<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 99


                                  RISK FACTOR

THERE IS NO ASSURANCE THAT THE PROPOSED BUSINESS OF ORBIT DESCRIBED HEREIN WILL
BE COMMERCIALLY VIABLE.  IN ADDITION, ACTUAL RESULTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES, TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS, MARKET AND COMPETITIVE CONDITIONS,
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, AND OTHER FACTORS MAY REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT MODIFICATIONS
OF ALL OR PART OF THE PROPOSED BUSINESS.

  Potential Securities Act Liabilities. Current management believes the Company
has sold securities and notes without registration under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended (the "Act"), or without qualification under the securities
(blue sky) laws of certain states. As a result of such sales, and a subsequent
transfer of the shares by the original purchasers, the Company may not be able
to claim valid exemptions for such sales since the burden of proving any
exemption is on the Company. Therefore, no assurances can be given as to any
liability which may result from violations of the registration or qualifications
provisions of the federal or state securities laws. The Company may thus have a
continuing contingent liability under the Act, the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and various state securities laws for an
undetermined period.

  Potential Corporation Law Liability.  The Company is conducting an internal
audit, which has revealed that substantial shares of the Common Stock issued to
former directors and officers may be subject to cancellation. This would reduce
the number of outstanding shares significantly. Between December 16, 1992 and
February 17, 1994, the Company may have issued more shares of Common Stock than
it had authorized under its Certificate of Incorporation.

  Potential Liability for Rescission of Dividends. In February 1994, the Company
declared a stock dividend on a ten to one basis of the following corporations,
all of which were contemplated subsidiaries of the Company: the TiTRODE
Corporation, the Metafuse Corporation, Electronics Recovery Systems, Inc., the
Titherm Technology Corporation and Shield Safe, Inc. In connection with such
dividends, each subsidiary was to receive a license for a particular technology
owned by the Company. The Company's Board of Directors has subsequently
rescinded such stock dividends principally because of the concern that such
dividends may not comply with the Delaware General Corporations Law since such
dividends would strip the Company of most of its valuable assets. It is possible
that a shareholder could challenge the rescission of the dividend and it is
unclear whether a Delaware court will uphold such rescission.

  Start-Up Company.  To date the Company has been engaged in the development of
technologies and intends to commercially exploit certain of its technologies
with third parties. Until the commencement of sales or licensing of the
technologies, the Company will have no operating revenues but will continue to
incur substantial expenses. No assurances can be given that the Company can
complete development of any technologies or that if a technology is, or in the
future may be, fully developed, that it can be manufactured by others on a large
scale basis or at a feasible cost. Further, no assurance can be given that any
technology will receive market acceptance. The Company is subject to all the
risks inherent in the establishment of a new enterprise and the marketing and
manufacturing of new products, many of which risks are beyond the control of the
Company. There can be no assurances that the proposed business of the Company
described herein will be commercially viable. In addition, actual results of the
development activities, technological developments, market and competitive
conditions, results of operation and other factors may require significant
<PAGE>
 
modification of all or part of the Company's proposed business plan. See Item 6.
Management's Plan of Operation.

     Accumulated Deficit; Operating Losses; Going Concern.  For the year ended
December 31, 1997, the Company incurred an aggregate operating loss of $882,223.
At December 31, 1997, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $14,018,562 and
a working capital deficit of $1,740,227. The Company has a ratio of liabilities
to tangible assets of 27.4 to 1 as of December 31, 1997. Such operating losses,
accumulated deficit and the working capital deficit have increased since such
date.  The losses are principally due to (1) the Company's unsuccessful search
for license, joint venture, or partnership arrangements with entities in
industries aligned with the Company's technologies, and (2) a lack of
technological and business focus.  The report of the Company's independent
certified public accountants is qualified with regard to the ability of the
Company to continue as a going concern.

     Risks of Foreign Operations. Certain studies and tests of the technologies
have been conducted outside of the United States.  Certain customers for these
technologies may be outside the United States, in various parts of the world,
including Europe, Russia and the Ukraine.  Thus, the Company may be subject to
the risks of operations including currency fluctuations, import/export controls,
lack of a well-defined business or legal system, arbitrary government actions,
and instability of a political system.

     Lack of Patent Protection. Patents do not cover most of the Company's
technologies. Of the technologies described herein, the Company's patents cover
the electronic recovery systems, the original Metafusion Process, and a patent
pending for the Polymer Encapsulations Technology (PET).  Those patents held by
the Company may be infringed upon by others and there can be no assurance that
the Company will be able to afford the high cost of filing and pursuing an
infringement action against any such alleged infringing party. In addition,
there can be no assurance that any particular aspect of the Company's
technologies will not be found to infringe the claims of other existing patents.
Certain technology embodied in the patents covering the Company's Metafusion
Process may incorporate technology embodied in patents owned by other entities.
Even if other patents infringed, Orbit may not have the financial resources to
prosecute. The Company has also filed a number of patent applications. There can
be no assurance that additional patents will be issued in respect of the patent
applications pending. The Company also relies, to a lesser extent, on trade
secrets and confidential disclosure agreements to protect its technology.
Neither the issuance of patents nor the use of trade secrets will necessarily
protect the Company from other persons using technologies similar to those
covered by the Company's patents or trade secrets.

     Lack of Full Time Research and Development Team. In addition to the
Company's officers, Orbit currently uses third party subcontractors and non-
affiliated laboratories to develop and review applications of its technologies.

     Dependence on Key Individuals. The success of the Company is dependent upon
among other things, the services of Dr. Stephen V. Prewett. Dr. Prewett is Vice
President - Technology Development and Dr. Christopher M. Miller, a consultant
with the company.  The loss of the services of Dr. Prewett and/or Dr. Miller for
any reason could have a material adverse effect of the prospects of the Company.

     Transactions with Prior Management. During the period prior to January 1996
there had been substantial transactions between the Company and members of
<PAGE>
 
management, including Adrian Joseph, Tatum C. Singletary and Richard A. Wall.
These transactions include the alleged exchange of technology developed or
purchased by Mr. Joseph for shares of Common Stock and/or the payment of shares
for debt or for services rendered to others. No assurances can be given that the
value of the technology transferred or the services rendered or other items of
value exchanged equal the value of the Common Stock transferred to such parties.
Such transfers were not approved by an independent majority of the board of
directors and thus may not have been on the same terms as if they were
transactions with unaffiliated third parties. An audit is being conducted to
review these transactions. Management is currently attempting to rectify the
apparent misconduct in these transactions. See item 3. Legal Proceedings and
Item 12. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.