Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2006 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop

Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated Nov 15

. Business Model Rating Criteria

A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital'

. Calculations

. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales)

Numerator

Denominator

IPO market capitalization…

Annualized Sales (last six or nine months)

(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range)

. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings)

Numerator

Denominator

IPO market cap

Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter

=========================================================================

SEARCH BY COMPANY

In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies

or ticker for analysis

scheduled below

=========================================================================

Summary ratios for the week of Nov 13 (IPOs not previously analyzed, scored & graded)

(P/E ratios based on annualizing recent results, see notes)

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Allot Comm (ALLT)

$244

7.3

327

3.4

2.9

27%

optimization products for broadband

Post-IPO shrs:24mm, includes 3.5mm option shrs

Consetlltn Enrgy PtrCEP

$226

6.5

19

1.5

1.5

40%

oil and natural gas properties: C+, 7

Post-IPO units:11.3mm

Emergent BioSolu EBSI

$411

4.7

-93

3.3

3.3

18%

biopharmaceutical -- immunobiotics: C+, 7

Post-IPO shrs:27.4mm

First Solar (FSLR)

$1,249

11.4

-234

3.6

3.6

25%

solar modules: B-, 8

Post-IPO shrs:70mm

Hansen Medical (HNSN)

$247

n/a

-10

3.1

3.1

30%

robotics for use of catheters, C, 6

Post-IPO shrs:20.5mm

Hertz Global (HTZ)

$5,457

0.7

54

2.3

2.9

27%

car-equipment rental: C, 7

Post-IPO shrs:321mm

KBR (KBR)

$2,648

0.3

52

1.4

1.7

17%

spin-off form Halliburton: C+, 7

Post-IPO shrs:166mm

NYMEX Holdgs (NMX)

$4,325

9.0

30

15.2

16.7

7%

futures exchange and clearinghouse: B, 9

Post-IPO shrs:86.5mm

Venoco (VQ)

$854

3.2

78

4.5

4.5

29%

oil-natural gas development: C, 7

Post-IPO shrs:43mm

=========================================================================

SEARCH BY COMPANY

In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies

or ticker for analysis

scheduled below

=========================================================================

Allot Communications

ALLT, C+, 7

optimization products for broadband

Post-IPO shrs:24mm, includes 3.5mm option shrs

Hod-Hasharon, Israel

2003

2004

2005

Sept 05*

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$15

$18

$23

$16

$25

Cap (mm)

Gross profit

$11

$14

$18

$12

$19

$244

Gross profit %

76%

75%

77%

75%

78%

@$10

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$2.3

-$3.3

-$2.4

-$2.7

$0.6

Profit (loss) %

-16%

-18%

-10%

-17%

2%

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Allot Comm (ALLT)

$244

7.3

327

3.4

2.9

27%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

1

2

7

Summary

. Significant top line revenue growth, high gross margins (above 75%)

. Broadband market growing, in part due to video

. Just breaking into profitabliity

. Srong competition from Cisco (CSCO, $162bb market cap)

. Orders from largest customer set to decline, see 'customer concentration' below

Business

. Broadband service optimization solutions using advanced deep packet inspection, or DPI,

technology.

. Provides broadband service providers and enterprises with real-time, highly granular visibility

into, and control of, network traffic, and enable them to efficiently and effectively manage and

optimize their networks.

Benefits

. End-customers use ALLT solutions to create sophisticated policies to monitor network

applications, enforce quality of service policies that guarantee mission-critical application

performance, mitigate security risks and leverage network infrastructure investments.

. Carrier-class products are used by service providers to offer subscriber-based and application

based tiered services that enable them to optimize their service offerings, reduce churn rates and

increase ARPU.

Sales & marketing

Sells products through channel partners, which include distributors, resellers, OEMs and system

integrators. End customers of our products include carriers, cable operators, wireless and wireline

Internet service providers, educational institutions, governments and enterprises.

Customer concentration

NTL sales to decline

. Derived 16% of revenues in 2005 and 27% in the first nine months of 2006 from a single system

integrator for products in the United Kingdom, primarily in connection with the deployment of our

products by NTL Group Limited, a leading United Kingdom cable operator.

. During these periods no other end-customer accounted for more than 5% of revenues.

. Expects that sales attributable to NTL will decline significantly as a percentage of revenue in the

last quarter of 2006 and in 2007 as deployment of a majority of products by NTL is completed and

as sales to other customers increase.

9% of revenues in 2005 from a single U.S. distributor of products to other resellers and system

integrators in the United States.

