interim results are out, page-24

Stonemasonn,

I wouldn't take a company presentation as gospel. If there is money to be made providing dewatering services then rest assured that there will be competitors lining up to share in the spoils. There are many well capitalised & resourceful companies providing mining services, if there is a superior economic return on offer they will develop a similar product offering.

In order to prosper long-term, RQL needs a sustainable competitive advantage - I see them as having a first mover advantage. What is it that you see as RQL's competitive advantage, what is it that RQL offer that a well capitalised competitor couldn't possibly offer?

RQL being able to grow earnings during the GFC does not provide proof of inelastic demand. RQL are an extremely small company operating a niche service. Whilst the overall demand is elastic, given RQL's small size there would be sufficient opportunities for growth. If they had a large market share they would most certaintly feel the impact of a GFC style event.

Demand is extremely elastic, completely dependent on the number of operational mines & the economic viability of deeper & deeper mines - which is entirely dependent upon commodity prices.

FGE and MND grew their earnings during the GFC, do you think demand for their services is inelastic?