I don't want to get into a long drawn out argument so I will be succinct and we can agree to have differing opinions. Feel free to have the last word.

IMO the minute a company puts itself on a timetable dictated by certain shareholders it's time for me to sell. Waiting to get a better handle on our financial strength in order affect a growth strategy thru m/a was the prudent thing to do. Now if you want to argue that there should have been no dividends and that money could have been used for m/a, I MAY agree. I may not agree because I think their thinking may have been that there was uncertainty regarding the future litigation and/or licensing potential so the decision was made to reward long term shareholders with hte dividends (yes, Swartz is among them) while they could. Fortunately the litigation and/or licensing potential seems to at least been clarified somewhat, so now it's time to get going.