The largest note holder agrees to role over for another two...

The largest note holder agrees to role over for another two years. Dutchess continues to fund operations. Company just continues as is. No need for another company to buy this one!

But consider.

Colt can increase its revenue by manufacturing and selling maul under a ?production license?. But can generate more revenue if it owns maul/mst outright.

Colt can book and hold profits in Australia. Helps them avoid increasing state (Connecticut) taxes, healthcare taxes and all those temporary US federal tax cuts that are ending within the next few years. I think MST has a -$30m corporate tax credit with the ATO, from -$100 mil trading lose (on the mst balance sheet). Thus, Colt doesn?t need to pay tax to the ATO on the first 100 mil in operating profits booked in Aust under mst.

MST has all sorts of other interesting tech and product potential. But, mst does not have the resources to bring this stuff to market. Example, mst doesn?t have the resources to certify 3gl and mass produce it. This lack of resources and lack of ability to realise its own tech potential creates a need for mst to be acquired by a bigger fish.

Potential.

Firestorm: a small, light weight and lower cost weapon system with more response options than the Gatling gun currently used to provide ship defence?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

A truly light weight, long range, mach 5/50 sniper rifle?

Plus all sorts of other tech Moosey and others have talked about. Just because this stuff hasn?t been brought to market yet is not evidence it can?t be done. Its just evidence MST hasn?t brought it to market yet! This may in fact be evidence of the need for mst to be acquired by a bigger fish to bring this stuff to market (monetize it!)

BAE Safariland

These guys and maybe another work group at bae may have an interest in developing the mst stacked round, electronically initiated, defence/offense, lethal/non-lethal, systems. If mst wins the mpm contract and receives other similar development contracts, mst can continue to develop this technology on its own (in partnership with bae safariland for ammo). But if bae Safariland wants to grow revenue, owning this entire tech outright grows bae Safariland revenue more than just as a junior partner contributing to ammo production. Revenue growth is important imo.

A joint venture between Colt and BAE to develop Metal Storm tech could be possible. I?m not saying it will happen. I?m just saying it?s possible. At the moment, the ability of MST to develop Metal Storm tech seems to have peaked. The necessity of a take over to monetize all the potential seems real to me.

Breon Defence.

I?m still completely convinced this is part of the acquisition process by a bigger or bigger fishes!!! A long time ago I saw a tech company appoint a new reseller then announce a take over by a bigger fish a little later. The new reseller arrangement was driven by the bigger fish acquiring them. Completely different than breon/mst, but also the same!!!

In short, a take over by Colt. Payment from png covers Colt?s costs to ?tool up? for maul production. The single largest note holder can still agree to role over for 2 more years. I don?t think Colt has to pay them out right now? Colt can now generate more revenue/operating profit from maul ownership compared to just being a manufacturing sales agent.

btw, If Colt markets maul to the world, I think the value of this marketing alone is worth millions to mst and would be an incredible free gift. In other words, Colt markets maul to its European and Asian customers and this drives them to buy maul from mst. How does Colt benefit from its own marketing??? (It does if Colt has world wide exclusive manufacturing rights!)