Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
You got it chief. Game over. The deal has been struck. Marines want hundreds of Cheetahs now... and this new armor AND the hybrid engines will make it a serious contender for the platform for the JLTV.
Oh, and read who holds the patent to the Cheetah.. no copycats from BAE or NAVZ this time!
USPTO Patent Application #: 20070234896
Patent Title: Mine resistant armored vehicle
Patent Abstract: A blast-resistant armored land vehicle that may include a monocoque body comprised of sheet material with the bottom portion of the vehicle being substantially V-shaped. The apex of the V is substantially parallel with the centerline of the vehicle with the tip of the V having a radius of approximately 1-4 inches. The angle of the V may be approximately 115°-130°. The vehicle has a ground clearance of greater than 30 inches. The vehicle further includes an engine detachably affixed within the body, a transmission connected to the engine, a transfer case connected to the transmission having a front output shaft and a rear output shaft. The transfer case may be located at the approximate the fore and aft center of the vehicle and may be enclosed within a blast resistant that includes sheet material above the transfer case. The drive train may be connected to the engine and may be detachably affixed to the body.
Patent Agent: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP - Washington, DC, US
Patent Inventor: Vernon P. Joynt
USPTO Patent Applicaton #: 20070234896 - Patent Class: 089036090 (USPTO)
Related Patent Categories: Ordnance, Shields, Transportable, Wheeled
Here's your good news, remember Dupont??
With new ceramic armor made by Dupont...thousands of Cheetahs to be built.
Sorry shorties.
Look at the pic on page 22...
http://www.defense-house.com/December200...
And page 31:
"In a preferred embodiment the inner layer of
armor, comprised of a layer of high strength
fiber (here embodied as woven fiber layer
90), further includes ceramic armor plates
(not shown) affixed to or placed within
pockets in the fiber armor layer."
Cheetah being modified for the Marines as we speak.. watch for orders shortly.
Buyout may not happen.. something better.. read the news!
The worm has turned.. MaxxPro deaths, Kevlar agreements... keep your eye on the ball.
And one other thing.... watch for lawsuits FROM FRPT.. look who was recently added to the BoD.
That is all for tonight.
This new order is for 28% of the market cap.. what a joke the PPS is. ILS revenue + assets = over $6 in PPS.
Ok, let's clarify a few things daytraders and noobs.
That video was aired by Fox back in the late summertime I believe..it's not new.
Huh? I already said Gordo was forced out, he didn't resign. Now, as for Moody, read HIS golden parachute... I give it 3 months before a buyout.
FRPT will sell all production facilities, but may keep R&D.. not sure yet though.
If you want to see evidence of a buyout, go find Moody's "golden parachute" package... and ask yourself, why did he put that in???
Buyout would be better.. and it's in progress by the way. Don't ask for details because I won't give any.
McGilton didn't resign, HE WAS FIRED.
EARNINGS ARE MARCH 15, PERIOD. 10-K release.
End of story.
And they do a CC as well.
They aren't using FRPT's technology to build the RG-33... so they say.
They'll stop building ILAV's.
No! How many times do we need to explain this? FRPT only receives royalties from ILAVs, that's it!
Yeah, he rubbed people the wrong way. He was great if he was COO, but he stunk as CEO. No people skills, no street smarts.. he managed from the heart, not the head.
I wouldn't mind if he was kept on to run Production, but we need a CEO with street smarts.
All of that said, don't be surprised if FRPT is bought out at around $12 within 2 months.
On Yahoo.. oh yeah, now we start to move. Love it. Hope you all loaded up the truck.
That's more a matter of opinion, but I think we are worth more than $5.
That is NOT true at all. No fees are being paid to FRPT.
The meeting is on the 10th, and again, pray Conway still loves the Cheetah.
Obviously, contrary to the Street.com articles, the Cheetah is still in consideration for MRAP II, since FRPT is making modifications. So, it's not over yet.
I am a fundamental expert on FRPT, and have made a nice chunk of change so far.
Here is my history... bought in the $3's back in '06, sold some at $30, $24, $13.
Now rebought in the $5's.
