that the penny stock that they've invested all of their money in isn't skyrocketing fast enough for them. I'm sorry if the very risky, start-up company that you put your money in isn't giving you information daily. If you want daily information on an investment, go invest in the S&P stocks. The people running the company are trying to make the business work, and it would be kind of hard to do that if you had to constantly answer to all of the board readers who feel like they should be coddled because they own 0.05% of the shares.

This message isn't directed at any individual poster, and I'm sorry to rant (vent), I just wish the amount of useless posts from people whining about their entitlements would greatly decrease so I'd have less to read (or skim/skip) every day. Sorry if I offended anyone.

Blacktie42
Re: #4310
Bork did not invent nanotubes. They purchase the nanotubes from companies who have the technology to synthesize them (at very high prices/gram) . Bork incorporates their prduct into the Kryon. (for armor it is 1 gram per 12 square feet.

Nanotube technology is going on in world class facilities and has been for many years.

JoeDaddy #2575
Re: dbanks3377 #2573
What is the confusion about TOS? {Total Outstanding Shares}

According FINRA Operations, both Bourque and the transfer agent, American Registar and Transfer Co (UT) independently filed that there are 29,744,490 total shares outstanding. You either believe what BORK reports, or you think the company is a fraud. However, there is no shell game with shares.... TOS is a matter of public record.

Also, if BORK wants to take some of that authorized capital and issue shares to raise funds, they must register them before they do it. This can only be done by public filings/ notice.

Get off your butts and verify @ PH: 240-386-6171 Contact Elik (FINRA Ops Mgr). Or if you don't trust the PH I provided, get the number off the official FINRA site www.OTCBB.com, and work your way through the Department maze to get to Elik, and then he'll verify the record.

Good luck to all Bork Longs!

Gotmilk #2545
Why Buy BORK?

Four reasons...
(1.) Ballistic Armor
In a time of war, our men and women require and deserve the best armor protection available. Kryron has broad uses in armor applications, outperforming the current industry standard in every aspect. It stops high-caliber rounds at closer ranges than the competition, is the only material to reliably stop multiple strikes, and it completely eliminates spall, shatter, and ricochet. All of this is accomplished with significant weight savings over competing materials.

(2.) Electric Wiring & Components
The need for updated energy infrastructure, including upgraded high-tension lines, is global. Kryronized wire is the revolutionary material these ultra-modern new systems require. It is lighter than traditional wire, has higher conductivity and exceptional heat dissipation for overall greater performance. Not to mention, the Kryronized wire and components are tougher and more durable than normal alloys and completely corrosion-proof, dramatically extending the infrastructure's useful life.

(3.) Mining Equipment
More and more, copper and zinc mines are employing solvent extraction and electrowinning processes to obtain the highest purity of metal. These processes use significant amounts of electricity to charge anodes and cathodes to obtain the metal from solution, and the high conductivity of Kryron provides greater yield with reduced energy consumption. Even better, the longer life of Kryronized anodes and hanger bars means less downtime and less replacement costs.

(4.) Agriculture Heavy Equipment
A major cost to America's food producers is the high cost and short life span of replacement parts for farm equipment. Kryron-infused alloys are an excellent material for heavy-use replacement parts used in agricultural operations. Kryron's excellent stre

JoeDaddy #2575
Re: dbanks3377 #2573
What is the confusion about TOS? {Total Outstanding Shares}

According FINRA Operations, both Bourque and the transfer agent, American Registar and Transfer Co (UT) independently filed that there are 29,744,490 total shares outstanding. You either believe what BORK reports, or you think the company is a fraud. However, there is no shell game with shares.... TOS is a matter of public record.

Also, if BORK wants to take some of that authorized capital and issue shares to raise funds, they must register them before they do it. This can only be done by public filings/ notice.

Get off your butts and verify @ PH: 240-386-6171 Contact Elik (FINRA Ops Mgr). Or if you don't trust the PH I provided, get the number off the official FINRA site www.OTCBB.com, and work your way through the Department maze to get to Elik, and then he'll verify the record.