Intellectual property

As of September 30, 2006, had two U.S. patents and four pending patent applications in the

United States. Also has one pending counterpart application outside of the United States, filed

pursuant to the Patent Cooperation Treaty

Competition

Principal competitors are Cisco Systems (through its acquisition of P-Cube), Sandvine and

Ellacoya Networks in the service provider market, and Packeteer in the enterprise market

Employees

As of September 30, 2006, we had 232 employees of whom 170 were based in Israel, 29 in the

United States and the remainder in Asia and Europe.

Use of $58.5mm in IPO proceeds

For research and development activities, expand our business development and marketing

activities, and the remaining proceeds for general corporate purposes and working capital.

. May also use a portion of the net proceeds to acquire or invest in complementary companies,

products or technologies, although currently does not have any acquisitions or investments

planned.

==============================================

Constellation Energy Ptr

CEP, C+, 7

oil and natural gas properties

Post-IPO units:11.3mm

Baltimore, Maryland

2005

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Revenue ($mm)

proforma

$24

$26

Cap (mm)

Profit (loss) ($mm)

$0.8

$9.0

$226

Profit (loss) %

3.2%

34.5%

@$20

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Consetlltn Enrgy PtrCEP

$226

6.5

19

1.5

1.5

40%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

2

1

7

Summary

. Limited partnership intending to distribute at a 9.25% annual rate on units

. Based on results generated, however, when oil/enery prices were higher

. Formed by a NYSE company with a market cap of $16bb, which will receive a $107mm payout on the IPO

Initial distribution policy

. $0.4625 per unit quarterly, or $1.85 per unit per year

. 9.25% annual rate at the price range mid-point

Business

. Limited liability company that was formed by Constellation (NYSE:CEG) in February 2005 to

acquire coalbed methane reserves and production.

. Focused on the acquisition, development and exploitation of oil and natural gas properties, or

E&P properties, as well as related midstream assets

. Average proved reserve-to-production ratio is approximately 25 years

Relationship with Constellation (NYSE: CEG, $16bb market cap)

. Constellation, an integrated energy company with 2005 revenues of approximately $17.1 billion

and total assets of approximately $20.2 billion as of September 30, 2006.

. Constellation is engaged in numerous aspects of the energy industry, including, through CCG, oil

and natural gas exploration and production, or E&P, natural gas transportation, natural gas storage

and physical and financial natural gas trading.

Use of $81mm in IPO proceeds plus

$30mm in new borrowings under a new reserve-based credit facility

. Distribution to CEPH of $106.8 million. CEPH is subsidiary of the parent, Constellation (NYSE:CEG)

. Contribution by CHI for the Class D interests, $8mm

. Balance for working capital

===================================================

Emergent BioSolutions

EBSI, C+, 7

biopharmaceutical -- immunobiotics, vaccines

Post-IPO shrs:27.4mm

Gaithersburg, Maryland

2003

2004

2005

Sept 05*

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$56

$84

$131

$87

$66

Cap (mm)

Productiion cost ($mm)

$22

$30

$32

$23

$12

$411

Production cost %

39%

36%

24%

26%

17.6%

@$10

SG&A cost

$20

$30

$43

$30

$33

SG&A cost &

36%

36%

33%

34%

50%

Profit (loss) ($mm)

$4.5

$11.5

$15.8

$6.3

-$3.3

Profit (loss) %

8%

14%

12%

7%

-5%

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Emergent BioSolu EBSI

$411

4.7

-93

3.3

3.3

18%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

1

2

2

7

Summary

. Eratic quarterly results based shipments into a large Department of Defense (DoD) contract

. Lost money for the nine months ended Sept 30

. DoD is the only customer

. Developing other vaccines, see collaboration below

Business

. Biopharmaceutical company focused on immunobiotics.

. Immunobiotics are pharmaceutical products, such as vaccines and immune globulins, that induce

or assist the body's immune system to prevent or treat disease.

Two business segments -- biodefense and commercial.

. In the biodefense business, develops and commercializes immunobiotics for use against

biological agents that are potential weapons of bioterrorism.

. In the commercial business, develops immunobiotics for use against infectious diseases with

significant unmet or underserved medical needs.

BioThrax

. Manufactures and market BioThrax®, also referred to as anthrax vaccine adsorbed, the only

anthrax vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA.

. Has derived and expect for the foreseeable future to continue to derive substantially all of

revenue from sales of BioThrax.

Department of Defense contracts

. Current contract with the DoD provides for the supply of a minimum of approximately 1.5

million additional doses of BioThrax to the DoD through September 2007.

. In April 2006, the DoD issued a notice that it intends to negotiate a sole source fixed price

contract for the purchase of up to an additional 11 million doses of BioThrax over one base

contract year plus four option years.

. In May 2005, we entered into an agreement to supply five million doses of BioThrax to HHS for

placement into the strategic national stockpile for a fixed price of $123 million.

