UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.      )

Filed by the Registrant x                            Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ¨

Check the appropriate box:

¨ Preliminary Proxy Statement

¨ Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

¨ Definitive Proxy Statement

x Definitive Additional Materials

¨ Soliciting Material Pursuant to Rule 14a-12

POINT BLANK SOLUTIONS, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

N/A

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

x No fee required.

¨ Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

(1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

(2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

(3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

(4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

(5) Total fee paid:

¨ Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

¨ Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

(1) Amount Previously Paid:

(2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

(3) Filing Party:

(4) Date Filed:

The following presentation was delivered to Institutional Shareholder Services on April 10, 2008, in connection with Point Blank Solutions, Inc.’s 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

Point Blank Solutions, Inc.

Annual Meeting

April 22, 2008

Presentation for RiskMetrics Group

April 10,

2008

Contents

1.

Introduction

2.

Company Overview

3.

A Look at the Past: Corporate/Legacy Issues

4.

Building a Team for the Future

5.

Strategy, Execution and Results

6.

Why We Disagree with Steel Partners’

Proxy Contest

7.

Corporate Governance

8.

Our Interests Are Aligned with Our Shareholders

9.

Qualifications of Our Directors

1

Company Overview

›

Point Blank Solutions is a leading manufacturer and provider of bullet, fragmentation and stab resistant

apparel and related ballistic accessories.  Our products are used domestically and internationally by

military, law enforcement, security and corrections personnel, as well as, government agencies.

›

The Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Life Wear Technologies, also manufactures and

distributes

sports

medicine,

health

support

and

other

products,

including

a

variety

of

knee,

ankle,

elbow,

wrist, back supports and braces.  These products are sold to retail, pharmaceutical and other national

distribution outlets.

›

Relationships are key drivers to our future success.  Over the years, the Company and our key

executives have built strong alliances with leading fiber suppliers, weavers, distributors and its global

customer base.

›

Point Blank Solutions is one of the largest suppliers of soft body armor to the U.S. Armed Forces and

government, and has been for years.  Its protective solutions have been credited with saving thousands

of

American

lives

–

both

abroad,

in

places

such

as

Afghanistan

and

Iraq,

and

at home.

›

The ballistic-resistant garment business has become highly competitive and fragmented. The Company

competes

by

providing

high

quality

solutions

that

meet

or

exceed

industry

standards.

Partnering

with

its

customers and primary suppliers, Point Blank for years has developed the lightest, most flexible body

armor products with the highest ballistic strength. Providing the United States Armed Forces and police

forces with the most advanced body armor systems quickly and ahead of schedule is paramount to

protection and to future orders.

›

Our primary competitor is BAE Systems.  Other industry comparables include Ceramic Protection

Corporation and First

Choice Armor.

2

Corporate/Legacy Issues

›

Since mid-2006, the Company has undergone a mass transformation; correcting and overcoming the

alleged misdeeds of prior leadership.  The many issues this management team and Board of Directors

have faced include:

David Brooks (former Chairman and CEO) and family/affiliates control 29.5% of the Company’s common stock.

3

›

Class action and derivative lawsuits.

›

Numerous investigations by government agencies (for example: the

Securities and Exchange

Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Internal Revenue Service).

›

Errors in prior financial reports that led to the withdrawal of financial results for 2003, 2004 and the first

nine months of 2005.

›

Receipt of Wells Notice from the SEC.

›

Material weaknesses in internal controls that prevented the Company from future filings (post 3Q ‘05)

and led to the Company’s non-compliance with the SEC.

›

Inadequate infrastructure with weak or non-existent systems.

›

Tax returns for 2003 and 2004 were filed incorrectly and had to be amended and no tax returns were

filed for 2005 and 2006.

›

Delisting of the Company’s securities on AMEX.

›

Inability to draw under credit facility with LaSalle due to non-compliance.

›

Indictments of former officers (former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and

Chief Operating Officer).

›

Corporate and legacy issues were well publicized, which adversely impacted business.

Team Building: Restoring Credibility in the Senior Ranks

4

›

In

2006,

a

special

committee

was

formed

by

the

Board,

consisting

of

Senator

Campbell

and

Larry

Ellis,

the

only two board members not named in the Class Action lawsuit.  In July 2006, this committee recommended

the removal of Mr. Brooks as Chairman and CEO.