Good luck to all Bork Longs!

Idcfo #3730
Re: post# 3717

"RockQQ" we have to be very specific here when we talk about number of shares. We need to differentiate between the number of outstanding shares, the number of restricted shares and the number of shares that the company can issue. I believe what you are referencing here is that there are a total of 180.0 Mil shares the company can issue. However, the company currently has 48.8Mil outstanding shares. The remaining 131.2 Mil shares can be used part of the outstanding/float shares for capital or other uses depending on how the board and possibly the stockholders decide.

RockQQ #3733
Re: post# 3730

There is only one meaning of 'outstanding' and another for 'authorized'. 'Float' is how many of the outstanding are freely available for trading....

They have 180 million ounstanding and 500 million authorized (available for future issuance). Some say float here is about 20-30 million

JohnETrader #3735
Re: post# 3733

Yes and to furhter clarify on this - the difference between the 180 million outstanding and the 30 million in float is the 150 million of restricted shares (not in float) that John Bourque owns as a result of the JBIT merger with GPGI. It's in a post somwhere, but here is the info again just for the newcomers:

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE NAME CHANGE, REVERSE SPLIT AND NEW SYMBOL CHANGE WILL BE FEBRUARY 7, 2011.

Pursuant to the vote taken by the shareholders of the Company at its Special Meeting of Shareholders held on October 29, 2010, and duly adjourned until November 3, 2010, by a majority vote the following proposals were all adopted and approved by a majority vote in each case as follows:

1. The name of the Company is BOURQUE INDUSTRIES, INC.

2. An Agreement was approved whereby the Company would acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of JBIT, Inc. in exchange for 150,000,000 restricted common shares of the Company.3. The Company’s shares issued and outstanding shares are reverse split on a one for five basis.

4. The Company’s authorized capital was increased to 500,000,000 common shares, $0.0001 par and a preferred stock was created consisting of 100,000,000 preferred shares, $0.0001 par.

The Company has been advised that for the next 20 business days, commencing February 7, 2011, pursuant to SEC rules, the Company’s common stock will continue to trade under the symbol “GPGI”, but with a capital “D” appearing at the end of the symbol. The new symbol thereafter will be “BORK”.

A new website for bourqueindusties.com is presently under construction and you will be directed there from the present website upon its completion.

If you have your present Company stock on deposit with a broker, an automatic adjustment will be made by them to your account and will reflect the number of shares owned after the reverse. Any fractional shares that exceed one-half share will equal one new share. It is not required, but any shareholder who desires to exchange their Global Platinum shares for a Bourque Industries, Inc. certificate may do so by remitting the old certificate(s) to the Company’s transfer agent at the following address:

American Registrar & Transfer Co.

P.O. Box 1798

Salt Lake City, UT 84110

In addition, give the transfer agency specific written instructions how you want the certificate(s) transferred. For each new certificate there is a fee of $25.00, which should accompany the surrendered certificate(s) and instructions.


Bomb cop #1942
Guys all I can say is that I was in Naples, FL at the demo of the armor and nothing penetrated the plates. I saw with my one 2 eyes a Collier SWAT member shoot the plate at least 4 times with 12 gauge slugs and it only caused a small bump on the opposite side and no penetration. Then another SWAT member shot 100 rounds into the armor with an MP5 (9mm submachine gun) and once again it wasn't penetrated. I'm in all the way. As a 25+ year law enforcement officer and a 19+ year bomb tech this stuff works. Although it's a little heavier than other materials used in armor, my 85# bomb suit may be 90# vs 85# I can literally live with that. (pardon the pun). I have heard they just developed another process that will make it lighter. It's going to be a great time I'm going to enjoy the ride.