As for your question about the Cheetah.. well, that really is the big gamble. I think FRPT knew that the MRAP program wasn't a sustainable program.. it has limits on the amount of vehicles the DoD wants. So FRPT designed the Cheetah to sell to anyone - DoD, Homeland security, overseas. And at the time of Roxboro, my guess is they had some verbal agreements with someone (Marines, Brits, etc.) to buy a bunch of Cheetash.
However, they didn't bank on getting shafted by the politicians and the DoD on the last MRAP order. So... now the Cheetah is a gamble, hence, why they are waiting to build any until late '08 until they have orders. I think they got screwed again on the Cheetah, and now are waiting for firm commitments before building.
The big hope is that Cheetah passes MRAP II. I would pray for that if you are long.
Anything you want to know about FRPT ask me. I'm not a T/A guy so don't ask me about charts.
Personally, this stock is dead money until at least the 10-K in March in my opinion, unless the Cheetah gets MRAP II orders. But, like the man says "Buy when they cry, sell when they yell."
Just a clarification on the AP article... the report that GD and FRPT teamed for JLTV is incorrect and will be corrected shortly in their update.
FRPT and GD are teamed for MRAP Cougars only... not Buffalos, not Cheetahs. But they are not teaming for JLTV. GD is teamed with AMG.
I agree with you on BAE. Those bastards outright stole the tech. from FRPT... FRPT was too trusting then.
As for NAVZ, I think their relationship will be short lived with the DoD with Lott gone now... they won't win MRAP II contracts, only MRAP I, and that's IF they can produce 500 per month.
FRPT's best chance is TXT/BA... they have no vehicle whatsoever.
There is a semi-colon between OSK and FRPT.. they never were teamed, nor will never be teamed up since OSK was originally teamed up with PVI.
Here is the rundown:
1. MRAP 1 (winners)
-FRPT/GD
-BAE
-NAVZ
2. MRAP II (test orders for vehicles)
-BAE
-OSK/CRDN/L3
-FRPT ???? Don't know yet
3. JLTV (potential competitors)
-AMG/GD
-BOEING/TXT
-LMT/BAE
-AH (now BAE) / NAVZ
-OSK / Northrop
-FPRT???? Hasn't even said they are going for the JLTV.
Reread my post, it is accurate.
FRPT never teamed or planned to team with OSK for anything, you never read that anywhere.
The players for the JLTV include:
-TXT/Boeing
-GD/AMG
-OSK/Northrop
-AH (now BAE)/LMT
-NAVZ/BAE
FRPT better team up with someone or they will be crushed.
OSK teamed with PVI originally for MRAP I... however, PVI vehicles sucked. They also submitted their Bushmaster via Thales, but US did not want to order Australian.
Then they teamed with CRDN and L3 for MRAP II.. "the Bull", which received test orders for MRAP II.
Now, they are teaming with Northrop for JLTV.
Bad news unless someone is looking to buy FRPT.
You are WRONG on this.
BAE pays a license fee of $8027 for each ILAV vehicle manufacture by BAE under the ILAV contract. The contract calls for FPI to be a sub to build 50% and BAE to build 50% of the Cougar/ILAV vehicles that BAE gets a DoD contract for. BAE only pays The $8027.00 fee on the 50% vehicle BAE builds not the 50% FPI builds. If BAE had to build more than 50% of the ILAV's then BAE will pay the $50K on any ILAV over the 50%. On the first ILAV 378 order FPI got $55M, SPAR got $45M and BAE got $90M. On th second order FPI got $5.3 million to produce more than 40 articulating interrogation arms for the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle (ILAV). As part of this award, a total of 22 additional new vehicles. On the third order FPI got $3.5M for 45 ILAV's. It's all in the SEC filings. IMHO you will make more money reading the SEC reports not some stupid message board.
Try investorvillage.com or yahoo even.
No dip son, this is the run to earnings!
Force Protection Delays New Blast-Resistant Truck by Two Months
By Edmond Lococo
Nov. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., the largest supplier of blast-resistant trucks to the U.S. Marine Corps, will delay the start of production for its new Cheetah vehicle by two months to focus on delivering current products for the Iraq war.
Force Protection now plans to open the new plant for Cheetah construction in Roxboro, North Carolina, at the end of this month and to begin production in January, Vice President Michael Aldrich said in an interview today. Force had originally planned to begin output by Nov. 1, and to build 10 to 20 vehicles a month in November and December, he said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edmond Lococo in Boston at elococo@bloomberg.net
You're really the flip flopper huh Hogs... long one day, short the next.
