I found an article that contains more info on what the Chicago...

I found an article that contains more info on what the Chicago loss of contract means to the company:

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/40/4022.asp

In 2012, the company reported a net profit before tax of $21.3 million. It announced Monday the figure through December will drop to $5.5 million or possibly less as legal costs mount. As the firm paid $6.2 million in tax last year, that means the firm could post a loss for the year. Redflex fortunes have depended heavily on the Windy City, which generated 13 percent of the firm's revenue and represented 19 percent of its installed camera base. The contract value totaled $84 million and was set to generate even more cash on the way to 440 installed cameras in upcoming years. Because Chicago takes ownership of the cameras upon contract termination, Redflex will also lose a significant investment in equipment, which was $11.3 million as of 2010.
__________

I have also noticed a trend on State governments in America taking over the speed camera contracts, instead of allowing private enterprise the contracts. This probably assists in the civil libertarian litigation- the State can watch, but no-one else can.

RDF will bounce again- it always does. It fell 20-odd %, because it had risen that 20-odd % since the Chicago disaster first became public on the ASX some months ago. RDF can be resilient, because- at least at some price- it is probably still a takeover target and the register has changed away from the Coopers and allies, to what seems like more takeover-friendly institutions. I wonder how the Coopers, etc, feel now about rejecting a $2.75 firm bid. I think there was around 5% turnover in shares yesterday, so we may see a new shareholder notice (out or in).