JonEtrader #1919
I just called the US Patent office to end this discussion and to confirm my findings and yes they are all approved - there are 3 filings related to Kryron - Patent #'s are 7870886, 7870887 and 7767121. The differences in the patents and in the Claims section if you look these up on the US Patent website I gave earlier. They are all approved patents and the first 2 were approved 1/18/11. I also emailed the WIPO and will wait to hear from them and post the results. Thanks



bobw02053 #1814
No institution will [is allowed to] buy this stock since it:
1. Is a pink sheet stock
2. Doesn’t have financial statements filed with the SEC

It can not be listed on NASDAQ until:
1. It has filed financial statements with the SEC.
2. It has had pre tax earnings in a prior financial reporting period of at least $11 million and that prior reporting period was at least three months long
3. The stock share bid price is $4.00 or more
4. Must have 3or 4 market makers and an electronic communications network (ECN) is not considered a market maker the purpose of these rules.
5. Must have 450 round lot shareholders or 2,200 total shareholders or 550 total shareholders and 1.1 million average monthly trading volume
6. Must have 1,250,000 publicly held shares (excluding shares held by officers, directors & beneficial owners of 10% or more of total shares).
7. Must have $110 million of market value of publicly held shares
8. The Company must comply with all corporate governance requirements as set forth in the Rule 5600 Series of NASDAQ (see: insert-text-here a link to Rules
9. The company pays a listing fee (based upon number of shares to be listed; 50 to 100 million shares would have an entry fee of $200,000 and an annual fee

JonETrader #1833
Good Saturday Morning to everyone, just to clarify on bobw's post below, based on research I have found at the NASDAQ website there are actually 3 listing standards for NASDAQ and in bobw's post #2 - #8 below just addresses the Global Select Market. There is also a Global Market and Capital Market which each have their own standards and they differ from below. Most notably, the 11 million net income requirement. The others look to have lesser income requirements, but potentially more balance sheet equity is required. Read for yourselves athttps://listingcenter.nasdaqomx.com/assets/nasdaq_listing_req_fees.pdf

Also, what about the chance of NYSE? See below: or go to
http://www.nyse.com/regulation/nyse/1147474807344.html

Again, no one really knows financial statement figures at this time so who knows what the stockholders equity is, but i just wanted to post he additional information I found. Happy day everyone.

NYSE:
Domestic listing requirements call for minimum distribution of a company's shares within the United States as well as minimum financial criteria. Distribution of shares can be attained through U.S. public offerings, acquisitions made in the U.S., or by other similar means.

This chart is to be used for an initial evaluation only. For a more complete discussion of the minimum numerical standards applicable to U.S. companies, see Section 102.00 of the Listed Company Manual.

Distribution & Size Criteria
Must meet all 3 of the following:
Round-lot Holders (a) 400 U.S.
Public Shares (b) 1,100,000 outstanding
Market Value of Public Shares (b,c):
IPOs, Spin-offs, Carve-outs, Affiliates
All Other Listings
$40 million
$100 million

Stock Price Criteria
All issuers must have a $4 stock price at the time of listing

Financial Criteria
Must meet 1 of the following standards:

Alternative #1 - Earnings Test

Aggregate pre-tax income for the last 3 years (d) $10 million
Minimum in each of the 2 most recent years
Third year must be positive $2 million
OR
Aggregate pre-tax income for the last 3 years (d)
$12 million
Minimum in the most recent year $5 million
Minimum in the next most recent year $2 million

Alternative #2a - Valuation with Cash Flow
Global Market Capitalization (f) $500 million
Revenues (most recent 12-month period) $100 million
Adjusted Cash Flow:
Aggregate for the last 3 years
All 3 years must be positive $25 million

Alternative #2b - Pure Valuation with Revenues
Global Market Capitalization (f) $750 million
Revenues (most recent fiscal year) $75 million

Alternative #3 - Affiliated Company
For new entities with a parent or affiliated company listed on the NYSE
Global Market Capitalization (f) $500 million
Operating History 12 months
Parent or affiliate is a listed company in good standing
Company's parent or affiliated company retains control of the entity or is under common control with the entity

Alternative #4 - Assets and Equity
Global Market Capitalization (f) $150 million
Total Assets $75 million
Stockholders' Equity $50 million

Bobw02053 #1877
BORK float, outstanding & restricted shares & market cap.

