A call with Investor Relations, page-61

I love FBR and do not think I have seen anyone work as hard as the Pivac's, but I am writing to express my concern regarding the company's current financial condition and the lack of clear communication on material developments that may impact shareholder value. Recent disclosures suggest the company is approaching a state of financial distress, and the recent resignation of former CEO Mike Pivac raises significant questions. (all inconsistent with the 3/25/2025 post)

I am highly concerned that Mike Pivac’s departure may position him—or a related entity—to reacquire FBR’s core intellectual property assets (including Hadrian X® and Dynamic Stabilisation Technology) under different terms, potentially leaving existing shareholders with no residual value.

The following need to be addressed at the upcoming meeting on Extraordinary General Meeting on 5/6/2025 on how does the voting impact the current situation. We need to understand.

1. What ongoing projects, commercial contracts, or partnership discussions is FBR actively engaged in as of this date?

2. What is the current status of previously disclosed collaborations with Samsung Heavy Industries, CRH Ventures, and PulteGroup? (Are all these collaborations finished? There is no real news other than what was posted on 3/25/2025 prior to the stock decline.) Per this article, for Samsung alone, there is so much backlog with ship building, how can a company keep up with demand without a technology like FBR. https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/samsung-heavy-industries-secures-508m-shipbuilding-deal/

3. Are there any pending negotiations regarding the sale, transfer, or licensing of FBR’s intellectual property to internal stakeholders, directors, former executives, or related parties?

4. What safeguards are in place to ensure that any such asset transfer—if considered—would occur at arm’s length, with full disclosure, transparency, and fair market valuation? The IP alone can be very valuable to a company like Samsung, etc. It is also concerning that a company like Pulte with a 19b market cap and CRH with a 58b market cap saw nothing in this technology that would not warrant additional investment or conversations?
   
   Today the IP is an FBR asset, and we need to understand fair market value, but insolvency creates problems for the following:
   

   	Shareholder Type	Risk Level	Likely Outcome
   1	Retail / Public Investors	High	Lose 100% of investment
   2	Insiders / Executives	High	Lose equity, may reacquire IP
   3	Convertible / Hybrid Holders	Medium	Possible partial recovery
   4	Institutional Funds	Medium	Large loss, but diversified

If FBR remains unprofitable via operations, the only thing that can be done is to sell the IP. Companies would need to be made aware of what the asset is and be able to bid accordingly. The question is, does anything at the 5/6/2025 meeting serve as an enabler to transfer this asset.