›

Mr. Brooks’

removal began the Company’s turnaround and was the first step in regaining trust and building

confidence in senior leadership.  The Company brought in new management and an independent, highly

experienced Board of Directors, the latter of which was done with the assistance of a national executive

recruitment firm. 

›

The

Company

brought

on

experienced

financial

advisors

(Alix

Partners,

Jefferson

Wells,

and

other

forensic

experts) to help improve the financial systems and controls and address financial reporting requirements. 

›

The

Company

also

engaged

investment

bankers

to

advise

the

Board.

Wachovia

Securities

was

one

of

the

two

banks engaged and they continue their work, helping the Board and management to identify the most

effective means to increase shareholder value.

›

New Senior Leadership:

›

Larry Ellis assumed the role as Chief Executive Officer.

›

John Siemer, formerly Special Assistant and Strategic Planner to

the U.S. Army Chief of Staff, was appointed Chief

Operating Officer.

›

Jim Anderson, formerly a partner with KPMG LLP with extensive turnaround/workout experience, was appointed

Controller and, later, Chief Financial Officer.

›

Sam White, formerly President of Point Blank Body Armor, was appointed Head of Global Sales.

›

Patrick Stallings, a retired Colonel with the U.S. Army, was named Head of Global Business Development.

›

Lisa Taylor, also with civil service and private sector experience, was appointed head of Human Resources.

›

This

new

team

met

regularly

with

customers,

partners,

suppliers,

lenders

–

all

key

constituents

to

ensure

the

Company’s future.

Team Building: Restoring Credibility in the Senior Ranks (Cont’d)

›

The primary goal in reconstituting the Board was to find experienced and independent professionals

with unique skill sets relevant to the Company’s business operations as well as those with credentials

in serving public companies.

5

U.S. Government

William Campbell

Larry Ellis

U.S. Army

Martin Berndt

U.S. Marine Corps

Maury Hannigan

Law Enforcement

David Bell

Marketing / Homeland Security

Jack Henry

Financial Accounting

Suzanne Hopgood

Corporate Governance

Strategy, Execution and Results

In September 2006, management, at the direction of General Ellis, undertook the development of a strategic plan

with the goal of best positioning the Company for future growth and profitability.  The strategic plan established a

vision

for

Point

Blank

Solutions

to

be

a

global

leader

in

safety

apparel

and

protective

solutions

–

more

than

just

body

armor.

Diversifying

products,

channels

and

markets

is

essential

to

the

future.

The Board adopted this plan and directed management to accomplish this vision through disciplined and

aggressive execution of a value enhancement strategy based on the following five strategic pillars:

6

›

Grow organically, by capturing new military programs and increasing the Company’s civil market

share;

›

Expand internationally by pursuing protective solutions contracts with friendly nations around

the world;

›

Improve cost position through operational excellence initiatives

and better management of its

supply chain;

›

Pursue strategic ventures to expand the Company’s service offering and diversify into related

growth markets; and

›

Maximize stockholder value by continuing to build confidence in leadership and demonstrating

financial responsibility.

This plan was detailed in the Company’s Form 10-K and proxy materials, along with how the Board’s skill sets were critical to successful execution of the plan.

Strategy, Execution and Results (Cont’d)

Throughout 2007, the Company, in concert with the Board of Directors, refined its plan and

outlined strategic objectives that position the Company for future growth and profitability.  As a

result,

in

2007

the

Company

grew

sales

by

26.3%

to

$320.8

million.

This

increase

was

due

to U.S. Military and federal government sales growth of 27.7% and 28.3 % in the domestic

market. 

Organic

Growth

During 2007, the Company completed an analysis of significant international opportunities.  The

Company developed a framework for global business development and established an office

primarily dedicated to expanding relationships with international military constituents.

In the years ahead, the Company anticipates international sales will comprise a higher

percentage of its overalls sales mix and will be a key contributor to our financial performance.

International

Expansion

Total

operating costs

decreased by

18.1%

during

2007

as

compared

to

2006.

This

decline

was attributable to a decrease in litigation and investigation costs, a decrease in employment tax

withholding charges and a reduction in selling, general and administrative charges.

Gross margin for 2007 was 19.2% compared to 22.8% during 2006.  Throughout 2007, certain

contracts were targeted for an aggressive pricing strategy, as the Company recognized the

changes in the competitive environment within the industry. The 2007 annual results include a

$3.5 million adjustment to the Zylon vest replacement program obligation as a result of a change

in estimate. 