Outstanding shares refers to the number of shares that a company actually has issued which for BORK is 180 million and consists of the following:
• The float, which for BORK is something less than 30 million. This number represents all the shares that can be bought and sold by the public PLUS
• The restricted shares, which for BORK is something more than 150 million This number consists of the 150 million shares issued to Bourque + some number previously issued by GPGI. The restricted shares require special permission before being transacted.
• The market cap is the outstanding shares (180 million) times the share price

JoeDaddy #1859
I hope no one minds me chimming in on all this back and forth discussion aimed at determining BORKS currentMarket Cap. I also, hope no one minds that according to my math, this rocket still has alot of gas left....

Here is my determination ...

Purchase of JBIT for 150,000,000 of restricted stock. Restricted by definition is unregistered, and can not be bought or sold. It is therefore currently a non-factor in the oustanding float of shares. Let's all support the principles of JBIT, and hope they all get rich for their had work over the next 25 years. Let's all keep watch of the poress releases and filings to determine when the restricted shares get the green light for monitization.

There has been a 500,000,000 common share and 100,000,000 prefered share increase in authorized capital... maximum. There is no evidence of fillings to, or approval by, FINRA to actually increae the number of common or prefered shares outstanding since the Feb 7 notice to shareholders. I do not see any evidence that any of the approved capital increase (common or preferred) has been put into play.... This increase in capital is a good thing, and can become a source of future funding of operations.

What we are left with, and all that we can quantify, are the audited 148,052,449 GPGI shares, which are now 30 mil BORK shares, due to 5:1 RS.

Current Market Cap = 170 Million.... not so bad given 2 billion + in Revenue potential within the next 5 years.

Any discussion beyond what is known to the public is pure speculation.

KZMike #1399 {Note. Post #1404 sums my visit quite well and much more succinctly}

As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, I had not been able to get a response from BORK's web site through their contact page, and mentioned that I might just drive down there and chat with them. . . . Well I did that yesterday. . .

These guys are definitely not a pump and dump deal! Their address is as advertised, though there is little evidence from the outside of their office to indicate they are much of a presence in the Commercial/Industrial location. Their physical profile is so low, that other companies/individuals in the same complex are not aware of BORK's presence.

The Sheriff's Department has an office close by, in the same complex, and they were are not aware of their location either.

As has been the case, and continues, information is not easily come by, and as been asserted here in at least one post, they may be under some sort of 'gag order'. However my thought is that it is a self imposed gag order from management, as I 'assert'/rationalize below. I spoke with Kathy and Meta, and they are very tight lipped, even with the most general of questions.

If this were a pump and dump operation there would be a 'slicker' look and feel at their office. It is not 'slick' by any stretch.

My point of view is that I am not going to attempt to read or extrapolate to much from what I did see/hear or from what I did not see/hear during my 30+ minute visit.

I've read too much of that on this blog as it is and do not wish to add to multitude erroneousness conclusions I am seeing.

It is obvious that 'cash flows' are difficult, dollars are tight and dollars are not being spent on anything other than getting the product to market, catching up on 'paper work' and likely getting their 'stuff together' so that they can get start generating revenue.

Their office is just that, an office, a very plain and utilitarian looking office at that . . . no production capability on site.

Regarding the NIJ certification issue being bantered about. . . BORK has completed the 'physical' portion of this testing, thus statements indication compliance to NIJ spec, but the actual certification process has not been completed . Whether this portion has been completed within or by a qualified/certified contractor, or done independently ‘in house’ or other 3rd party I do not know.

The effort with the NIJ certification process indicates that at least one of BORK's initial/primary goal/effort is to produce products that local law enforcement agencies would purchase. Arizona [State, City, County] rely on/require NIJ certified products as a part of their procurement process. I won't speculate as to what specific products Bourque plans to target for these agencies. . .

Another point regarding the NIJ certification issue, and I think I saw some comments some where here that reflect this. Part of the NIJ certification process [may/does ?] require certain information be divulged and the assertion is that there are 'members'of BORK's competition which are part of the certification process. As a result, the implication is that BORK is not moving forward in this aspect for the time being.

