Obviously, based on the market treatment of PTSC, you are correct. I guess I wasn't arguing those facts as much as expressing that the market has failed to accept and reflect what PTSC HAS accomplished over the last 3 years, and will likely continue to accomplish pending USPTO resolution. It seems the pps is reflecting USPTO rejection already, rather than giving PTSC credit for all the revenues it's generated, and the apparently successful settlements with the J's, though that success remains to be affirmed.

If I remember correctly, in Forgent's case, the market PPS penalty came AFTER rejection by USPTO. In PTSC's case, once you reflect on the steady and increasing revenues, it seems to be built into the PPS already. My point was that until the USPTO issue is resolved, which could take another 12 months, PTSC should be getting more credit for what's been accomplished.