Cost

Improvement

7

Strategy, Execution and Results (Cont’d)

In 2007, the Company began to implement an integrated information technology solution and to

replace outdated manufacturing and financial systems. The Company expects to benefit from

completing the IT integration to enhance productivity, improve timeliness, provide more

rigorous internal controls and improve yield in the manufacturing process.

In 2007, the Company explored various strategic initiatives to better integrate the value chain

and diversify products and market with the goal of reducing costs, growing sales and increasing

profits.

Among the highlights are an exclusive partnership with G2 Consulting, a collaborative venture

with DSM and various alliances with the Company’s key suppliers and distributors.

Recently,

the

Company

announced

a

joint

venture

with

FMS

Enterprises,

an important

milestone marking our entrance into the weaving industry.  We expect this operation to add to

our top line, decrease our material costs, increase our margins and add a profit center to the

Company.  Furthermore, it provides Point Blank with a unique value proposition in that it is the

only body armor company with weaving capabilities, which will provide direct access to fiber

suppliers and improve its ability to compete on tenders.

Strategic

Ventures

The Company was profitable for the first time in five years.

Net

income for the year

ended December 31, 2007 was approximately $6.2 million, compared

to

a net loss of ($5.3

million) during the prior year.

Maximizing

Shareholder Value

Cost

Improvement

8

Strategy, Execution and Results (Cont’d)

Earning per share, basic and diluted, was $0.12 for the year ended December 31, 2007, as

compared to a loss per share, basic and diluted of ($0.12) during 2006.

The Company’s SEC filings are current for the first time in three years.

The Company

also made significant

progress towards achieving compliance with regulatory agencies and

improvements were achieved in internal control over financial reporting.

The Company’s goal is to eliminate all material weakness by the end of 2008.

Maximizing

Shareholder Value

In 2007, the Company exceeded its internal goals, receiving over $200 million in new contract awards from the U.S.

Government.  Point Blank is one of two producers of the Army’s new Improved Outer Tactical Vest, and the Company

delivered the vests ahead of schedule to meet the Army’s urgent and compelling need.  Today, the Company is actively

involved in several open solicitations and believes its well-documented delivery record and best value production

capability make it highly competitive to receive a large share of these potential awards.

While the 2007 market share strategy resulted in significant increases in sales, it negatively impacted gross margins

compared to the prior year.  However, this was part of a more comprehensive, global plan to grow sales and implement

changes to improve gross margins.

The joint venture with FMS addresses the margin shortfall directly.  This aggressive pricing strategy was

implemented

with

the

knowledge

that

the

Company

would

be

able

to

offset

these

declines

as

a

result

of

this very important milestone.

The Company continues to execute this plan and is well on its way to achieving its goals.

9

Why We Disagree with Steel Partners’

Proxy Contest

10

›

Over

the

last

two

years,

the

current

Board

has

worked

diligently

to

implement

a

specific

strategic

plan

to generate full value for all stockholders.  As detailed earlier, this plan covers organic growth,

international growth, cost improvements and strategic ventures.

›

The current Board has been chosen to address the unique demands and challenges of the Company’s

market.  The Board has experience in legislative matters, military and law enforcement contracting

and operating public companies.

›

The Board, as stated in the Company’s public announcements, believed that resolution of legacy

issues, improved corporate governance and successful execution of the strategic plan would best

serve

the

Company’s

shareholders

and

enhance

value.

As

such,

the

Board

stated

at

the

time of

Steel’s public announcement that it did not believe that the time was right to explore a sale

process. 

›

At the time of Steel’s offer to negotiate, the Company was in discussions with its

weaving joint venture partner and had not yet filed its 2007 Form 10-K.

›

A

standstill

was

paramount

if

the

Company

and

Steel

were

to

have

true

discussions

at

that

time.

Standstill agreements are a normal mechanism to ensure a level playing field. The Company

offered to negotiate a reduced time period, but Steel refused.

›

The Board left the door open for further discussions.

›

It is worth noting that Steel has approximately a 40% economic interest in one of

our primary weavers,  JP Stevens (acquired Hexcel).

