.1475 closing price

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BORK+Interactive#symbol=bork;range=1d;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;

What's up... besides the pps?

Dt: Good point... But I thought BORK had reached this point. A partial copy of JB's statement "and after final certification we will be able to fully engage these opportunities.”

Well, wasn't "final certification" achieved in February when they got NIJ certification? Link: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120214005775/en/Bourque-Industries-Level-III-Body-Armor-NIJ

I thought with full NIJ certification that completed the ITAR requirement. Is there yet another certification to go through that I am missing?

Yes. It's posted in the I-Box:

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120126005469/en/Bourque-Industries-Issued-ITAR-Registrant-Code

I found the last paragraph interesting:

"If Kryron passes the NIJ tests, BAE Systems might change their tune, or another manufacturer could buy or license the technology. If not, it will be difficult at best for Borque to succeed, even with a superior product. It’s difficult and expensive to bring new tech to the law enforcement marketplace, no matter how good your wares might be. I, for one, wish him the best of luck."

JB... bring in partners. Problem solved!

No way! It's STILL DOWN since June 2nd? My God! I thought it was experiencing another outtage -- not a constant one!

And this is the big PR announcement from May heralding the beginning, at least we thought, of sales announcements. Ha! What a joke!

I still believe in the promise of Kryron, but not the management of BORK. They had better get some partners to get this product to market. Otherwise this company is soon kaput.

1938: "No way I would add more here."

I agree. Without news of a major, verifiable sale or a PR that a partner or patners have been added to produce and/or sell the Kryron armor or other similar news, one would be crazy to add at this point.

Yesterday, I tried to access FORTIS US website to check on progress there. The website is down.

Not good.

shad: I agree. JB has valuable IP. Now, let's get it to market by teaming up with well established, deep pocketed partners that can do or assist with the fabrication, production and sales networking that BORK needs to realize max reveunue in the shortest time possible.

Sure. BORK will lose some profit margin, but a smaller percentages of, let's say, $10,000,000 to begin with, is better than 100% of these minimal sales so far booked.

Note: It's "patent", not "patient". Of course, you may be referring to we the "stock holders" of BORK. Right now, we fall under this definition:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/patient

chade: Thanks for the Dick Bove piece.

I agree with him, so therefore, I bought AH last night, but before Moody's downgrade hit the wires. I got my shares at a good price. Ready for today's action...

ob22: I asked him the same thing in a more wide-ranging post about a hour ago. He deferred an answer. Possibly imbibing already?

annual shareholders meeting

watts! I'm under tremendous time constraints due to a project I have been working on for the past several weeks. Therefore, I don't have the time to read all the posts -- yours and others -- about the latest developments unfolding now.

Could you summarize the most salient points for me? I would appreciate it.

I did read one of your posts that you said (I'm paraphrasing now) the major move never materialized, so expect a deceleration in pps in coming days. Is that what you expect or am I taking your statement(s) out-of-context?

TIA for any summary info you can provide.

pacco: Thanks for the civil reply to my inquiry.

OK. Now you've made it clear that the court doesn't have that info on-line due to how far in the future it is.

Unfortunately, my present work scedule makes it impossible for me to call the AZ court. When my present project is finished, I will call.

And, if JB's lawyers can't get the breathalyzer test thrown out, I'm fine with a one-year minimum or more jail sentence. If one flouts the law and puts others at risk, one needs to pay the consequences of those actions.

Dt: The best outcome of JB's DUI charges would be that they were dismissed. However, since so much time has passed without AZ court proof that this has happened OR (2nd-tier evidence) a PR from BORK stating that fact, I naturally have my doubts too.

pacco posted some dates for a "continuance", but didn't post a link to back those dates up. That's not good enough. If I post something as important as that, I always post a link so others can easily verify the infomation.

pacco: The board would appreciate the link or a repudiation of your original claim.

