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

Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated Oct 28

. 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 month's revenues times 2)

(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

for analysis

scheduled below

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

Summary ratios for the week of Oct 30 (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

Globalstar (GSAT)

$1,180

8.5

328

3.0

5.6

9%

voice/ data communications services: C, 7

Post-IPO shrs:69.4mm

Innophos Hldngs (IPHS)

$284

0.5

46

3.7

-9.6

46%

specialty phosphate salts and acids: C, 7

Post-IPO shrs:19mm

ORBCOMM (ORBC)

$472

18.7

-44

2.9

3.1

31%

low-Earth orbit satellites for wireless: C, 6

Post-IPO shrs:36.3mm

RRSat Netwrk (RRST)

$200

5.1

28

3.9

3.9

23%

distribution services for tv/radio: C+, 7

Post-IPO shrs:16.7mm

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

SEARCH BY COMPANY

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

for analysis

scheduled below

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

Globalstar

GSAT, C, 7

voice/ data communications services

Post-IPO shrs:69.4mm

Milpitas, CA

2004

2005

June 05*

June 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$84

$127

$50

$69

Cap (mm)

Direct cost of services ($mm)

$25

$25

$14

$14

$1,180

Direct cost of services % of rev

29.9%

20.0%

27.4%

20.2%

@$17

Operating income ($mm)

-$3.5

$21.9

$6.4

$5.7

Operating income %

-4.1%

17.2%

12.7%

8.3%

Fully-taxed C-conversion proforma

$14.3

$2.0

June 30 six months estimate, down 10% because operating earnings down 10%

$1.8

*for the six months ended June 30

Operating data -- averages

2004

2005

June 05*

June 06*

Monthly revenue

$67.93

$68.10

$66.88

$57.52

Cost per gross addition

$230.00

$248.00

$334.00

$248.00

Churn rate

1.51

1.27

1.08

1.09

Number of subsribers (mm)

141

196

158

236

*for the six months ended June 30

Observations -- for the six months ended June 30, 2006 vs 2005 six months

. Revenue up 38%

. Subscribers have increased 50%, but operating income is down 10%

. $ direct cost of services stable

. Operating income down 10%

. Most likley reflects a more price competitve environment

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Globalstar (GSAT)

$1,180

8.5

328

3.0

5.6

9%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

2

1

7

Notes to income statement

Average revenue per user

. Average retail revenue per user during the six months ended June 30, 2006 decreased by 14.0% to $57.52

from $66.88 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. This decline resulted from the rapid acceptance of

GSAT’s Liberty Plans, introduced broadly in April 2005 and which require subscribers to pre-pay for a

year of service.

. Liberty Plans reduce current period revenue because revenue is not recognized until minutes are used or

expire. Unused minutes are recognized as revenue at the expiration of a Plan. Subscribers generally do not

use all of the minutes for which they have prepaid.

. Accordingly, GSAT expects an increase in average retail revenue per user in later periods as the minutes

related to Liberty Plans sold in prior periods are used or expire

Gross margins

. Added substantially more new subscribers during the six months ended June 30, 2006 than during the first

six months of 2005,

. Which had the short-term effect of lowering current period margins

. Because all subscriber acquisition costs are expensed in the current period.

One time tax benefit not recurring

and is eliminated from the above results,

specifically for the six months ended June 30, 2006

Company history

. On February 15, 2002, Old Globalstar and three of its subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions under

Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code.

. New GSAT was formed in Delaware in November 2003 for the purpose of acquiring

substantially all the assets of Old Globalstar and its subsidiaries.

. With Bankruptcy Court approval, GSAT acquired Old Globalstar's assets and assumed certain of

its liabilities in a two-step transaction, with the first step completed on December 5, 2003, and the

second step on April 14, 2004.

. Management determined that operational control of its business passed to them with the

completion of the first step of the acquisition on December 5, 2003.

Thermo Funding

In 2004, Thermo Capital Partners L.L.P., which owns and operates companies in diverse business sectors,

became the principal owner, and GSAT completed the acquisition of the business and assets of Old

Globalstar.

Funding agreement

. GSAT entered into an irrevocable standby stock purchase agreement with Thermo Funding Company

pursuant to which it agreed to purchase under certain circumstances up to $200.0 million of Series A

common stock at a price of $16.17 without regard to any future increase in the trading price of GSAT’s

common stock.