Why

We

Disagree

with

Steel

Partners’

Proxy

Contest

(Cont’d)

11

›

Steel in turn, nominated its own slate of directors to replace five of the seven Board members.  In

consideration

of

its

fiduciary

responsibilities,

the

Board

finds

this

troubling,

given

Steel’s

public

statements

that

it is interested in acquiring the Company.  Two of their five nominees work directly for Steel, and two of the

other three have ties to Steel and/or affiliates of Steel. 

›

Lastly, claims made in Steel’s proxy are troubling for a number of reasons:

›

They state the Company should not remain public. Steel claims we

would be better served by becoming part of a

larger conglomerate.  They claim they are a potential acquirer.

In conversations with Steel, they have expressed a

belief that the Company should enter into a sales process, and that they will be a bidder. Their public statements

are in contradiction.

›

They claim the Board’s interests are not aligned with shareholders because the Board owns only options and not

stock.  In fact, Board members own restricted stock.  Management

and Directors were also precluded from

purchasing stock in the open market due to our public company blackout period.  Steel was fully aware of this. 

After the Company’s Form 10-K for 2007 was filed, officers and directors did in fact make stock purchases during a

very small window of opportunity to do so.

›

Steel claims our strategy adversely impacts margins and that margins would erode further, thus impacting

shareholder value.  Steel mentions comments made by Larry Ellis during our third quarter conference call.  Steel

did not update their proxy to include comments made on the Company’s fourth quarter call, which directly

contradict their statement.  Our joint venture, which was in development during Steel’s offer to negotiate, directly

impacts not only margins, but also the Company’s top-line, cost of goods sold and, we believe, overall profitability.

›

Each of the Company’s directors, other than General Ellis, qualifies as an “independent”

Board member.

We

do

not

manage

our

business

for

the

quarter.

We

manage

our

business

for

the

future,

and

to

enhance

and

maintain

true

value

for

our

shareholders.

Corporate Governance

In

response

to

Steel’s

attacks

on

the

Company’s

corporate

governance:

Significant management changes have been made over the last two years resulting in the departure or

replacement of all but one Board member since June 2006.

The Board conducted extensive board and peer evaluations.  The Board also identified the skill sets

needed to implement the strategic plan. The skill sets of the current Board were matched with those

needed

by

the

Company

as

part

of

the

evaluation

and

disclosed

in

the

proxy.

The

Company’s

current

Board

places

the

utmost

importance

on

implementing

sound

governance

policies.

The Company believes these defensive measures helped ensure a period of stability needed to

execute our strategy and achieve a valuation commensurate with performance/potential.

12

›

Each of the Company’s directors, other than General Ellis, qualifies as an “independent”

Board member.

›

Our Nominating, Compensation, Audit and Corporate Governance committees are comprised solely of independent

outside directors.

›

Our Board of Directors is elected for one-year terms.

›

Our Chairman and CEO are separate and our Chairman is an independent outsider.

›

All Directors attended at least 75% of the Board meetings in the

past year or had a valid excuse for absences.

›

Although the Company has a rights plan in place, it contains a three-year independent director evaluation

provision.

›

Any other takeover protections the Company has implemented were done to maintain stability in order to enable

the Company to pursue maximized value for all shareholders.

›

All Directors own restricted stock. The Board has adopted a stock accumulation policy requiring Directors to own

stock to align their economic interests with those of Company stockholders. Blackout policies have restricted

purchases.

Our Interests Are Aligned with Shareholders

13

›

We have been and continue to pursue strategic alternatives to enhance shareholder value.

›

With our Form 10-K for 2007 filed, our joint venture signed, and a strong platform in place, we believe our competitive and financial

position in 2008 and the years ahead is bright.

›

We listen to our shareholders: Management and select members of the Board met with many of our key owners last week, including Steel

Partners, to learn more about their views on our business, our prospects and their beliefs on how to maximize value.

›

Numerous shareholders believe we have done an excellent job in saving the Company from bankruptcy and solidifying our position as an

industry leader with great potential. 

›

The shareholders’

message was clear: Begin a process to explore ALL strategic alternatives for enhancing shareholder value, including a

possible sale of the Company and do this now. 

›

Many

of

the

Company’s

major

stockholders,

including

Steel

Partners,

recommended

postponement

of

the

Annual

Meeting

to

allow

the

Board

and

management

to

concentrate

on

managing

the

best

possible

process

for

exploring

strategic

alternatives.

