But the "The Swartz..PTSC innuendo was an off the cuff statement regarding Swartz' past chokehold on PTSC strategy (divies, board appointees, etc)" is what is troubling. I understood that it was an off-the-cuff statement regarding the PAST. Now, say you're a prospective investor here, and the person who recommended PTSC also suggested you take a look at this board for some DD. Now they read your statement. What would they think? Per YOUR WORDS they'd think that some fella named Swartz somehow collected ALL money coming in to PTSC (i.e., why would I want to invest in something like this?). That's why I said "this I fear".

Now tell me how Swartz differs that much from a regular shareholder at this point in time. Yes, he's got Johnson on the BoD (any real influence at this point?). Yes, he has a ton of shares (probably less than a tenth of what he once had, if you include the warrants). Yes, he could influence trading (by selling - which BTW is in OUR long term best interest). But is that influence any greater than the influence of probably many, many flippers? Has he decreased his holdings? (by more than 90%)? Two years ago, or even one year ago, my comment may have been worthy of a belly laugh, but no longer IMO.

And you evade the question about how would TPL come up with $2B. That's TWO BILLION DOLLARS, American! Even when Steve Jobs hit up bottomless-pocket Bill for a loan, it was one half billion. $2B is TWO THOUSAND MILLIONS. Think this through. I'll try an analogy.... Say you want to borrow $20K from your sister so you can buy more PTSC. You give assurances as to the current state of affairs, the extremely bright prospects, etc. Why would she loan you the money as opposed to taking that $20K and investing it in PTSC herself? Now apply that to the supposed TPL investors. They hear the story from TPL - it's a sure thing (would have to be their sales pitch). Why would they invest in TPL as opposed to just taking that money and buying PTSC stock? Let's see, I could be one of two thousand people investing a million in TPL, have almost no control other my investment and may see a profit some day, or I could just buy PTSC stock, have control over my investment (hold/sell), and potentially (probably?) get a ten fold return near term.

Oh, maybe you're talking AFTER a settlement with the Js? What incentive would PTSC have to sell their rights to the MMP at that point? For the money? (that they won't need - they'll have plenty with a lot more to come). To escape the litigation/negotiation "worries"? (what worries on that front? - the worries are TPL's problem). To escape the PTSC shareholder ridicule? (when the SHs are on cloud nine).

And like above and your off-the-cuff Swartz comment, what would a prospective investor think about that speculation? Maybe good things, maybe not. You never cited a number/dollar value. That's why that part of the equation is so important. Their thought process may be "why should I buy this PTSC stock when they may sell their rights to the fruit for some small premium, and I never receive the true potential - by a long shot - of this investment?".

Now you cite a number, $500M. Win/win? Do the math (as I illustrated). Yes, it would be a win, a very moderate win, considering. Say you have something that was gifted to you that really may be worth as much as $200, and someone offers you $50, and you know this, and that it may take a few years to realize the full $200. Are you going to jump at the $50 offer? Especially when (post settlement) you really don't need the money urgently? Yup, the money was "free" to you, so you win - 25% of what you could have had. This point is rightfully arguable (now that you threw out a number). But without that number, what is a prospective investor to think of your proposition? That's the point I'm making.

Apparently you think TPL is willing to accept a small settlement (because it doesn't really matter, per you they're only going to be shooting for $1.25-2.5-5M from future licensees, so the settlement amount is of no significant import). And, regardless of current settlement size, they're only going to hit up future infringers for maximum $5M average per pop (which is very close to or less than the average for licenses to date, pre-settlement with the Js), and, per you, will accept a minimum average of $1.25M. Yup, a settlement with the Js is meaningless, and the price for a license for TI, IBM, MOT, AAPL, SUNW, Samsung, LG, etc., etc. will be an average of between $1.25M and $5M, even though we have 'em by the gonads.

The value of the settlement with the Js.... Speculated numbers range from $100M to $600M. The proof will be in the pudding. I think it will be somewhere in between (safe guess! LOL). But the pudding will likely be served within two weeks. Even if it's only $100, or some $30M each, that's a pretty strong precedent (especially when you consider the Js also eat litigation costs).

I called it FUD for the reasons stated above. Again, if you're a prospective investor reading what you've had to say, they could easily draw these conclusions:

All money going to PTSC ends up in the hands of some fella named Swartz.

PTSC may sell it's interests in the MMP to TPL for some unspeculated amount, maybe $25M, maybe $50M, maybe $100M, maybe as much a $150M (giving shareholders a simple return of perhaps 25 cents per share on the high end, a few penneys per share on the low end, and it's game over for PTSC).

Even if PTSC doesn't sell, future licensees may only pay an average of $1.25M, half that to PTSC.

Hopefully you now see what I'm getting at.

I do appreciate the speculation - I've thrown out some pretty wild stuff myself!

I do have a habit of getting combative, always with supporting arguments, when people post things that could negatively affect the perceptions of prospective investors (who we need). That's why I was "Johnny on the spot" when ttccrr ranted about the past. PERCEPTIONS.

All I ask is that you keep that in mind.

And if TPL were able to come up with $2B for the MMP, I'd take it. $500M, no go (after taxes, that's only something like $300M).

Respectfully, with yet another novel.

SGE