Business

. Leading provider of mobile voice and data communications services via satellite, with an

estimated 10.2% share of global subscribers in the mobile satellite services industry in 2005.

. By providing wireless services where terrestrial wireless and wireline networks do not, GSAT

seeks to address customers' increasing desire for connectivity and reliable service at all times and

locations.

Target markets & growth trends

> Target markets include government, public safety and disaster relief; recreation and personal;

maritime and fishing; business, financial and insurance; natural resources, mining and forestry; oil

and gas; construction; utilities; and transportation.

> Both the industry and GSAT’s own subscriber base have been growing rapidly as a result of:

• favorable market reaction to new pricing plans with lower service charges;

• awareness of the need for remote and reliable communication services;

• increased demand for reliable communication services by disaster and relief agencies and

emergency first responders;

• improved voice and data transmission quality; and

• a general reduction in prices of user equipment.

In addition, GSAT’s industry as a whole has benefited from the improved financial condition of

most industry participants following their financial reorganizations or conversions to private

ownership.

Services

• two-way voice communication between mobile or fixed handsets or user terminals sold by us

and other mobile and fixed devices;

• two-way data transmissions (which we call duplex) between mobile and fixed data modems;

• one-way data transmissions (which we call Simplex) between a mobile device that transmits its

location or other telemetry information and a central monitoring station.

Risk -- competition and pricing pressures

. GSAT faces increased competition from both the expansion of terrestrial-based cellular phone

systems and from other mobile satellite service providers.

. For example, Inmarsat plans to commence offering satellite services to handheld devices in the

United States around 2008, and several competitors, such as ICO Communications, have received

financing to deploy new satellite constellations.

. Increased numbers of competitors, and the introduction of new services and products by

competitors, increases competition for subscribers and pressures all providers, including GSAT, to

reduce prices.

. Accordingly, increased competition may result in loss of subscribers, decreased revenue,

decreased gross margins, increased cost per gross addition, higher churn rates, and, ultimately,

decreased profitability and cash flows.

Licenses

. GSAT holds licenses to operate a wireless communications network via satellite over 27.85

MHz, comprised of two blocks of contiguous global radio frequencies

. GSAT is also licensed by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, or the FCC, to provide

an ancillary terrestrial component, known as ATC services, in combination with GSAT’s existing

communication services.

Satellites & ground stations

. Using 43 in-orbit satellites and 25 ground stations, which GSAT refers to as gateways, voice and

data communications services are offered in over 120 countries. Sixteen of these gateways are

operated by unaffiliated companies, which purchase communications services from GSAT on a

wholesale basis for resale to their customers.

Special GSAT equipment required

GSAT services are available only with equipment designed to work on GSAT’s network and

includes

• mobile telephones;

• fixed telephones;

• telephone accessories, such as car kits and chargers; and

• data modems.

Subscribers

. At June 30, 2006, GSAT served 236,500 subscribers.

. Added 54,000 and 41,000 net subscribers in the year ended December 31, 2005 and in the six

months ended June 30, 2006, respectively

Service history & growth plan

. GSAT’s satellite constellation was launched in the late 1990s

. GSAT intends to launch eight spare satellites in 2007 to supplement those currently in orbit.

. GSAT believes that, as supplemented, its constellation will continue to provide commercially

acceptable service at least into 2010.

. GSAT is currently in the process of designing and procuring its second-generation satellite

constellation, which it expects to deploy beginning in 2009 to extend the life of its network until

approximately 2025.

Employees

As of June 30, 2006, had 316 full-time employees and six part-time employees, none of whom is

subject to any collective bargaining agreement.

Use of $100mm in IPO proceeds

. To fund in part the procurement and launch of GSAT’s second-generation satellite constellation

and related upgrades to gateways and other ground facilities.

. GSAT estimates that the cost to procure and launch these satellites and upgrade these facilities

will be $1.0 billion to $1.2 billion between now and 2014.

. GSAT intends to fund the balance of those costs principally from $100 million of proceeds from

the delayed draw term loans under the credit agreement, the remaining proceeds of sales of

GSAT’s common stock under Thermo Funding Company's $200mm irrevocable standby stock

purchase agreement and $600 million to $800 million in cash generated by GSAT’s business.