›

On

April

7,

2008

the

Board

determined

to

explore

all

strategic

alternatives

to

enhance

shareholder

value,

including

a

possible

sale

of

the

Company.

As

a

result,

the

2008

Annual

Meeting,

which

was

initially

scheduled

for

April

22,

2008,

has

been

rescheduled

for

August

19,

2008,

in

order

to

pursue

this

process

in

a

stable

environment.

Qualifications of Our Directors

›

General Larry Ellis (Ret.),

age 61, joined the Board of Directors in December, 2004.  He became President of the Company in 2005 and assumed the role of

Chief

Executive

Officer

in

July,

2006.

In

addition,

he

serves

on

the

board

of

directors

of

SRA

International,

a

publicly

traded

information

technology

company. 

General

Ellis

served

in

the

U.S.

Army

for

over

35

years,

holding

positions

of

increasing

responsibility

before

retiring

in

2004

as

Commanding

General

of

United

States Army Forces Command in Atlanta, Georgia.  During his career, he oversaw multi-year, multi-billion-dollar programs and directed the development of

comprehensive strategic plans supporting the Army’s mission.  He also coordinated extensive operations and training programs in Germany, South Korea, and

Bosnia.  Between 2001 and 2004, General Ellis orchestrated the mobilization and deployment of over 500,000 soldiers and more than a million tons of

equipment to locations worldwide.

›

Senator William P. Campbell (Ret.),

age 72, joined the Board of Directors in May, 2006, and was named Chairman of the Board of Directors in July, 2006.

Senator Campbell served in the California legislature for 22 years, including 14 years as a state senator.  During his legislative career, Senator Campbell held a

number of distinguished positions, including Chairman of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, Minority Floor Leader, and Founding Chairman of the Joint

Committee on Fire, Police Emergency and Disaster Services.  In 1990, he retired from the Senate and became President of the California Manufacturers

Association

(now

the

California

Manufacturers

&

Technology

Association),

and

in

1998

became

President

Emeritus.

In

April,

2000,

he

founded

William

Campbell & Associates, a consulting firm, where he serves as President.  Senator Campbell is a member of the Compensation Committee.

›

David Bell,

age 64, joined the Board of Directors on November 22, 2006.  Mr. Bell is the retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Interpublic Group,

a public company that is a leading organization of advertising agencies and marketing service companies, a position he has held since January, 2005.  Mr. Bell

was Chief Executive Officer of Interpublic from 2003 to 2005, having joined Interpublic as Vice chairman in 2001.  Previously, Mr. Bell was Chairman and Chief

Executive

Officer

of

True

North

Communications

Inc.,

a

marketing

communications

and

services

group

that

was

acquired

by

Interpublic.

Prior

to

joining

True

North,

he

was

the

President

and

CEO

of

Bozell

Worldwide.

Mr.

Bell

joined

Bozell

in

1975

when

the

marketing

agency

acquired

Knox

Reeves

Advertising

where

he

had

been

President

since

1972.

He

is

currently

an

operating

advisor

to

Pegasus

Capital

Advisors,

a

private

equity

group,

and

a

senior

advisor

to

Google,

Inc.  Mr. Bell was given a Presidential nomination to be one of the thirteen original members of the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council following

the events of September 11, 2001.  He currently serves as a director and the chair of the Compensation Committee of two other public companies, Warnaco

Group, Inc., and Lighting Science Group corporation; and as a director and the chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of Primedia,

Inc. Mr. Bell is Chair of the Compensation Committee and a member of the Nominating and Governance Committee.

14

›

General Martin R. Berndt (Ret.),

age 60, joined the Board of Directors on March 1, 2007.  General Berndt retired in 2005 after a 36 year career in the U.S.

Marine

Corps

where

he

commanded

U.S.

Marine

Corps

Forces

Atlantic,

South

and

Europe;

U.S.

Marine

Corps

Bases,

Atlantic;

and

U.S.

Fleet

Marine

forces

Atlantic

and

Europe.

General

Berndt

was

commissioned

a

Second

Lieutenant

in

the

U.S.

Marine

Corps

upon

graduation

from

West

Chester

University

in

1969.

During

his

career

he

served

in

Vietnam,

Panama,

Germany

and

Bosnia.

He

serves

as

a

Senior

Mentor

of

the

U.S.

