Ann: Quarterly Activities Report and Appendix 4C - December 2018, page-60

Other than what I assume is a notable cash flow lag, I really don't get the double standards as far as negativity towards contracts of this value....

Others are suggesting flinging cameras to all random and less than convenient parts of the world for a not too dissimilar sum (albeit up front payment) and the idea is supposedly genius....even though the costs to support such roll-out or maintenance would be higher than respective comparisons locally and have largely been understated.

Then on top of that, once a foreign client signs a deal, how many other sites does that same client have which you can upsell? No doubt some clients will have multiple sites, sure....though it's not inconceivable you sell these cameras, and you never hear from the client again, unless it's for maintenance (costs). Then the comparison is the state governments....across WA and elsewhere....which have endless locations for potential shark system placements and upselling on their other needs.

Now $20 per day *is* stuff all(assuming cash comes in progressively and delayed)....but a shark system only has to be in rental for 15 months or so to bring in income similar to cameras which other clients may only buy once and never again depending on their needs and service life. So...bigger issue I think is if they can successfully start to lock in these daily rentals for ongoing periods longer than 15 months, and on the basis of a minimum number of sites at one time (e.g. min requirement of 10 at a time). Will start to add up just as much as these one off clients in the long run. Unless of course you're looking for instant gratification.