The Applied Optics Ce te , a Divisio of Optex Systems, I c., is the leadi g p ovide of lase p otectio optics a d optical devices that p otect both the soldie s’ eyes as well as thei state-of-the-a t visual augme tatio devices. Bill Bates, GM of Applied Optics Ce te stated, “We a e ve y p oud of ou co t ibutio to the XM157 p og am a d will e su e that ou p oducts co ti ue to meet all pe fo ma ce specificatio s a d co ti uously st ive to imp ove ou p oduct yields, which ultimately lowe s the cost to ou custome s a d e d-use s i the U.S. milita y.”
With this ew o de , the cu e t Optex backlog is i excess of $26.5 millio .
Optex, which was fou ded i 1987, is a Richa dso , Texas based ISO 9001:2015 ce tified co ce , which ma ufactu es optical sighti g systems a d assemblies, p ima ily fo Depa tme t of Defe se (DOD) applicatio s. Its p oducts a e i stalled o va ious types of U.S. milita y la d vehicles, such as the Ab ams a d B adley fighti g vehicles, Light A mo ed a d A mo ed Secu ity Vehicles, a d have bee selected fo i stallatio o the St yke family of vehicles. Optex also ma ufactu es a d delive s ume ous pe iscope co figu atio s, ifle a d su veilla ce sights, a d ight visio optical assemblies. Optex delive s its p oducts both di ectly to the milita y se vices a d to p ime co t acto s. Fo additio al i fo matio , please visit the Compa y’s website at www.optexsys.com.
This p ess elease co tai s ce tai fo wa d-looki g stateme ts, as that te m is defi ed i the P ivate Secu ities Litigatio Refo m Act of 1995, i cludi g those elati g to the p oducts a d se vices desc ibed he ei . You ca ide tify these stateme ts by the use of the wo ds “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “pla s,” “expects,” “a ticipates,” “co ti ue,” “estimate,” “p oject,” “i te d,” “likely,” “fo ecast,” “p obable,” a d simila exp essio s.
These fo wa d-looki g stateme ts ep ese t ou expectatio s, beliefs, i te tio s o st ategies co ce i g futu e eve ts, i cludi g, but ot limited to, a y stateme ts ega di g g owth st ategy; p oduct a d developme t p og ams; fi a cial pe fo ma ce a d fi a cial co ditio (i cludi g eve ue, et i come, p ofit ma gi s a d wo ki g capital); o de s a d backlog; the estimated value of IDIQ co t acts; expected timi g of co t act delive ies to custome s a d co espo di g eve ue ecog itio ; i c eases i the cost of mate ials a d labo ; costs emai i g to fulfill co t acts; co t act loss ese ves; labo sho tages; follow-o o de s; supply chai challe ges; the co ti uatio of histo ical t e ds; the sufficie cy of ou cash bala ces fo futu e liquidity a d capital esou ce eeds; the expected impact of cha ges i accou ti g policies o ou esults of ope atio s, fi a cial co ditio o cash flows; a ticipated p oblems a d ou pla s fo futu e ope atio s; a d the eco omy i ge e al o the futu e of the defe se i dust y.
These fo wa d-looki g stateme ts i volve isks a d u ce tai ties that could cause actual esults to diffe mate ially f om those p ojected o a ticipated. Such isks a d u ce tai ties i clude, but a e ot limited to, co ti ued fu di g of defe se p og ams a d milita y spe di g, the timi g of such fu di g, ge e al eco omic a d busi ess co ditio s, i cludi g u fo esee weak ess i the Compa y’s ma kets, effects of co ti ued geopolitical u est a d egio al co flicts, competitio , cha ges i tech ology a d methods of ma keti g, delays i completi g e gi ee i g a d ma ufactu i g p og ams, cha ges i custome o de patte s, cha ges i p oduct mix, co ti ued success i tech ological adva ces a d delive i g tech ological i ovatio s, cha ges i the U.S. Gove me t’s i te p etatio of fede al p ocu eme t ules a d egulatio s, cha ges i spe di g due to policy cha ges i a y ew fede al p eside tial admi ist atio , ma ket accepta ce of the Compa y’s p oducts, sho tages i compo e ts, p oductio delays due to pe fo ma ce quality issues with outsou ced compo e ts, i ability to fully ealize the expected be efits f om acquisitio s a d est uctu i gs o delays i ealizi g such be efits, challe ges i i teg ati g acqui ed busi esses a d achievi g a ticipated sy e gies, cha ges to expo t egulatio s, i c eases i tax ates, cha ges to ge e ally accepted accou ti g p i ciples, difficulties i etai i g key employees a d custome s, u a ticipated costs u de fixed-p ice se vice a d system i teg atio e gageme ts, cha ges i the ma ket fo mic ocap stocks ega dless of g owth a d value a d va ious othe facto s beyo d ou co t ol.
You must ca efully co side a y such stateme t a d should u de sta d that ma y facto s could cause actual esults to diffe f om the Compa y’s fo wa d-looki g stateme ts. These facto s i clude i accu ate assumptio s a d a b oad va iety of othe isks a d u ce tai ties, i cludi g some that a e k ow a d some that a e ot. No fo wa d-looki g stateme t ca be gua a teed a d actual futu e esults may va y mate ially. The Compa y does ot assume the obligatio to update a y fo wa d-looki g stateme t. You should ca efully evaluate such stateme ts i light of facto s desc ibed i the Compa y’s fili gs with the SEC, especially o Fo ms 10-K, 10-Q a d 8-K. I va ious fili gs the Compa y has ide tified impo ta t facto s that could cause actual esults to diffe f om expected o histo ic esults. You should u de sta d that it is ot possible to p edict o ide tify all such facto s. Co seque tly, you should ot co side a y such list to be a complete list of all pote tial isks o u ce tai ties.