Marine

Corps

Staff

Training

Program

and

in

a

similar

capacity

for

the

Joint

Forces

Command.

He

also

serves

as

a

member

of

the

“CorpStrategy”

team

under

the

sponsorship

of

the

Institute

for

Defense

and

Business

at

the

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and is a member of the

Onslow County Military Affairs Committee.  Recently, General Berndt was a member of a

congressionally chartered, bipartisan commission to examine the Iraqi security forces.  He serves as a board member for the Governor’s North Carolina Military

Foundation and a privately owned company in Northern Virginia. General Berndt is a member of the Nominating and Governance Committee.

Qualifications of Our Directors

›

Jack A. Henry,

age 64, joined the Board of Directors on November 13, 2006.  Mr. Henry found Sierra Blanca Ventures LLC, a private advisory

firm, in 2000. Prior to that, he served as managing partner of the Phoenix office of the accounting and consulting firm Arthur Andersen, LLP,

where he spent over 34 years in various consulting and managerial positions.  Mr. Henry currently serves on the board of directors and as chair

of the audit committee of White Electronic Designs Corporation, a publicly-traded provider of advanced technology solutions.  Mr. Henry also

served on the board of directors and as chair of the audit committee of VistaCare, Inc., a provider of hospice services in the United States, until

VistaCare’s

recent

acquisition

by

Odyssey

Healthcare,

Inc.

He

also

serves

on

the

boards

of

three

privately-held

companies.

Mr.

Henry is

president of the Arizona Chapter of the National Association of Corporate Directors (“NACD”), serves on the NACD faculty , and is an NACD

Certified Director.  Mr. Henry is Chair of the Audit Committee and the Audit Committee financial expert.

›

Maurice

(Maury)

Hannigan,

age

67,

joined

the

Board

of

Directors

on

November

22,

2006.

Mr.

Hannigan

served

31

years

with

the

California

Highway Patrol (“CHP”) rising through the ranks to be appointed the Department’s Commissioner from 1989 to 1995.  His term as

Commissioner included service as General Chair of the State and Provincial Police Division of the International Association of Chiefs of Police,

Chair of the U.S. DOT/NAFTA Southwest Border States Law Enforcement Implementation Committee, and President of the California peace

Officers Association, and in several other capacities as a public safety advocate.  Following his retirement from CHP, Mr. Hannigan was a

consultant to the National Safety Council, public commissions, and other entities in both the private and public sectors.  From 2001 to 2006, he

served as Vice President / Managing Director of the Washington, D.C. based public safety solutions group of Affiliated Computer Services, a

publicly traded business process outsourcing and information technology provider headquartered in Dallas, Texas.   He presently serves on the

board of directors of the FBI’s national Executive Institute Associates, a public service foundation providing continuing education and training to

the chief executives of law enforcement organizations.  Mr. Hannigan is a member of the Audit and Compensation Committees.

›

Suzanne

M.

Hopgood,

age

58,

joined

the

Board

of

Directors

on

March

1,

2007.

She

is

the

President

and

CEO

of

The

Hopgood

Group,

LLC, a

workout

consulting

firm

she

founded

in

1985.

She

also

serves

as

the

director

of

In-Boardroom

Advisory

Services

for

the

National

Association of

Coprorate Directors overseeing ISS certified education and advisory services for approximately 100 companies per year.  She has served on the

board of nine companies, five of which are public, and as Chairman of the Board of two.  She has also served as CEO of both public and private

companies,

and

she

has

served

as

an

audit

committee

financial

expert.

Ms.

Hopgood

has

assisted

a

variety

of

companies

in

facing difficult

business, financial and legal challenges and crises, as CEO, as chairman of the board, as chair of executive, nominating, governance, on five

public company audit committees, and on the board of an Italian Company.  She has twice served as a member of board slates elected in proxy

contests

initiated

by

institutional

investors.

She

currently

serves

as

chair

of

the

Nominating

&

Governance

Committee

and

as

an audit

committee financial expert at Acadia Realty Trust.  She also serves on the board and audit committee of the privately held Newport Harbor

Corporation.  Ms. Hopgood is an NACD Certified Director. She co-authored the award-winning book Board Leadership for the Company in Crisis. 

Prior to founding the Hopgood Group, LLC, Ms. Hopgood was responsible for a $1 billion equity real estate portfolio for Aetna Realty Investors. 