Bottom line: The best thing for BORK as a company would be to have the DUI charges against JB dropped. However, it doesn't represent the end-of-the-world for BORK, the company. After all, it's the IP of Kryron that is most important. That would still be intact, and survive any punitive measures brought to bear against JB.

That is why I still hold my shares. BORK is making progress with securing sales outlets and bolstering manufacturing capabilities. These things take time to establish. I'm hoping that the 2nd half of the year BORK will get going on sales. We need sales to get the pps moving forward.

pacco: still waiting. Any links to verifiable AZ court websites showing JB's supposed continuance? TIA

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76596280

pacco: You wrote JB808... "Please refer me to PUBLISHED information..."

I'm still waiting for that PUBLISHED info from you. Thanks.

jb: That makes sense. Last weekend, I think, I even posted that that may be why the then 6/11 hearing was scheduled.

But that hearing dropped from the docket.

I'm trying trying to find some court website that will say "yes, the charges have been dropped" or "the case has been rescheduled to XXXX date". Something that anybody can independently access for verification.

Do you have know of such a link?

pacco: I wasn't inferring anything. My work schedule for the next week or two, at least, prevents me from calling anyone during business hours.

Is the information available on-line or not?

In important matters such as this, I post a link (if available) so others can independently verify.

According to this post from pacco, JB's hearing has been rescheduled to 10/29/12:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76380519

pacco or anyone:

Provide a link to the AZ website so others can independently verify this. I just tried, but the only thing about court docket schedules I could find only go out 7 days. TIA

Would BORK's Kryron plates, after curve modification, be designated XSAPI for military purposes as this link suggests?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Arms_Protective_Insert#XSAPI

If so, Kryron would have a leg up on the present forms of protection.

Don't I deserve some of the credit for asking about JB's DUI proceedings?

Posted 6/7/12 on Yahoo prior to 6AM:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_B/threadview?m=tm&bn=53473&tid=7062&mid=7065&tof=2&rt=2&frt=2&off=1

Posted 6/6/12 on IHub:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76351118

Posted 6/2/12 on IHub:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76202630

And a couple others that I've submitted in addition to these wanting to get to the bottom of JB's legal question concerning his DUI charge.

Why did I keep pressing for ACTUAL VERIFICATION FROM THE COURT? So we, as shareholders, knew what we faced. Either JB being exonerated of all charges (the best circumstance) OR him having to do some jail time (quite substantial in the worst case scenario) AND BORK having to appoint a new CEO/CEO to run the company.

So, forward to this afternoon when pacco posts this:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76380519

Many of you take this post as gospel. Even though pacco didn't post a link to verify his claim. Bad move in my estimation. In sensitive/crucial matters like this, I always post a link to the information source so others can verify. Not saying pacco is wrong. Just not verified properly.

As some of you know, I am busy during normal hours for the next week or two, so early morning or evening hours are the best I can do as far as communications go.

Bottom line: Kryron is for real, NIJ certification in hand, patents in hand, testing completed, manufacturing capabilities established (may have to bump these up in the near future), and the beginning of a sales network being set up. All-in-all, imo, a rather remarkable track record given the head winds BORK has faced.

JB's 6/11 DUI hearing:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_B/threadview?m=tm&bn=53473&tid=7062&mid=7062&tof=1&frt=2

Anybody know the answer?

Exactly my point. The Navy wants LM technology for their rail gun ramped up. LQMT, the company, got with Visser to do just that.

That's why two companies (LQMT/Visser) deepened their relationship/committment toward each other.

A win/win situation.

Looks the same to me. Could this be what the CC tomorrow is about or will Steipp just give more details of the Visser financing deal?

Perhaps the two are connected?

Good points, Alvie. I am aware of those things, and concur that this year's Q4 report should be more in-line with filing standards.

That said, I don't think it will be within the 45-day requirement. I would like nothing more than to be proven wrong on this.

We shall see.

