Thanks for the confirmation on that aspect. But the prohibition against exceeding 9.99% respectively by S&L is against S&L, not PTSC. S&L in essence have agreed to act to avoid defaulting on their agreement (i.e., contract) with PTSC. S&L will be forced to decrease their holding, and certainly they understood this before entering the agreement (and before running up their holdings to the exact threshold). The onus is on S&L, not PTSC. Non-issue for PTSC - they should be able to buy back as many shares as they want (and, in essence, be buying some of those shares from S&L at the prevailing price).

S&L would actually benefit from price appreciation due to the buy back, so how resistent would they be? ``Let`s see, they`ll be buying back our shares at a premium, and the result will be an improved value of our remaining holdings due to decreased float - what should I (S&L) do?``. ``And, buy the way, if I (S&L) don`t act, I`ll be subject to a law suit that could undo my sweet deal - golly, what`ll I do?``.

SGE