She has a B.S. Degree in Business administration.

15

Important Additional Information

›

In connection with the Company’s 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the Company has filed a definitive proxy

statement and other materials with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  On March 24, 2008, the

Company began the process of mailing the proxy statement and WHITE proxy card to Company stockholders.  The

proxy

statement

contains

important

information

about

the

Company

and

the

2008

Annual

Meeting. 

STOCKHOLDERS ARE URGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT CAREFULLY.   Certain of the Company’s officers and

directors may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies with respect to the matters to be

considered at the 2008 Annual Meeting.  Information regarding such individuals and their ownership of the

Company’s securities is included in the Company’s proxy statement relating to the 2008 Annual Meeting. 

Investors may obtain a free copy of the proxy statement and other relevant documents, as well as other materials

filed

with

the

Securities

and

Exchange

Commission

concerning

the

Company,

at

the

U.S.

Securities

and

Exchange

Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.  Copies of these materials and other documents also may be

obtained at no charge from: Point Blank Solutions, Inc., 2102 S.W. 2nd Street, Pompano Beach, FL, 33069,

Attention: Investor Relations.

›

SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT: UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995: THE

STATEMENTS WHICH ARE NOT HISTORICAL FACTS CONTAINED IN THIS PRESS RELEASE ARE FORWARD-

LOOKING STATEMENTS, WHICH ARE BASED LARGELY ON THE COMPANY'S EXPECTATIONS AND ARE SUBJECT TO

VARIOUS BUSINESS RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES, CERTAIN OF WHICH ARE BEYOND THE COMPANY'S CONTROL.

WORDS SUCH AS "EXPECTS," "ANTICIPATES," "TARGETS," "GOALS," "PROJECTS," "INTENDS," "PLANS,"

"BELIEVES," "SEEKS," "ESTIMATES," VARIATIONS OF SUCH WORDS, AND SIMILAR EXPRESSIONS ARE INTENDED

TO IDENTIFY SUCH FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS. THESE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS ARE ONLY

PREDICTIONS THAT SPEAK AS OF THE DATE HEREOF AND ARE SUBJECT TO RISKS, UNCERTAINTIES AND

ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT. THEREFORE, ACTUAL RESULTS MAY DIFFER MATERIALLY AND

ADVERSELY FROM THOSE EXPRESSED IN ANY FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS. FACTORS THAT MIGHT CAUSE

OR CONTRIBUTE TO SUCH DIFFERENCES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, (1) CHANGES IN THE COMPANY'S

INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING, (2) DE-LISTING FROM THE AMERICAN STOCK

EXCHANGE, (3) UNCERTAINTY OF FUTURE FINANCIAL RESULTS, (4) ADDITIONAL FINANCING REQUIREMENTS,

(5) DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PRODUCTS, (6) GOVERNMENT APPROVAL PROCESSES, INCLUDING APPROVAL OF THE

SETTLEMENT BY THE COURT, (7) THE IMPACT OF COMPETITIVE PRODUCTS OR PRICING, (8) TECHNOLOGICAL

CHANGES, (9) THE EFFECT OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, (10) THE OUTCOME AND IMPACT OF

LITIGATION TO WHICH THE COMPANY IS A PARTY AND THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND

OTHER

INVESTIGATIONS

REGARDING

THE

COMPANY,

(11)

TURNOVER

IN

THE

COMPANY'S

SENIOR

MANAGEMENT AND (12) OTHER UNCERTAINTIES DETAILED IN THE COMPANY'S FILINGS WITH THE SECURITIES

AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE UNCERTAINTIES AND RISKS

DISCUSSED

IN

DETAIL

IN

"RISK

FACTORS,"

IN

THE

COMPANY'S

PERIODIC

REPORTS

ON

FORM

10-K

AND

10-Q.

THE COMPANY UNDERTAKES NO OBLIGATION TO REVISE OR UPDATE PUBLICLY ANY FORWARD-LOOKING

STATEMENTS TO REFLECT ANY CHANGE IN THE EXPECTATIONS OF OUR MANAGEMENT WITH REGARD THERETO

OR ANY CHANGE IN EVENTS, CONDITIONS, OR CIRCUMSTANCES ON WHICH ANY SUCH STATEMENTS ARE BASED.

16