. Completed delivery of all five million doses by February 2006, seven months earlier than

required.

. In May 2006, entered into a contract modification with HHS for the delivery of an additional five

million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for a fixed price of $120 million.

. Delivered approximately one million doses of BioThrax under this contract modification through

September 2006.

Sanofi Pasteur collaboration

. In May 2006, entered into a collaboration agreement with Sanofi Pasteur relating to the

development and commercialization of our meningitis B vaccine candidate and received a $3.8

million upfront license fee.

. This agreement also provides for a series of milestone payments upon the achievement of

specified development and commercialization objectives, payments for development work under

the collaboration and royalties on net sales of this product.

Expects revenues to fluctuate

. Expects that revenues will continue to vary, on a quarterly basis primarily because of the timing

of fulfilling orders for BioThrax.

. Expects contracts and grant revenues to increase in 2006 compared to 2005 as EBSI receives

reimbursement for development expenses under the meningitis B collaboration with Sanofi

Pasteur, funding from the Wellcome Trust for costs associated with the completed Phase I clinical

trial and planned Phase II clinical trial of the typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam and funding

from NIAID for costs associated with the animal efficacy studies in rabbits of EBSI's anthrax

immune globulin candidate.

Intellectual property

. As of October 20, 2006, owned or licensed a total of 20 U.S. patents and 44 U.S. patent

applications relating to biodefense and commercial product candidates as well as numerous

foreign counterparts to many of these patents and patent applications.

. Patent portfolio includes patents and patent applications with claims directed to compositions of

matter, pharmaceutical formulations and methods of use.

Competition

. GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis, Wyeth, Merck and Chiron generated approximately 85% of

total vaccine revenues in 2005

. Smaller or more focused companies, including VaxGen, Cangene, Human Genome Sciences,

Acambis, Avant Immunotherapeutics and Avecia, may also prove to be significant competitors,

particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

Use of $66mm in IPO proceeds

o $10 million of these net proceeds to fund development of our biodefense product candidates,

comprised of $3 million for label expansions and improvements for BioThrax, $2 million for a

next generation anthrax vaccine candidate and $5 million for our anthrax immune globulin

candidate;

o $19 million of these net proceeds to fund clinical development of our commercial product

candidates, comprised of $6 million for our typhoid vaccine candidate and $13 million for

EBSI's hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidate;

o $25 million of these net proceeds to fund a portion of the construction, validation and

qualification costs for a new manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan and the initial

engineering design and preliminary utility build out of the manufacturing facilities in Frederick,

Maryland; and

o the balance of these net proceeds for general corporate purposes, which may include the

expansion of our sales and marketing organization, the acquisition or in license of technologies,

products or businesses, working capital and capital expenditures

===========================================================

First Solar

FSLR, B-, 8

solar modules

Post-IPO shrs:70mm

Phoenix, AZ

2003

2004

2005

Sept 05*

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$3

$14

$48

$35

$82

Cap (mm)

Gross profit

-$8

-$5

$17

$13

$29

$1,249

Gross profit %

-259%

-39%

35%

37%

35%

@$18

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$28

-$17

-$7

$1

-$4

Profit (loss) %

-875%

-124%

-14%

2%

-5%

Note: Sept 06 results includes $7.75mm in production startup costs

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

Pretax profit not counting production startup costs

$4

& of revenues

4.6%

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

First Solar (FSLR)

$1,249

11.4

-234

3.6

3.6

25%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

2

2

8

Summary

. Signficant top line revenue growth

. Low cost product selling into a growing market

. Ramping up production

. If one-time production startup costs are backed out, would have been profitable for the Sept nine months

Business

. Solar modules using a proprietary thin film semiconductor technology that has allowed FSLR to

reduce average solar module manufacturing costs to among the lowest in the world.

. Average manufacturing costs were $1.59 per Watt in 2005 and $1.50 per Watt in the first nine

months of 2006, which we believe were significantly less than those of traditional crystalline

silicon solar module manufacturers.

. By continuing to expand production and improve technology and manufacturing process, FSLR

believes that it can further reduce manufacturing costs per Watt and improve the cost advantage

over traditional crystalline silicon solar module manufacturers.

Objective & competitive advantages

Objective

. To become, by 2010, the first solar module manufacturer to offer a solar electricity solution that

competes on a non-subsidized basis

. With the price of retail electricity in key markets in the United States, Europe and Asia.

Stable supply of raw materials

. FSLR does not believe it is currently constrained by and does not foresee a shortage of cadmium

telluride, its most critical semiconductor material. In addition, because of the relatively small

amount of semiconductor material FSLR uses, FSLR believes its exposure to cadmium telluride

price increases is limited.