This is a bit puzzling to me, but since I am not at all familiar with the NIJ Certification/Qualification process, I'm not able to make a clear judgement. I do know that in my experience with other qualification/certification processes, at some point there is a need/requirement that the 'recipe' or a certain portion of the 'recipe' needs to be provided as part of the process.

Based on what I know from my own manufacturing background and 'the feel' I encountered during my visit I will make an educated guess or a supposition if you will indulge. . . it is no more than that.

Below is my opinion, my educated guess and is only that. . . I am not holding any of this out as fact. . . none of the following is from any direct information spoken or written during my short visit.

Bourque will need partner up with a company or companies with capability and capacity to produce their initial product line[s]. This route at, this stage of their development, is the least costly, requires the least time to ramp up and should provide cash flow in the shorted amount of time

This route is, however, more complicated and requires that a certain level of 'secrecy' in order to get 'the set up right' before moving forward. There are two potential fatal flaws, that could, if not done correctly, prove costly. The advantage of TIME in this can turn 180° and become a significant/defeating problem if the partners are not up to the tasks required, which could require a retreat to 'square one'. . . Boeing is currently facing this issue as a result of their decision to out source most of the production for the 787. The other potential 'flaw is the 'secrecy' factor which needs little explanation.

I asked several questions regarding their 'off site' manufacturing or other site locations and was told that was information that they were not able to divulge. They would not even indicate whether it was in Arizona or some other state. The way the response was phrased, I would guess they have other locations where they are 'working'. . . whether they are BORK locations or "partner" is anyones guess.

One last impression/opinion here. . . Bourque's employees are really 'on board' with everything happening at the company. I am sure there is a 'game face' here, but there is something more that one can 'hear/see/feel' when face to face. There is a huge 'expression' of confidence of the "brilliance" and capability with the team and the expectation is that BORK will 'git 'er done'. . . these are a few the intangibles that one will have to rely on by choice. . . one can choose not, and that is fine as far as I am concerned.

Regards. . .

John11 # 2616

Gentlemen, I am starting to get back into the swing again, let me say that you gentlemen are doing an outstanding job with your info, it is great to see and hear the comments that are being made about bork. Trust me on this bork will not be a small company in 3 or 4 years. It will grow but how fast I do not think anyone knows for sure, but mark my word it is going to happen soon. All the financial paperwork is being address now and should be completed soon as well as the OTC problem. Remember, OTC problem arose over the merger with GPGI, and with no filings and $4700 dollars nothing has been done and that is probably why you see the OTC rating as it is, but that will be cleared up shortly. All of bork restricted stock will be available on the 23rd of Feb 2012 when the restriction comes off. You asked me about the government, I did talk to john and right now it is a work in progress but you must remember working with the government is not an overnight process and there is always red tape involved with any government issue. I do hope and know things are going to happen sooner rather than latter. Think Positive my friends because this is surely a once in a lifetime opportunity for all of us. Just think a year or two down the road and what could be am amazing ride for you and me and BORK. Thanks for all your concern and have a great day and
P.S. John B does ready this board and we have discussed it.

Dbanks3377 #2618
Re: post #2616
Ridicule me if you will but how can BORK not find $4700 for OTC filings to remove caveat emptor status, but it can start a foundation and give a disadvantaged youth a drum set? Noble gesture Mr.Borque but hard to routinely swallow this no time or resources to clear up paperwork, filings, etc. and then see this press release today. Again, nice gesture but seems like there are bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Flatcat #2621
$4700 is pocket change. I respect your right to express whatever you want. I have learned that the process of upgrading the tier is a lot more complex than writing a check. I suggest you go to Pinksheets.com and see if you can understand the tiers and the process. If you can understand and can reconcile those with how BORK is classified please explain it to the rest of us.

The bottom line, as I see it, is that Pinksheets is extorting BORK for $4700!

Here I thought John Bourque was a dork nerd that only spoke Kryroneze. I find it refreshing that he is not only business savvy, very smart technically, but also has a human side.

