While I appreciated your posts back in the RB days I goota say your first 2 posts here sound more like someone trying to get back in. It`s not the same as 5 years ago.

``I too would like to be a little more positive. But I have to think that AMD got a screaming deal before settlement with Intel. Because post settlement, the number of zeros at the end of the number goes up``

Since we don`t know the terms of the deal with AMD this is pure conjecture. I could just as easily argue that even a sweet deal for AMD could bring enough capital to PTSC to make them a viable couple for more than a few years.

``I suspect that Management bent over real hard for the AMD deal. If our position is so good, why the restricted stock? It had to be a sweetner for AMD. WHY?``

Yes, why the restricted stock? Are you saying PTSC just threw it in to appease AMD. Again, pure conjecture. I could just as easily argue that PTSC insist AMD but restricted stock so that much needed capital would be brought in.

``All the previous potential contracts and NO INK! We may have a great patent position and with competent management be able to prevail. Track record does not support such an assumption.``

Not the same management as when you last posted on a regular basis. Not same circumstances. Nuff said.

``The patent win does nothing for their ability to close deals. The patent revenue stream will last about as long as it takes Intel to design around the patent (assume 24 months).``

I would think if Intel could do that they already would have. Big assumption on your part. Huge. Why didn`t AMD take that approach?