. By contrast, Solarbuzz estimates that a shortage of silicon feedstock will constrain the production

of certain crystalline silicon solar module manufacturers until 2008.

Low cost

. FSLR believes it is the first company to integrate non-silicon thin film technology into high

volume low cost production.

. FSLR's manufacturing process transforms an inexpensive 2ft x 4ft (60cm x 120cm) sheet of

glass into a complete solar module in less than three hours, using 1% of the semiconductor

material used to produce traditional crystalline silicon solar modules.

Market supply growth

. Worldwide, annual installations by the photovoltaic industry grew from 0.3GW in 2001 to

1.5GW in 2005, representing an average annual growth rate of over 43%.

. In 2005, the cumulative installed capacity of solar modules surpassed 5GW.

Sales & demand

. Historically, almost all of net sales have been to project developers and system integrators

headquartered in Germany, who then resell FSLR solar modules to end-users.

. Strong market demand, a positive customer response to FSLR's solar modules and its ability to

expand production without raw material constraints

. Present FSLR with the opportunity to expand sales rapidly and increase market share.

Production lines expand

. Currently, FSLR operates three 25MW production lines. FSLR refers to the original 25MW

production line in its Ohio facility as our base plant.

. In August 2006, FSLR completed an expansion of its Ohio facility, adding two 25MW

production lines, the Ohio expansion.

. With the completion of the Ohio expansion, FSLR will have an annual manufacturing capacity of

75MW, and will have become the largest thin film solar module manufacturer in the world.

. Currently FSLR is building four 25MW production lines in Germany

. After FSLR's German plant reaches full capacity, estimated for the second half of 2007, FSLR

will have an annual manufacturing capacity of 175MW.

. FSLR is also in the planning stage for a new manufacturing plant in Asia.

Pre-sold capacity through Long Term Supply Contracts

. FSLR recently entered into long-term solar module supply contracts with six project developers

and system integrators headquartered in Germany that allow for approximately €1.2 billion ($1.4

billion at an assumed exchange rate of $1.20/€1.00) in sales from 2006 to 2011.

. These Long Term Supply Contracts contemplate the manufacture and sale of a total of 745MW

of solar modules.

. Under each of FSLR's Long Term Supply Contracts, FSLR has a unilateral option, exercisable

until December 31, 2006, to increase the sales volumes and extend such contract through 2012

. FSLR plans to exercise each option promptly following the completion of this offering, after

which these contracts will allow for €1.9 billion ($2.3 billion at an assumed exchange rate of

$1.20/€1.00) in sales from 2006 to 2012 for a total of 1,270MW of solar modules.

. The sales contemplated by the Long Term Supply Contracts increase year over year through

2008 and remain constant thereafter.

. The Long Term Supply Contracts require a 6.5% annual decline in sales price and an 5% annual

increase from 2007 to 2009 in the minimum average sellable Watts per module

. In order to satisfy contractual requirements and to address additional market demand, FSLR is

expanding its annual manufacturing capacity from 75MW to 175MW by the second half of 2007.

Financial reporting risk

. As of December 31, 2005, did not maintain effective controls over the preparation, review and

presentation and disclosure of consolidated financial statements due to a lack of personnel with

experience in financial reporting and control procedures necessary for SEC registrants.

. This failure caused several significant deficiencies, four of which had a large enough impact on

operating results to individually constitute material weaknesses.

Intellectual property

. As of September 30, 2006, in the United States FSLR held 26 patents, which will expire at various

times between 2007 and 2023, and had 15 patent applications pending.

. Also held 16 patents and had 37 patent applications pending in foreign jurisdictions.

Competition

. Main sources of competition are crystalline silicon solar module manufacturers, other thin film

solar module manufacturers and companies developing solar thermal and concentrated

photovoltaic technologies.

. Among photovoltaic module and cell manufacturers, the principal methods of competition are

price per Watt, production capacity, conversion efficiency and reliability.

Global photovoltaic industry

. At the end of 2005, the global photovoltaic industry consisted of over 100 manufacturers of

photovoltaic cells and solar modules.

. Within the PV industry, FSLR faces competition from crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell solar

module manufacturers, including BP Solar, Evergreen Solar, Kyocera, Motech, Q-Cells,

Renewable Energy Corporation, Sanyo, Schott Solar, Sharp, SolarWorld, Sunpower and Suntech. .

Also faces competition from thin film solar module manufacturers, including Antec, Kaneka,

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Shell Solar and United Solar.

Thin film expansion

. With the completion of FSLR's Ohio expansion, has an annual manufacturing capacity of 75MW

and is the largest thin film manufacturer in the world.

. According to Photon International, United Solar and Kaneka are the second and third largest thin

film manufacturers, with estimated 2006 manufacturing capacities of 30MW and 29MW,

respectively.