HUGE NEWS! This is it folks. Be in before Friday - next week, 800 Cougar order.
Defense: Pentagon Narrows MRAP I Suppliers Down to Three; Awards Likely This Friday
• Pentagon has reduced the number of Mine Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) I suppliers from five to three for ease of maintenance, according to sources. We believe these three companies are likely to receive MRAP orders later this week from the $5.2 billion Continuing Resolution (CR) funding. These three companies are Force Protection (FRPT, Not Covered [NC]), Navistar (NAVZ, NC), and BAE Systems (BAESY, NC). Designs by General Dynamics (GD, NC) and Armor Holdings (acquired by BAE Systems) will be eliminated from future MRAP I procurement.
• According to Hill sources, CR funding can purchase between 2,200 - 2,400 units due to a lower cost estimate after the increase of official MRAP requirement from 8,000 to over 15,000 units. Previously, Pentagon had budgeted $5.2 billion in CR funding from approximately 1,500 units of MRAP. Therefore, we expect each one of the three MRAP I suppliers to receive approximately 800 units ($400 million) in order shortly based on equal distribution of the available CR funding to keep their production lines running. This is consistent with Force Protection’s expectation of a near-term order for 800 units.
• MRAP Funding Update: In our view, we will unlikely see a passage of the FY08 defense appropriations and supplemental bill before Thanksgiving. However, the chairman of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, Senator Inouye (D-Hawaii) has pledged to pay for all MRAP vehicles the Pentagon has requested, which is a total of $16.8 billion for closeto 9,000 additional MRAP vehicles in FY08. If the supplemental bill is not finalized by November, Congress will support another Continuing Resolution with another $11.5 billion for MRAP to avoid a break in production if the supplemental is not finalized by November 15.
• MRAP Requirement Review: According to Inside Defense, Pentagon leaders plan to review the official MRAP requirement early next year to consider a possible increase. We believe this will coincide with a renewed debate in Congress on Senator Biden’s (D-Del.) amendment to add $23.6 billion for MRAP in the FY08 supplemental. In our view, final MRAP demand for FY08 will likely be somewhere between the current 15,374 and Biden’s 23,000 units, driven by factors like timing and level of troop drawdown and industrial capacity.
MRAP II = Cheetah.
That's not the news that is driving this rally....
Army, Marine Corps Scrap Plans to Accelerate Humvee Replacement
Aug. 22, 2007 -- The Army and Marine Corps have abandoned efforts to accelerate the production of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, a multibillion-dollar program to replace the entire humvee fleet -- 40,000 vehicles in the first wave of orders alone.
The decision, reviewed at a high-level Pentagon meeting today, means neither the Army nor the Marine Corps will propose adding procurement funds for the JLTV program in their fiscal year 2009 budget proposals to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which are due this month.
Instead, the services opted to keep the program on course to proceed with production in fiscal year 2012 rather than putting JLTV development on a fast track toward initial fielding in 2010, according to officials familiar with the program.
Pentagon and industry officials said accelerating the JLTV schedule had difficulty gaining traction this spring and summer as the Defense Department leaders funneled resources and unprecedented high-level attention to the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program, which has become an interim solution between the humvee and JLTV.
On March 9, Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Richard Cody and Gen. Robert Magnus, the assistant Marine Corps commandant, gathered defense industry executives in the Pentagon and outlined a plan to pull JLTV development and fielding two years to the left, to 2010 (DefenseAlert, March 16).
Today’s decision, however, reflects the new reality for the ground services’ tactical vehicle plans.
“The notion of 2010 is off the table,” said one industry official following JLTV developments in the Pentagon closely. “No one thinks that in the wake of MRAP that JLTV can be accelerated.”
This afternoon, John Young, acting Pentagon acquisition executive, and Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reviewed the Army and Marine Corps’ plans for the JLTV program, which call for key requirements documents to be certified this fall, paving the way for a formal launch of the program that would begin with the issuance of a request for proposals from vehicle makers.
On Aug. 17, the JLTV program office announced a five-month delay in the program schedule. Requests for proposal earlier this year were scheduled to be issued in June; the announced delay would set the new release date in November. The original program schedule also allowed for approximately three fiscal quarters between the request for proposals and a decision on the JLTV winner, which would put the source selection sometime in late spring or early summer next year.