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

Innophos Holdings

IPHS, C, 7

specialty phosphate salts and acids

Post-IPO shrs:19mm

Cranbury, NJ

2005

June 05*

June 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$535

$272

$270

Cap (mm)

Gross Profit %

17.2%

17.8%

16.7%

$284

Operating income ($mm)

$41.3

$19.5

$23.3

@$15

Operating income %

7.7%

7.2%

8.6%

Interest ($mm)

$46.6

$21.6

$26.3

Interest %

8.7%

7.9%

9.7%

Notice interest is greater than operating income

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$16.7

-$4.7

-$3.1

Profit (loss) %

-3.1%

-1.7%

-1.1%

Adjusted EBITDA ($mm)

$88.0

$43.0

$46.0

Adjusted EBITDA %

16.4%

15.8%

17.0%

Proforma

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$2.4

$0.9

$3.1

Profit (loss) %

-0.4%

0.3%

1.1%

Note:

*for the six months ended June 30

In financial statement footnote (9) the ‘pro forma’ income calculation does not reflect the

$115.6mm dividend paid to shareholders in February 2005. We believe the proforma calculations

should reflect the dividend payment

"(9) Adjusted to give effect to this offering and application of the proceeds and cash used to pay

down indebtedness as described in "Use of Proceeds" as if they had occurred at the beginning of

the period. This does not reflect the reverse stock split contemplated by the Company. Nor does

this reflect the $115.6 million dividend that was paid to our shareholders in February 2005. "

Source: bottom of page 12 in the S-1/A filed October 20, 2006

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

Innophos Holdings IPHS

$284

0.5

46

3.7

-9.6

46%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

1

3

1

7

Dividend policy

. Annual rate of $0.675 per share.

. 4.5% at $15, price range midpoint

. $12.8mm per year, from EBITDA rather than earnings

Business

. Largest North American (United States, Canada and Mexico) producer of specialty phosphates,

based on 2005 sales. Most specialty phosphates are highly customized, application-specific

compounds that are engineered to meet customer performance requirements.

. Specialty phosphates are critical to the taste, texture and performance of foods, beverages,

pharmaceuticals, oral care products and other applications.

. For example, specialty phosphates act as flavor enhancers in beverages, electrolytes in sports

drinks, texture additives in cheeses, leavening agents in baked goods, calcium and phosphorus

sources for nutritional supplements, pharmaceutical excipients and cleaning agents in toothpaste.

Industry

. According to estimates by British Sulphur Consultants, the North American specialty phosphates

market generated $1.4 billion in total sales in 2005.

. This specialty niche historically represents approximately 20% of the overall phosphate market,

the rest of which is comprised of more commodity-like items such as fertilizers.

. Overall, specialty phosphate demand has grown 2% per annum over the last five years, on a

volume basis.

Improved Industry Trends

Note: based on improved industry trends IPHS should have had better financial results

. Over the past decade, fundamentals in the North American specialty phosphates market have

improved due to producer consolidation and elimination of uneconomic capacity.

. Industry utilization rates have increased from below 75% in 2001 to approximately 90% in 2005,

across all major product categories.

. Recently, imports of specialty phosphates, which historically represent a small portion of the

North American market, have been further disadvantaged by increasing costs of transportation and

logistics and the depreciation of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies.

. In some market segments, IPHS has been subject to increased competition from low cost

producers and import competition.

Strengths

. Leading Market Positions in Specialty Products.

. IPHS believes it is the overall lowest-cost producer of specialty phosphate salts and acids in

North America as a result of large scale and proprietary manufacturing technology.

. In addition, manufacturing and distribution facilities are strategically located close to customers

to minimize transportation costs, and the largest manufacturing facility is located in Mexico, a

low-cost region within North America.

Anticipated cost savings

. To realized anticipated annual cost savings of approximately $12.0 to $15.0 million within the

next two to three years including the cogeneration project at the Coatzacoalcos plant, expected to

significantly reduce our energy costs

. IPHS believes that capital and other expenditures of $21.0 to $25.0 million over the next two-to

three years will be required to realize these cost savings.