. FSLR's current conversion efficiency of 9% also compares favorably to other thin film

manufacturers, according to estimates by Sun & Wind Energy: Antec (6.9%); Kaneka (6.3%);

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (6.3%); Shell Solar (9.3%); and United Solar (6.3%).

. FSLR's solar module comes only in one size measuring 2ft x 4ft (60cm x 120cm). In contrast,

some of the thin film competitors, such as United Solar, have developed solar products that are

flexible and can be tailored to a customer's specifications.

Other competition

. FSLR may also face competition from semiconductor manufacturers and semiconductor

equipment manufacturers, or their customers, several of which have already announced their

intention to start production of photovoltaic cells, solar modules or turnkey production lines

. In addition to manufacturers of PV cells and solar modules, FSLR faces competition from

companies developing solar thermal and concentrated PV technologies.

Employees

. On September 30, 2006, had 634 employees, including 491 in manufacturing, 33 in research and

development, 10 in sales and marketing and 100 in general and administrative.

. Of these employees, 21 are located in Phoenix, Arizona, 582 are located in Perrysburg, Ohio, 14

are located in Mainz, Germany, 2 are located in Berlin, Germany, 2 are located in Brussels,

Belgium, 12 are located in Frankfurt (Oder), Germany and 1 is located in Denver, Colorado

History

. Began developing predecessor technology in 1987

. Did not complete the qualification of the pilot manufacturing line until January 2002 and the base

plant until November 2004.

. Launched commercial operations in January 2002 through the end of 2005

Use of $222.3mm in IPO proceeds from sale of $13.25mm shares

(shareholders intend to sell 4.25mm shares)

o $150.0 million to build a manufacturing facility in Asia and approximately $30.0 million to fund

the associated ramp-up costs;

o $26.0 million to repay related party debt; and

o remainder for working capital and general corporate purposes, including potential acquisitions

and vertical integration

=======================================================

Hansen Medical

HNSN, C, 6

roboticsfor use of catheters

Post-IPO shrs:20.5mm

Mountain View, CA

2003

2004

2005

6-Sep

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$4

-$7

-$21

-$17

-$18

Cap (mm)

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

$247

@$12

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Hansen Medical (HNSN)

$247

n/a

-10

3.1

3.1

30%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

0

2

6

Summary

. Relatively unique product almost ready to ship

. Main competitor Stereotaxis (STSX) IPO'd August 12, 2004 and lost $13mm in the June quarter

. Appears to be a long road to profitablility for HNSN

Business

. New generation of medical robotics designed for accurate positioning, manipulation and stable

control of catheters and catheter-based technologies.

. Currently have no products approved for sale. To date, has generated no revenue, and we

have incurred net losses in each year since our inception

Sensei system

. Designed to allow physicians to instinctively navigate catheters with greater stability and control

in interventional procedures.

. HNSN believes its Sensei system and its corresponding disposable Artisan Control Catheter, or

Artisan control catheter, will enable physicians to perform procedures that historically have been

too difficult or time consuming to accomplish routinely with existing catheters and catheter-based

technologies, or that we believe could be accomplished only by the most skilled physicians.

Expecting shipments to begin

. Expects to begin commercial shipments of Sensei system and disposable Artisan control

catheters in Europe and in the United States in 2007, subject to receiving required regulatory

clearances.

. In the United States, are currently seeking clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug

Administration, or FDA, for the use of the Sensei system and Artisan control catheters for

mapping the heart anatomy

Competition

In electrophysiology, the first targeted market

o Drug therapies

. Drug therapy is currently considered the first line treatment for electrophysiological conditions

such as atrial fibrillation.

. Not currently aware of drug therapies under development that have the potential to improve the

success rate of drug treatment for electrophysiological conditions such as atrial fibrillation

. However, to the extent that more effective drug therapies are developed and approved for use in

treating these conditions, HNSN will face increased competition.

o Existing manual catheter-based interventional techniques.

. The vast majority of interventional EP procedures performed today are performed with several

types of hand-held catheters.

. These products evolve rapidly, and their manufacturers are constantly attempting to make them

easier to use or more efficacious in performing procedures.

o Minimally invasive surgical procedures

. A number of manufacturers are attempting to market devices that access the heart through an

endoscopic surgical technique called thoracoscopy to treat atrial fibrillation.

. While less invasive than open surgery, these still require a surgical incision and general

anesthesia, and therefore are more traumatic to the patient than an interventional EP procedure.

o Magnetic guidance systems for steering catheters.

. Stereotaxis, Inc. markets a system that has been on the market in the United States and in Europe

since 2003 and that uses magnets to control the working tip of catheters and other control catheters

during interventional EP and other procedures.