Last's year annual report (i.e. FYE 5/31/11 or Q4) was initially filed October 18, 2011, then restated/refiled December 18, 2011 per your link.

Why do you think this year's Q4 will be filed "very soon", slick?

clicked on the link I supplied in my first post to see if the info was there. Unfortunately, one has to enter the specific, I guess, to see it. So, I copied the actual hearing info for JB. It should be below:

Arizona Superior Court in Pima County ?- ?Online Court Calendar?To verify hearing dates?, ?times?, ?locations and for more complete case information?, ?please call ?
Case Management Services at ?(?520?) ?740?-?4240 ?(?8?:?00 ?am to ?5?:?00 ?pm?, ?Monday?-?Friday?).? ?Saturday, June 02, 2012

Report Generated ?Online Court Calendar?Monday, June 4, 2012

Date?:?Minutes

5

Matter?:?Event?:? 9:00 am

Case?:?CR20093764

672

Room?:?Time?:?Judge?:?MILLER, MICHAEL

Status Conference

Hearing

BOURQUE, JOHN MICHAEL

Defendant:

Minutes

5

Matter?:?Event?:? 9:00 am

Case?:?CR20093764

672

Room?:?Time?:?Judge?:?MILLER, MICHAEL

Continue Trial

Motion

BOURQUE, JOHN MICHAEL

Defendant:

Monday, June 11, 2012

Date?:?Minutes

30

Matter?:?Event?:?11:00 am

Case?:?CR20093764

672

Room?:?Time?:?Judge?:?MILLER, MICHAEL

Status Conference

Hearing

BOURQUE, JOHN MICHAEL

A thought: If indeed the charges are to be formally dismissed, the Hearing has to take place. Therefore the 6/11 Hearing is still on the docket.

6/11 Hearing still scheduled per Pima County Superior Court's website:

http://www.sc.pima.gov/Default.aspx?tabid=286

Thanks slick for that background info tying ATLLivn to a web services company that does some web site work for BI. That's something at least.

People are pretty testy here judging from some of the cold comments to my posts. As you know from the Yahoo board, I like posts to be "sourced" to the company, a news article, SEC document, etc. unless it's just general chatter.

As this Yahoo MB post by me demonstrated:

"Company spokesman Andrew Myers said the company is prepared should Bourque be unable to fulfill his duties.

"Bourque Industries, like any company, has plans in place to operate effectively in the absence of any executive," Myers said."

and... "Bourque Industries, which received a key certification of its patented Kryron aluminum-alloy body-armor plates last year, is ramping up production at its new manufacturing facility at 5333 E. Drexel Road, Myers said.

Its body-armor plate was certified in February by the National Institute of Justice - a key step to qualify for government contracts. The plate has demonstrated superior stopping power against high-powered gunfire with less ricochet and fragmentation than current top-level armor made of ceramics."

finally... "Myers said the company is busy building inventory and developing a network of retail distributors but will also go after contract orders."

http://azstarnet.com/business/local/bour...

Or this example:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_B/threadview?m=tm&bn=53473&tid=6975&mid=6975&tof=3&frt=1

In this latest example, I actually wrote Andrew Myers, VP Chief Operating Officer of BI, asking for clarification of the FORTIS distributorship recently announced.

This establishes credibility beyond a shadow of a doubt. Many of the posts here, and, to be fair I haven't read that many due to my just becoming a member today, haven't got the source info that I require of posts to establish authencity. Without such source info, instead of credibility (good thing), it produces nothing more than credulity (bad thing).

One last thing. I am awaiting a reply to an inquiry I made today about the "charges have been dismissed" rumor from Andrew Myers. When I receive his reply, I will post it on this board.

Good to hear from you, slick.

I have read that "all charges have been dropped" 3 times. 2 times were posted last night, and now you have the same message.

How do you know? Where is a link to a reliable source -- court record or newspaper story, etc?

That would be great news for sure. But I don't believe it presently.