This weekend, I analyzed the severe drop in $LPTH following the NGSRI (Next-Generation Short-Range Interceptor) RFI (Request for Information). I determined the drop stems from investors and at least one analyst completely misunderstanding how defense procurement actually works. I invite @skrubin and anyone else to let me know if anything I say in this post is untrue or misleading. The goal here is truth ahead of money. Dropping an RFI during an active competitive fly-off isn’t a sign the Army is starting over. It’s routine FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) Part 10 market research. The Pentagon does this to check supply chain capacity and ensure pricing is realistic before cutting billion-dollar production checks. I found three very similar situations to the NGSRI situation (there are more), and every time the panic was wrong: 1. NGI (MDA - Missile Defense Agency): Big market surveys sparked rumors of a program reboot. MDA ignored the noise and awarded the contract to Lockheed ON TIME (actually nearly a year ahead of schedule). 2. FLRAA (Army): Open notices had everyone worrying the Army was rethinking the whole thing. The Army awarded to Bell ON TIME, right on its original target schedule. 3. T-7A (USAF): Market notices invited outside looks and chatter. The Air Force stuck with its mature fly-off candidates and awarded ON TIME. The DoD doesn't scrap years of funded, flying prototypes just because an RFI went out, and the DoD doesn't delay a missile award during a severe missile shortage. Now, let's look at the actual competition. Lockheed Martin ($LMT) has executed its flight and seeker tests with textbook precision. If this award timeline slips at all, it won’t be because a routine RFI derailed the architecture—it will be normal procedural alignment across two competing prototypes. More importantly, Lockheed completely leapfrogged legacy tech by building a 100% digital missile: It is software-defined: When threats or drone tactics change, you update algorithms in days with code, instead of spending five years redesigning circuit cards. Modern plug-and-play architecture: Digital optics and advanced sensors integrate seamlessly—which is massive for precision component suppliers like $LPTH. Instant network integration: It natively plugs into modern battlefield radar grids, meaning a missile can be cued to a target before the soldier even sees it. On top of the digital brain, Lockheed fixed the physical headaches that have annoyed troops for decades: Shoulder-fired (MANPADS): Drove down the clunky weight and awkward ergonomics of the old Stinger for fast, easy shoulder lock-on. Vehicle-mounted (M-SHORAD / Stryker): Cleaned up the turret rail integration and reload friction that mechanics have complained about for years. The cooling nightmare: Replaced the ancient argon gas bottles and cryogenic cooldown delays with modern thermal tech for instant launch readiness. Given the desperate global push to refill depleted stockpiles and counter cheap drone swarms, the Army can't risk a single factory bottleneck. That’s why I expect an 80/20 or 70/30 split award: Lockheed takes the lion’s share because they have the superior, clean-sheet digital missile, while $RTX keeps a secondary production line open to protect industrial base capacity. Lockheed has the execution, the hardware, and the digital architecture. This drop in $LPTH is wrongheaded and will be proven so. I was right on $PESI when it crashed to the 8s. I believe I will be right on $LPTH as well.