. Because the system was introduced prior to HNSN's Sensei system and has a significant installed

base, HNSN believes it currently leads the market for guidance systems for controlling the

working tip of catheters and catheter-based technologies.

o New approaches

. HNSN expects to face competition from companies that are developing new approaches and

products for use in interventional procedures.

. Some of these companies may attempt to use robotic techniques to compete directly with HNSN

. Many of these companies have an established presence in the field of interventional cardiology,

including the major imaging, capital equipment and disposables companies that are currently

selling products in the EP lab.

Use of $67mm in IPO proceeds

o $18.0 million for sales, marketing and general administrative activities;

o $10.0 million for research and product development activities;

o $8.0 million for capital equipment and tenant improvements; and

o remainder to fund working capital and other general corporate purposes.

========================================================

Hertz Global

HTZ, C, 7

car-equipment rental

Post-IPO shrs:321mm

Park Ridge, NY

2003

2004

2005

June 06*

Sept 06**

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$5,934

$6,676

$7,469

$3,827

$6,068

Cap (mm)

Interest Exp ($mm)

$355

$384

$886

$423

$673

$5,457

Interest % of rev

6%

6%

12%

11%

11%

@$17

Profit (loss) ($mm)

$159

$366

$3

-$33

$76

Profit (loss) %

3%

5%

0%

-1%

1.3%

Note: 2005 & 2006 are proforma for the leveraged buyout

*for the six months ended June 30

**for the nine months ended Sept 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Hertz Global (HTZ)

$5,457

0.7

54

2.3

2.9

27%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

1

3

1

7

Note: graded C because of the jump in interest charges due to leveraged buy-out

Compare & contrast

Price 11/10

Hertz Global (HTZ)

$5,457

0.7

54

2.3

2.9

Avis Budget Group (CAR)

$2,040

0.4

20

n/a*

n/a*

$20.51

CAR assumes proforma pretax income of $130mm for the nine months ended Sept 30, 40% tax rate

*not available based on a series of upcoming accounting adjustments

Dollar Thrifty (DTG)

$1,010

0.6

13

1.5

2.9

$41.46

Observation

. Based on the above comparisons the private equity groups are likely telling the institutional investors

'We can manage Hertz better than Ford did. We are more focused and you can trust us'

. If Fortress Funds (Gatehouse, etc) had been the buyer…

Summary

. Big international brand

. Private equity bought from Ford for book value ($2.3bb) December 21, 2005

. IPO set at 2.3 times book (130% over purchase price)

. Post-IPO private equity will have returned all investment except $656mm

. After 4 1/2 months private equity money will be worth $3.9 billion, a 650% short term profit

Conclusion

. Ford (the prior owner) was desperate to sell by the end of 2005

. This is the biggest private equity/leverage buyout short term profit flip in history

. The IPO price appears high, especially because interest charges now consume 11% of revenue, up from 6% pre-buyout

Business

. Owns what HTZ believes is the largest worldwide general use car rental brand and one of the

largest equipment rental businesses in the United States, both based on revenues.

. HTX and its independent licensees and associates accept reservations for car rentals at

approximately 7,600 locations in approximately 145 countries.

. The only car rental company that has an extensive network of company-operated rental locations

both in the United States and in all major European markets.

. HTZ and its predecessors have been in the car rental business since 1918 and in the equipment

rental business since 1965.

The Transactions -650% return in four months

. On June 30, 2006 HTZ acquired 'old Hertz' for equity contributions from three sponsors totaling

$2.295 billion, of which $1.437 will have been repaid in dividends post-IPO

. Plus $92 million in fees ($25mm each for the initial transactions, $5mm each for terminating the

consulting relationship, $2.25mm for other fees)

. Post-IPO the three sponsors will have about $656 million in remaining equity with an IPO mid

point price range value of $3.9 billion

Sponsors

. Clayton, Dubilier & Rice

. The Carlyle Group

. Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity

Relationship with Ford

. Prior to the Acquisition, Ford, through its wholly owned subsidiary Ford Holdings, was Hertz's

only stockholder.

. Pre-IPO, investment funds associated with or designated by the Sponsors own 99% of Hertz

Holdings' outstanding common stock, with the remainder held by members of management

. Post-IPO, the funds associated with or designated by the Sponsors will hold 72% of outstanding

common stock.

Dividend policy

. HTZ's ability to pay dividends to holders of common stock is limited as a practical matter by

Hertz's Senior Credit Facilities, Hertz's Fleet Debt Facilities and the indentures governing Hertz's

Senior Notes and Senior Subordinated Notes, insofar as HTZ may seek to pay dividends out of

funds made available to it by Hertz and/or its subsidiaries,

. Because Hertz's debt facilities directly or indirectly restrict Hertz's ability to pay dividends or

make loans to HTZ.