In early 2006, the Army, which will lead the JLTV program, established a provisional joint program office located in Warren, MI, with a satellite shop in Quantico, VA.
In February, the Army unveiled plans to spend $104.5 million in overall research and development funding to launch the JLTV program in fiscal years 2008 and 2009. The FY-08 budget request includes $82.3 million for JLTV research and development; $4.6 million for program management; and $77.6 million for prototype design and development, according to Army budget documents.
In FY-09, the Army has budgeted $22.2 million for JLTV: $5.3 million for program management and $16.8 million for research, development, test and evaluation.
The service plans to competitively award up to three contracts for system development and demonstration sometime between October 2007 and March 2008, according to Army budget justification documents provided to Congress in February. From that point, the documents show, the Army plans a 24-month SDD resulting in the award of “contracts for a single vehicle system or set of vehicle systems” that “closely meet” JLTV requirements. -- Jason Sherman
Date: August 22, 2007
© Inside Washington Publishers
Force Protection Inc. sues local rival Protected Vehicles Inc.
A Ladson company that makes armored trucks for the military has declared war on a local rival over trade secrets used in building the blast-resistant combat vehicles.
Force Protection Inc. this week sued Protected Vehicles Inc. and its founder, Garth Barrett, a former top Force Protection executive who resigned two years ago today and within months started a competing business.
The lawsuit alleges that Barrett and other former Force Protection officials made off with confidential information about Force Protection's vehicle design and suppliers and has used it to help build their new company.
As a result, North Charleston-based Protected Vehicles is competing unfairly with Force Protection "by avoiding substantial expense and time required to develop, build, and test their own armored vehicles," Force Protection said in documents filed in U.S. District Court in Charleston.
Barrett did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday, and his company has not yet filed a response to the allegations. A Force Protection spokesman declined to discuss the lawsuit.
Both manufacturers are among a growing number around the country that are vying heavily for orders from the Pentagon, which has earmarked $1.1 billion this year to buy mine-resistant armored vehicles in an effort to reduce the number of casualties from roadside explosive devices.
The military uses the vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Barrett started Force Protection as Technical Solutions Group Inc. a decade ago. Over the years, the company "developed numerous commercially valuable trade secrets and a considerable amount of valuable confidential, technical and business information concerning the design, production, marketing, and sale of armored vehicles," according to the complaint.
At Force Protection, Barrett held several high-level positions, including president and chief technology officer. He became "intimately familiar" with the design of the vehicles, and he began copying records for his own personal use, the lawsuit alleges.
When Barrett resigned on Aug. 23, 2005, he told co-workers that he didn't plan to start a competing company and declined an offer to cut back gradually on his responsibilities, Force Protection said. Three weeks later, Barrett reserved the name Protected Vehicles Inc., and by Oct. 24 of that year he incorporated the company, according to the court filing.
Around the same time, Thomas Thebes left as Force Protection's vice president of finance and chief financial officer to join Barrett in his new venture, taking with him a computer hard drive, according to the lawsuit. Thebes didn't respond to messages left at his Raleigh home.
The court filing claims that through their lawyers, Thebes and Barrett admitted to taking hard drives containing "trade secrets and confidential information regarding the design, development, testing, construction and operation of Force Protection's armored vehicles."
They also admitted to taking photographs of vehicles, as well as information about customers, vendors, pricing and employees, the complaint added.
Their actions violate confidentiality agreements that both former executives signed, the lawsuit alleges.
The suit also names another former Force Protection executive, Paul Palmer, who, like Thebes, left to join Protected Vehicles. While at Force Protection, Palmer worked as production planner and was knowledgeable about the company's manufacturing processes and other trade secrets, the lawsuit said. Palmer did not return phone calls.
Force Protection alleges that Barrett improperly encouraged other employees who were familiar with sensitive inside information to join Protected Vehicles.
To date, Protected Vehicles has made few inroads on Force Protection's turf.
Force Protection has landed numerous government contracts in recent years and has formed a joint venture with defense giant General Dynamics to help it meet demand. The company's 1,000 employees currently are assembling 22 of its Cougar vehicles for the government as part of a $5.3 million contract, said spokesman Tommy Pruitt.