Acquisition History

. On June 10, 2004, entered into the Rhodia Agreement. Pursuant to the Rhodia Agreement, IPHS

agreed to acquire the outstanding capital stock of certain Mexican subsidiaries and acquire certain

assets relating to the specialty phosphate operations of Rhodia Inc., Rhodia Canada Inc., and

Rhodia de Mexico S.A. de C.V., collectively referred to as the Phosphates Business, for a closing

purchase price of $473.4 million, subject to subsequent post-closing working capital adjustments

as defined in the Rhodia Agreement.

. The combined stock and asset purchase, which was consummated on August 13, 2004

Competition

Specialty phosphates customers incur high costs to switch suppliers which creates significant

barriers to entry for new suppliers

However

. In the past IPHS has experienced pricing pressure from customers in the markets. IPHS took

steps to reduce costs and resist possible price reductions; however, price reductions have in the

past impacted sales and profit margins.

. If IPHS is able to offset future price pressure through improved operating efficiencies and

reduced expenditures, price reductions may have a material adverse effect on results of operations.

. The startup of a fourth production train of purified phosphoric acid by PCS in 2006, and ICL’s

ammonium phosphates plant in Israel, may adversely affect IPHS’s ability to raise prices beyond

cost increases.

Use of $90mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 6.7mm shares of stock

(shareholders intend to offer 2mm shares)

Intends to use offering proceeds together with $44.2 million of cash on hand to

(i) pay down $30.0 million of indebtedness under the senior credit facility

(ii) redeem $83.2 million in Senior Notes and pay $4.7 million in prepayment penalties

(iii) pay transaction-related expenses of $16.3 million, which includes a management services

agreement termination fee of $13.0 million paid to Bain Capital and a management bonus of $3.3

million

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

ORBCOMM (ORBC)

ORBC, C, 6

low-Earth orbit satellites for wireless

Post-IPO shrs:36.3mm

Fort Lee, NY

2003

2004

2005

June 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$7

$11

$16

$13

Cap (mm)

Cost of services & products

111.3%

100.0%

81.3%

91.3%

$472

Profit (loss) ($mm)

-$13.3

-$12.4

-$9.1

-$5.4

@$13

Profit (loss) %

-187.3%

-113.8%

-58.7%

-42.9%

*for the six months ended June 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

ORBCOMM (ORBC)

$472

18.7

-44

2.9

3.1

31%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

1

1

6

Summary -- significant top line revenue growth, cost of services & products currently too high

Business

. Operates the only global commercial wireless messaging system optimized for narrowband

communications.

. System consists of a global network of 30 low-Earth orbit, or LEO, satellites and accompanying

ground infrastructure.

. Two-way communications system enables customers and end-users, which include large and

established multinational businesses and government agencies, to track, monitor, control and

communicate cost-effectively with fixed and mobile assets located anywhere in the world.

. Products and services enable customers and end-users to enhance productivity, reduce costs and

improve security through a variety of commercial, government and emerging homeland security

applications.

Organization

. ORBCOMM LLC was organized as a Delaware limited liability company on April 4, 2001 and

on April 23, 2001, it acquired substantially all of the non-cash assets and assumed certain

liabilities of ORBCOMM Global L.P. and its subsidiaries, which had filed for relief under

Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

. The assets acquired from ORBCOMM Global L.P. and its subsidiaries consisted principally of

the in-orbit satellites and supporting U.S. ground infrastructure equipment that ORBC owns today.

. At the same time, ORBCOMM LLC also acquired the FCC licenses required to own and operate

the communications system from a subsidiary of Orbital Sciences Corporation, which was not in

bankruptcy, in a related transaction.

. Prior to April 23, 2001, ORBCOMM LLC did not have any operating activities.

. ORBC was formed as a Delaware corporation in October 2003 and on February 17, 2004, the

members of ORBCOMM LLC contributed all of their outstanding membership interests in

ORBCOMM LLC to ORBC in exchange for shares of common stock, representing ownership

interests in ORBC equal in proportion to their prior ownership interest in ORBCOMM LLC.

. As a result of, and immediately following the contribution, ORBCOMM LLC became a wholly

owned subsidiary of ORBCs.

. ORBC has continued the historical business, operations and management of ORBCOMM LLC

. Prior to February 17, 2004, ORBCOMM Inc. did not have any operating activities.