Use of $1.437 billion in IPO proceeds

. Repay loan that was used for cash dividend of $999.2 million on June 30, 2006

. Of this amount, approximately $991.4 million, or over 99%, was paid to investment funds

associated with or designated by the Sponsors on a pro rata basis according to their ownership of

HTZ common stock.

. Expects to pay an additional $427mm to pre-IPO shareholders of record from IPO proceeds

==========================================================

KBR

KBR, C+, 7

spin-off from Halliburton

Post-IPO shrs:166mm

Houston, TX

2003

2004

2005

Sept 05*

Sept 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$8,813

$11,906

$10,146

$7,422

$7,124

Cap (mm)

Profit (loss) ($mm)*

-$142

-$314

$210

$162

$38

$2,648

Profit (loss) %

-2%

-3%

2%

2%

1%

@$16

Backlog ($mm)*

$8,600

$7,100

$10,600

$15,000

* continuing operations

*for the nine months ended Sept 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

KBR (KBR)

$2,648

0.3

52

1.4

1.7

17%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

2

1

7

Compare & contrast

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

15-Nov

KBR (KBR)

$2,648

0.3

52

1.4

1.7

Fluor Corporation (FLR)

$7,400

0.5

30

4.1

4.6

$84.08

Jacobs Engineering (JEC)

$4,770

0.6

24

3.4

5.6

$81.13

Halliburton Co. (HAL)

$33,830

1.8

16

4.8

5.4

$33.64

Backlog, Sept 30, 2006

($bb)

KBR (KBR)

$15.0

Fluor Corporation (FLR)

$19.8

Jacobs Engineering (JEC)

$9.8

Update note, November 15

U.K. to Complete KBR Review This Month

. KBR said the British government warned that if it determined a stand-alone KBR didn't have enough

financial strength, it could retake the shipyard or allow the minority owners to buy out KBR's 51% stake.

. UK Ministry of Defence shipyard segment accounted for 8.8% of revenue for the nine months ended Sept 30, 2006

. See below under 'Risks', G&I segment

Summary

. Engineering, construction spinoff from businesses acquired by Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) $32bb market cap

. Backlog increasing, although Iraq work expected to decline

. Halliburton intends to sell all remaining shares

Business

. Leading global engineering, construction and services company supporting the energy,

petrochemicals, government services and civil infrastructure sectors.

. Largest U.S.-based international contractor according to Engineering News-Record based on

fiscal 2005 construction revenue from projects outside a company's home country.

. Engineering News-Record also ranks KBR as the fourth largest U.S.-based contractor overall

based on fiscal 2005 construction revenue.

History

KBR traces its history and culture to two businesses: The M.W. Kellogg Company (Kellogg) and

Brown & Root, Inc. (Brown & Root).

. Kellogg dates back to a pipe fabrication business which was founded in New York in 1901 and

has been creating technology for petroleum refining and petrochemicals processing since 1919

. Brown & Root was founded in Houston, Texas in 1919 and built the world's first offshore

platform in 1947.

. Brown & Root was acquired by Halliburton in 1962 and Kellogg was acquired by Halliburton in

1998 through its merger with Dresser Industrie

Asbestos and Silica Settlement and Prepackaged Chapter 11 Proceeding and Completion

. In December 2003, six subsidiaries (and two other entities that are subsidiaries of

Halliburton) sought Chapter 11 protection to discharge current and future asbestos and silica

personal injury claims and demands.

. The order confirming the Chapter 11 plan of reorganization became final and nonappealable on

December 31, 2004, and the plan of reorganization became effective in January 2005.

. Pursuant to the plan of reorganization and the order confirming the plan, a permanent injunction

has been issued enjoining the prosecution of asbestos and silica personal injury claims and

demands against our subsidiaries and our affiliates.

Relationship With Halliburton

. Currently a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton.

. In addition to owning KBR, Halliburton is one of the world's largest energy services companies.

. Upon the closing of this offering, Halliburton will own 83% of KBR's outstanding common

stock, or 81% if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, and will continue to

be controlled by Halliburton.

. Halliburton has advised KBR that it intends to dispose of KBR's common stock that it owns

following this offering as expeditiously as possible through a tax-free distribution to Halliburton's

stockholders

Markets

. A leader in many of the growing end-markets that serves, particularly gas monetization, having

designed and constructed, alone or with joint venture partners, more than half of the world's

operating liquefied natural gas (LNG) production capacity over the past 30 years.

. In addition, KBR is one of the ten largest government defense contractors worldwide according

to a Defense News ranking based on fiscal 2005 revenue and, accordingly, KBR believes it is the

world's largest government defense services provider.