Securing orders has been more difficult for Barrett and his upstart company. Earlier this week, Protected Vehicles announced the firing of 230 workers after the company said it was unable to obtain enough work.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/aug/23/armored_warfare13741/
MRAP II Article!
Date: August 20, 2007
At least a half dozen companies are making no secrets of their plans to vie next month for a chance to build or help build the next-generation version of the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles for troops overseas.
The Marine Corps on July 31 issued a request for proposals for the MRAP II Enhanced Vehicle Competition, and in the solicitation listed 20 companies as potential prime vendors.
Representatives for five of those companies confirmed to Inside the Navy they plan to compete in the follow-on MRAP effort, and another major player in the current MRAP push -- International Military and Government of Warrenville, IL -- is not on the non-binding list but told ITN it plans to submit a proposal package.
MRAP II vehicles are intended to be variants of the much-sought-after MRAP vehicles the Marine Corps has been ordering for all of the services in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 6,400 MRAPs have been ordered thus far -- from five primary companies -- as part of a multicontractor vehicle competition launched last November, and thousands of additional MRAP orders are expected.
MRAPs provide troops better underbelly protection from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) than humvees do. The MRAP II variants are also intended to provide better protection than the initial MRAPs from explosively formed penetrators (EFPs), molten-metal explosives that can pierce the sides of vehicles.
Some potential MRAP II contractors are also making no secret of the pressure they are under to deliver production-representative vehicles along with their proposals to the Marine Corps by Sept. 17 -- less than two months after first reading the July 31 solicitation and a classified annex several days later.
“Right now our focus is strictly on getting the first two trucks delivered on time,” said Marc King, vice president of armor operations at Ceradyne.
The Costa Mesa, CA-based armor maker is in partnership with Oshkosh, WI-based Oshkosh Truck and Arlington, VA-based Ideal Innovations to produce the “Bull,” which the Army tested against EFPs last March.
Ceradyne’s vehicle armor systems are an exception to the company’s stated core business of “advanced technical ceramics,” King said. Its defense work includes supplying ceramic plates for the Interceptor body armor system and providing armor components to AM General for humvees.
Ideal Innovations’ core business is “innovative solutions and research and development,” said Chief Technology Officer Craig Arndt. The Virginia firm’s Defense Department history includes work with the Army Rapid Equipping Force and the Joint IED Defeat Organization, he said.
In the Ceradyne-Ideal Innovations-Oshkosh Truck partnership, Oshkosh would provide the MRAP II vehicle. Oshkosh was one of nine contractors awarded indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts by the Marine Corps in January calling for them to produce four prototype MRAPs for consideration for future vehicle orders. Yet Oshkosh’s prototypes did not fare well in testing and it did not end up as one of the five contractors with sizable MRAP contract awards during the first-round competition.
In addition to building trucks, Oshkosh’s defense work includes a remanufacturing program and aftermarket parts and service, and it develops next-generation hybrid propulsion systems in tactical defense trucks, spokeswoman Ann Stawski said.
Ladson, SC-based Force Protection Industries -- one of the companies that landed a sizable chunk of the MRAP orders in the initial competition, with just shy of 2,000 vehicles on order -- confirmed it will submit a proposal for MRAP II.
The company’s core business is military protected vehicles, and the MRAP work has helped it make its mark at the Pentagon.
Spokesman Jeff Child said Force Protection will submit an MRAP II proposal along with General Dynamics Land Systems in Sterling Heights, MI, as part of the two companies’ joint venture Force Dynamics. That proposal will be based on Force Dynamics’ MRAP I designs.
Yet Child said Force Protection may also independently submit one or more new vehicle designs for the MRAP II competition. Asked if Force Protection is planning any MRAP partnerships aside from the joint venture with GDLS, he said any such partnering “may or may not occur and would only be made public after submission of the company’s response to the RFP.”
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in a July 18 letter to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) that the Pentagon is considering MRAP technologies developed by Ceradyne and Force Protection for MRAP spirals.
Still, there are other players in the MRAP II game.
PVI laying off 60% of their workforce!!!
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/aug/21/protected_vehicles_slashes_jobs13574/
Institutional ownership 77% now!!!!
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15837275?q=frpt