Customers

. Include value-added resellers, or VARs, original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, such as

Caterpillar Inc., Komatsu Ltd., Hitachi Construction Machinery Co., Ltd. and the Volvo Group,

service providers, such as the Equipment Services business of General Electric Company, and

government agencies, such as the U.S. Coast Guard.

. Through our M2M data communications system, our customers and end-users can send and

receive information to and from any place in the world using low cost subscriber communicators

and paying airtime costs that we believe are the lowest in the industry for global connectivity.

Service limitations

ORBC’s system is optimized for small packet, or narrowband, data transmissions, is subject to

certain delays in the relay of messages, referred to as latencies, and may be subject to certain line

of-sight limitations.

Satellites need to be replaced

The majority of ORBC’s current fleet of satellites was put in service in the late 1990s and has an

estimated operating life of approximately nine to twelve years. ORBC plans to launch additional

satellites to supplement and ultimately replace the current fleet in order to continue to provide

ORBC’s communications services in the future.

. For 2006 to 2011, ORBC anticipates spending $200 million on its capital plan, which

contemplates the launch of at least 25 additional satellites at a cost of $170 million, including the

Coast Guard demonstration satellite, and the remaining $30 million for non-satellite capital

expenditures which are primarily for additional gateway earth station deployments and additional

network support equipment.

Employees

Expects to increase headcount from 98 employees as of September 30, 2006 to 145 employees by

2010

Competition

. Currently, ORBC believes it is the only commercial provider of below 1 GHz band, or little

LEO, two-way data satellite services optimized for narrowband.

. Competing service providers can be divided into three main categories: terrestrial tower-based,

low-Earth orbit mobile satellite and geostationary satellite service providers.

Terrestrial tower-based networks

. While terrestrial tower-based networks are capable of providing services at costs comparable to

ORBC, they lack seamless global coverage. Terrestrial coverage is dependent on the location of

tower transmitters,

. Which are generally located in densely populated areas or heavily traveled routes. Several data

and messaging markets, such as long-haul trucking, railroads, oil and gas, agriculture, utility

distribution and heavy construction, have significant activity in sparsely populated areas with

limited or no terrestrial coverage

Low-Earth orbit mobile satellite service providers

. Low-Earth orbit mobile satellite service providers operating above the 1 GHz band, or big LEO

systems, can provide data connectivity with global coverage that can compete with ORBC’s

communications services; however, to date, the focus of big LEO satellite service providers has

been primarily on circuit-switched communications tailored for voice traffic, which, by its nature,

is less efficient for the transfer of short data messages because they require a dedicated circuit that

is time and bandwidth intensive when compared to the amount of information transmitted. .

Additionally, a circuit-switched network does not support multicast or broadcast messaging for the

transmission of the same data to multiple users.

. These systems are still in the early stages with respect to the development of data terminals and

integration of applications and they entail significantly higher costs for the satellite fleet operator

and the end-users. Our principal big LEO mobile satellite service competitors are Globalstar LLC

and Iridium Holdings LLC.

Geostationary satellite service providers

. Geostationary satellite system operators can offer services that compete with ORBC. Certain

pan-regional or global systems (operating in the L or S bands), such as Inmarsat plc, are designed

and licensed for mobile high-speed data and voice services.

. However, the equipment cost and service fees for narrowband, or small packet, data

communications with these systems is significantly more expensive than for ORBC’s system

. Some companies, such as the OmniTracs subsidiary of QUALCOMM Incorporated, which uses

SES Global S.A.’s satellites (operating in C and Ku bands) have developed technologies to use

their bandwidth for mobile applications.

. ORBC believes that the equipment cost and service fees for narrowband data communications

using these systems is also significantly higher than ORBC’s, and that these geostationary

providers cannot offer global service with competitive communications devices and costs.

. In addition, these geostationary systems have other limitations to which ORBC is not subject to.

For example, they require a clear line of sight between the communicator equipment and the

satellite, are affected by adverse weather or atmospheric conditions, and are vulnerable to catastrophic

single point failures of their satellites with limited backup options

Use of $108mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 9.2mm shares

(shareholders intend to sell 1.9mm shares)

. $65.0 million to fund capital expenditures (including the deployment of ORBC’s "quick-

launch" and next-generation satellites);

. $4.4 million to pay accumulated and unpaid dividends as of June 30, 2006 (increasing by

$726,000 per month to approximately $6.6 million as of September 30, 2006) on ORBC’s Series

B convertible redeemable preferred stock;

. $4.6 million to pay the contingent purchase price amount relating to the purchase of an interest in

Satcom International Group plc. (assuming a valuation based on a per share price of $13.00, the

idpoint of the estimated price range); and

. Remainder to provide additional working capital and for other general corporate purposes.