Two business segments

Energy and Chemicals (E&C) and

. Provides a wide range of engineering, procurement, construction, facility commissioning and

start-up (EPC-CS) services, as well as program and project management, consulting and

technology services for energy and petrochemical projects.

. Provides these services to a diverse customer base, including international and national oil and

gas companies, independent refiners, petrochemical producers, and fertilizer producers.

. Expertise includes onshore oil and gas production facilities, offshore oil and gas production

facilities (which KBR refers to collectively as its offshore projects), pipelines, LNG and gas-to

liquids (GTL) gas monetization facilities (which KBR refers to collectively as its gas monetization

projects), refineries, petrochemical plants and synthesis gas (Syngas).

. Currently benefiting from increased capital expenditures by petroleum and petrochemicals

customer base and expect demand for services to continue to increase with the growth in world

energy consumption.

Government and Infrastructure (G&I), 65% of 2005 revenue

. Provides program and project management, contingency logistics, operations and maintenance,

construction management, engineering, and other services to military and civilian branches of

domestic and foreign governments and private customers worldwide.

. Delivers on-demand support services across the full military mission cycle from contingency

logistics and field support to operations and maintenance on military bases.

. A significant portion of the G&I segment's current operations relate to the support of United

States government operations in the Middle East, which KBR refers to as its Middle East

operations.

. Also currently is the majority owner of Devonport Management Limited (DML), which owns

and operates Western Europe's largest naval dockyard complex. KBR's DML shipyard operations

are primarily engaged in refueling nuclear submarines and performing maintenance on surface

vessels for the U.K. Ministry of Defence as well as limited commercial projects.

. The G&I segment operates in diverse sectors of the civil infrastructure market, including

transportation, waste and water treatment, and facilities maintenance.

. KBR expects the heightened focus on global security, military operations and major military

force realignments, as well as global growth in government outsourcing, to enhance demand for

KBR's services.

Backlog

From continuing operations

Sept 30, 2006 --$15 billion; Dec 2005--$10.6bb; Dec 2004--$7.1bb; Dec 2003--$8.6bb

Risks

G&I segments

o The current level of government services being provided in the Middle East will not likely

continue for an extended period of time, and the current rate of spending has decreased

substantially compared to 2005 and 2004.

. Government services revenue related to Iraq under our LogCAP III and other contracts totaled

$3.6 billion in the nine months ended September 30, 2006, $5.4 billion in 2005, $7.1 billion in

2004 and $3.5 billion in 2003.

. KBR expects the volume of work under the LogCAP III contract to continue to decline as the

customer scales back the amount of services KBR provides under this contract, and KBR expects

to complete all open task orders under the LogCAP III contract during 2007.

. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has also announced that it will solicit competitive bids

for a new multiple service provider LogCAP IV contract to replace the current LogCAP III

contract, under which KBR is the sole provider.

. KBR expects the volume of work under the MoD contract with KBR's DML joint venture to refit

and refuel the MoD's nuclear submarine fleet to decline in 2009 and 2010 as KBR completes this

round of refueling of the current fleet. The MoD also has the right at any time to assume control of

the dockyard operated by DML if the MoD deems it to be in the essential security interests of the

United Kingdom

E&C segment

Depends on demand and capital spending by oil and natural gas companies for KBR's services,

which is directly affected by trends in oil and gas prices and other factors affecting customers.

Competition and Scope of Global Operations

. Conducts business in over 45 countries.

. Operations in countries other than the United States accounted for 87% of consolidated revenue

during 2005 and 90% of consolidated revenue during 2004.

. Based on the location of services provided, 50% of consolidated revenue in 2005 and 45% in

2004 was from operations in Iraq, primarily related to work for the United States government

. Revenue from operations in Iraq represented 27% of consolidated revenue in 2003.

. Also, 8% of consolidated revenue during 2005 was from the United Kingdom.

Customers

. Revenue from the U.S. government, resulting primarily from work performed in the Middle East

by KBR's G&I segment, represented 65% of 2005 consolidated revenue, 67% of 2004

consolidated revenue, and 47% of 2003 consolidated revenue.

. No other customer represented more than 10% of consolidated revenue in any of these periods

Use of $416mm in IPO proceeds

Repay debt incurred under subordinated intercompany notes

. Remaining net proceeds will be used for general business purposes

At September 30, 2006, the aggregate principal amount owed under the subordinated

intercompany notes was $774 million, and in October 2006, KBR repaid $324 million in

aggregate principal amount of this indebtedness.

=================================================================

NYMEX Holdings

NMX, B, 9

futures exchange and clearinghouse

Post-IPO shrs:86.5mm

New York, NY

2003

2004