InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 24
Posts 3145
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/30/2009

Re: es1 post# 65898

Sunday, 11/03/2013 11:16:40 AM

Sunday, November 03, 2013 11:16:40 AM

Post# of 278720
Read the PR!: "Preparation for mechanical testing of the new fiber is currently taking place." I.E. had not been done yet.

The ONLY detail that they gave as having been confirmed in the PR was the color of the cocoon.

I am not assuming anything, only refusing to assume (as you very clearly are) things that were neither stated nor implied from the PR.

A non disclosure agreement is not by the wildest stretch of the imagination remotely enough protection for a fully developed product. Nor can it be used as justification for failure to disclose a very major material event. It can be used for justification to fail to disclose certain DETAILS of such an event, (and is routinely used to do so) but not to fail to disclose the event itself.

RE: "Actually they [Warwick] have 2 years to learn [how to weave MS]. "

NOT for the purposes of including MS in the military contract! The military contract was already awarded by two years after MS was available. And Howland (Warwick CEO) has said well AFTER the contract was awarded that they will have to learn how to weave MS. So you're saying Warwick has a time machine they've used to go into the future to get the woven MS and sent it back to the past to be used in the military contract? Or is it that you think Howland has Alzheimer's and either has forgotten he's already done it or how to do it and needs to figure it all out again?

It is entirely irrelevant that Warwick was in the contract. If MS was used in the product that won the award it is a material event (of the very highest order!) regardless of whose name the contract was in.

Asking what material Warwick used if it was not MS is a pure herring and you well know that. It's irrelevant if they used Kevlar, depleted uranium or reformulated recycled rancid butter. All that's relevant is that it was not MS.

RE: "NDAs are good enough reason to not PR the deal until it is a contract"

Not true but I'm not even going to argue it because even if it was true, it does not explain the lack of a PR:

There is no way that Warwick would have taken the product thru the entire military contract process and SIX MONTHS after the contract was awarded STILL not have a contract with KBLB for an essential material.

There is no way that Warwick would have taken the product thru the entire military contract process and SIX MONTHS after the contract was awarded STILL not have a contract with KBLB for an essential material.


There is no way that Warwick would have taken the product thru the entire military contract process and SIX MONTHS after the contract was awarded STILL not have a contract with KBLB for an essential material.

And that's it. I'm done with the Flat Earth Society. ALl my future posts will be "elsewhere".
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent KBLB News