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

RRSat Global Com Net

RRST, C+, 7

distribution services for tv/radio

Post-IPO shrs:16.7mm

Ormer, Israel

2003

2004

2005

June 05*

June 06*

IPO Mkt

Rev ($mm)

$14

$24

$31

$14

$20

Cap (mm)

Gross Profit %

37.1%

40.4%

36.7%

40.1%

37.1%

$200

Profit (loss) ($mm)

$2.2

$5.2

$4.2

$1.7

$3.6

@$15

Profit (loss) %

15.7%

21.7%

13.4%

12.0%

18.3%

Adjusted EBITDA ($mm)

$4.4

$7.6

$9.2

$4.4

$5.8

Adjusted EBITDA %

31%

32%

29%

31%

29%

*for the six months ended June 30

VALUATION RATIOS

IPO Mrkt

Price /

Price /

Price /

Price /

% offered

Cap (mm)

Sales

Earnings

BookValue

TangibleBV

in IPO

RRSat Netwrk (RRST)

$200

5.1

28

3.9

3.9

23%

SCORECARD

Mgt

Market

Market Do-

Proprie-

Total

1-5, 5 is high

Growth

mination

tary

rating

20 is perfect

2

2

2

1

7

Business

Overview

. Can transmit news directly to broadcasting organizations, via satellite, worldwide.

. Through RRST's world connectivity, provides services to all major international & local news organizations facilities.

and offer a wide range of production facilities

Service summary

. Content management and distribution services to the rapidly expanding television and radio

broadcasting industries.

. Through the proprietary "RRSat Global Network," composed of satellite and terrestrial fiber

optic transmission capacity and the public Internet, offers high-quality and flexible global

distribution services for content providers.

Services

. Include producing and playing out TV content as well as providing satellite newsgathering

services (SNG).

. Concurrently provide these services to more than 265 television channels and more than 80 radio

channels, covering more than 150 countries.

. Offers continuous distribution services to channels such as Canal Europe, Fashion TV, GOD TV,

I Media, Kurdsat, Russia Today, Thai Global Network, and Turkish Radio and Television, and

occasional distribution services to channels such as CBS, Fox News, Israeli Channels (2, 5 and

10), Al Jazeera, NBC News, NTV Russia, and RAI Middle East.

. During the first half of 2006, we derived 59.5% of our revenues from European and North

American customers.

Risk

RRST’s principal teleport and playout facilities are located in Re'em, Israel. Significant damage to

these facilities, for any reason, including acts of terrorism, could require substantial time and

expense to repair, and would require reestablishing transmission links with suppliers of capacity.

Competition

. The content distribution services market consists of four types of service providers: in-house

distribution departments of broadcasters, telecommunications companies, satellite fleet operators

(hybrids) and independent teleport operators.

. Each of these service providers allows for the distribution of content and some also provide

certain content management services.

. As a provider of global, comprehensive, content management and distribution services, we

believe that our most significant and direct competitor is GlobeCast, which is a subsidiary of

France Telecom.

. Most of our customers are broadcasters. A limited number of broadcasters, such as CNN, Fox

and Sky, have internal content management and distribution capabilities, and therefore will not

seek RRST’s services except on an occasional basis.

. However, RRST believes that most broadcasters who do not currently possess these capabilities

will not establish their own content management and distribution systems since dedicated in-house

operations represent an expensive solution that is not cost effective and not easily scalable.

Use of $39mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 3.625mm shares

(selling shareholder expected to sell 175,000 shares)

. $20 million and $30 million to make acquisitions of, or establish, additional teleports, initially in

the United States and subsequently in Asia.

. The cost of acquiring or establishing such operations will include the cost of fixed assets related

to transmission equipment and playout equipment and can vary between $5 to $15 million per

teleport, depending, among other things, on the location of the teleport and the time it will take to

establish the local teleport.

. Balance for working capital and general corporate purposes

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