I've noticed several posts regarding the PTSC PPS recently, more specifically Friday. Some strange "guesses" IMO. Here's my little reminder of what logically will happen when the overall market takes a plunge, or several plunges in a narrow time period.

Though I doubt as many people buy securities on margin these days(as in the 1990s), using other securities held long as collateral for their margin holdings, I'm sure there is still quite a bit of it still out there. When the margined and/or collateral security drops, the broker nails you with a margin call, which must be covered in short order. The problem is multiplied when several securities held as collateral drop at the same time. Not a pleasant experience (I've been there), as you're forced to either quickly deposit more cash or take other actions with your existing portfolio. No cash available? What do you do?

Well, you could sell some of your collateral securities, but this quickly becomes a compounding problem, because your collateral base thus drops, forcing you to sell still more to get the cash to cover. And keep in mind, this happens on a very large scale across the markets, thereby exagerating any significant broad-based drop. This is actually what caused much of the crash of 1929, because in those days you could margin up to 10 times your actual "real" cash portfolio holdings - 10 times! Anyways, it's fairly obvious that if you keep selling your cash securities and dwindling your collateral, it becomes a compounding domino effect.

In recognition of the above, I believe that most astute investors, upon getting the dredded margin call, will sell any securities they hold that are not marginable (a la PTSC) and where there is a reasonable chance to buy back that security when the market rebounds. In this way, you protect your marginable security collateral base and avoid the compounding domino effect.

This is what I think has caused our recent PPS decline. Another possible explanation is that S&L continues to sell to convert - nothing has changed on that front until all the warrants are converted, IMO.

I do NOT think that the PPS has declined from our recent base due to some grand manipulation to accomodate a big buyer. I virtually NEVER buy that argument - baseless illogical hogwash IMO. Sure it could be done, but explain to me how MMs/brokers make huge money doing this, that is, money beyond what could be made by playing their real game and buying an inventory to sell into the demand they see on their doorstep - a sure thing.

JMHO based on the actions of the overall market, but I KNOW nuttin'! Accumulation = demand = increase in PPS, not decrease IMO.

SGE

Different subject. Does anyone here honestly believe EDIG could make more money on its patents than PTSC? They have half the float, but do split royalty revenue 60/40 with their contengency legal representation (not much different than our 50% plus expenses with TPL), but infringement is limited to flash-based products (with a record capability) and not friggin' everthing with a performance processor. I've countered this claim on the EDIG board a few times, but it keeps coming up. So I'm looking for a sanity check off this board.

TIA,

SGE