I don't expect John Bourque to solve all the business problems overnight. I invest because I think the stock will go up with time. If you really think Bourque has his priorities all messed up and doesn't know what he is doing then you can short the stock and call it a day if you really believe this is not real.

KZMike #2624
Re: post 2589

The rating was there when I first started my DD on BORK about 2 months ago. I must agree with Flatcat's recent posts on this issue.

For my money, it is something that is not worth the time or effort to change at this point. IMO, increasing production capacity, procuring financing as needed, and generating cash flow, taken separately or combined, are much more important for the long term than the inappropriate rating that the OTC folks have applied.

Once those priorities 'come together', I feel that BORK will migrate/grow from the Pink Sheet 'arena' to the next level.

In the first sticky post is an explanation of such a change. JonETrader outlines three subsequent possible levels

I do believe BORK is moving forward on those issues, we've just not seen the actual results yet. We have seen some of the 'fruits' of that effort however over the past six weeks in the up trend of BORK share price.

That upward trend includes the expectations of not only those 3 priorities, but also expectations of a positive NIJ Cert, sales to local law enforcement departments and some positive news from either the DOD or Army.

Not to worry to much about to days stock price. . . the trend is still 'sideways', lacking news one way or the other

Regards,

KZMike

Sircooer #2627 & 2628

The point is that John is more interested in getting his work done than worrying about a rating by OTC. It is kind of like the BBB giving a company a bad rating because of a complaint, but people that have done business with the company know their true reputation and value and ingore the Nay Sayers.

I have seen two companies on the pink sheets that is in the $15.00 price range, another in the $26.00 range and they have been recommended by a highly rated investment company. The volume of trades is very low on these two companies but their price is rising. I would think that BORK would want to be off of the OTC and on one of the major exchanges to eventually draw institutional investment companies.

Wouldn't it be nice if some of us who own thousands of shares in BORK would be getting nice dividends from the company in a couple of years, a dream come true.....

Regards,
SirCooper

As I just previously posted, the caveat emptor status is not warranted and is more prejudicial on the part of OTC in my opinion-pay us a fee and see the status change, in other words, jump through our hoops and you will get an improved rating. The reasons cited for the above rating are not actions in which Bourque Industries as engaged itself. All it does is keep people who don't know what they are doing from investing in Bourque Industries and leaving more shares for the rest of us to lap up.

My opinion,
SirCooper

Bowser619 #5027
Re:5026

Hey Slick I was at the demo...the "thinline" 4x8 insert/strike plate is only 1 lb 3oz. It is very light and obviously thin...hence the name. KZ posted the pics of each of the plates that I took front/back which shows the current weight for each of the 4 plates that was there.

I am unsure about the "boat armor" specs...due to the fact that JB stated that it was the first day that they tested it. FYI though, the boat armor custom plate they shot...was struck with approx 20-23 .308 rounds and .223 rounds and nothing penetrated. You can see the defamation from one of the pics posted.

Hope that helps out a little

Regards,

Bowser

Smartarmor #5033
Re: 5026
An inexpensive (under $200) Industry standard Level IV weighs 8 lbs for a 10x12 and can be much lighter (4.9lbs) if you up the dollars and shoot it in conjunction the the kevlar vest.

"30% lighter than..." sounds like marketing jargon to me. I thought somewhere i heard the fatboy was in conjunction only..don't quote me, maybe from a video.

Level III stand alone is 3.6 for a 10x12 that picks up M80 and AK rounds.

As for the Thin line, those are Trauma Plates that are In-conjunction with a vest. A good level IIIA vest will stop a ton of shost but if you were wearing it and shot 66 times your chest would be more purple than Barney and you wouldn't have the cheery disposition either. The thin line is designed to take a lot of the sting out and keep your vital zone (heart) from being bruised.

Bork would do well to consult with a professional on how to properly test and demo the plates capabilities. The main obstacle is finding someone who isn't already your competitor or wanting a kings ransom for knowledge very few people have.