"KZ"- Thanks for more FACTS !! It seems "worst case scenario" speculation is the rule and FACTS are few these days.
The history is simple. I'll submit a short primer to the unitiated and speculators.
FACTS: BAM was a separate business oppportunity started by John Bourque for mfg. certain KRYRON-based products. e.g. It had exclusive licensing rights (for ballistic armor) per KG,LLC.
The forms included a Private Placement Memorandum, a Business Plan and a Pro Forma agreement = NEARLY 50 pages of documents filed with the SEC. BAM, Bourque Alloys (BAL) and Kryron Global,LLC merged with BORK Sept. '11. The merger combined all separate entities w/ separate licensing agreements and /or separate KRYRON patents under one entity: "Bourque Industries."
As a result BORK Shareholders now OWN ALL mfg.rights and patentsof John Bourque business entities. In return, John Bourque, the inventor, will receive a 5% Royalty for 20 years - til 2031 - for the use of his KRYRON technology patents.
BACKDROP: All KRYRON tech. and patents were the sole property of JB and his corporations.
BAM's Plan was detailed and ambitious. The idea: sell 3.4 million shares, raise $5 million dollars for a facility.
BAM was not very successful. Some could argue it's lack of success precipitated or acclerated the downward spiral of Bourque Industries, depriving it of much needed operational funds. Others argue that a successful BAM would have filled JB's trust funds faster and contributed to his narcisism and got us nowhere with new markets since he was still the main impediment to successful contracts.
The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
EXCERPT
"Dear Bourque Industries Investors,
John Bourque has recently formed a new company by the name of Bourque Alloys Manufacturing, Inc. (BAM) to become the exclusive manufacturer for Kryronized alloy products. Said license gives BAM the worldwide exclusive rights to manufacture Kryronized alloy products for all ballistic armor products and other defense related products for the Military, ballistic armor for law enforcement and all other ballistic applications, the mining and agriculture industries and any other industry as agreed to in writing by Kryron Global, Inc.
The Shares are being offered (“Offering”) pursuant to exemptions from federal registration contained in the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), and Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated thereunder. This offering is being made to certain investors (the “Investors”) in Bourque Alloys Manufacturing, Inc., a Nevada corporation that was formed to manufacture proprietary alloys developed by Kryron Global LLC.
Upon completion of the audits and disclosure statements of Bourque Industries, Inc., it is the intention of the Company to merge with Bourque Alloys Manufacturing, Inc. at a minimum of a 1 to 1 share price. The details of this Offering are attached to this email in the form of a for your review."
We are where we are.
The reverse merger resulted in a 60% + increase of shares to 296 million.
As of April 12, 2013 - 4 weeks ago - the NEW, extremely capable members of the BORK BoD and new CEO have NEW "Task Forces" assigned to tackle various aspects of reviewing BORK's troubled history and riding herd on the FULLY REPORTING process which, per the SEC, REQUIRES A FULL AUDIT.
The main questions at this date, (on my list) about the merger that an AUDIT should reveal upon completion and SEC / DTCC acceptance of the AUDIT paperwork sometime in the next 4 months:
Were JB (and others) awarded shares disproportionate to a “reasonable valuation” of the companies BAL, BAM, KGL and especially Basalt Fiber Technologies? Where is the valuation accounting, due diligence review and second opinion of the share valuation for BAL, BAM, KGL and Basalt Fiber Tech.? The PPS of BORK on the 9.26.11 merger date was $2.00. Is that the valuation upon which the share qty. was based on + for a minimum of $226 million ?
Until the AUDIT is complete and the DTC Chill is removed, I'm of the mind that we will have to wait for the answers to the above questions. Legally speaking there are likely to be actions pending that it's best to remain with the attorneys and the BoD.
They have their work cut out for US - the BORK shareholders.
AI
