Excellent post, and I'm in total agreement.

I suspect a piece of minutia to which you refer has to do with the USPTO activities, and perhaps the M&A activities. It seems many here think THOSE are the big issues, and that positives on those fronts are more likely to be catalysts for a big PPS move than the financials. I obviously disagree. It's the money! Better put, the money/income is a clear cut fact, and a very surface-level fact. No serious digging will be required to uncover this fact. Easy to grasp. It'll probably be emphasized in the headline of a PR.

How much digging would be required to uncover the USPTO activities? And how relevant is it, really, in the scheme of things? Is not such activity commonplace? We've read from multiple sources that it is. IMO, the only thing that could come about from the USPTO activities, PPS wise, is a drop in PPS if there were an adverse ruling. A limited drop, IMO, because there is an appeals process which, until finalized, still leaves the validity issue in question, and sidelined. And, as I indicated in yesterday's novel, I'm confident that we'll ultimately prevail. Note that what I'm saying is that while any positive ruling(s) on the USPTO front will be a great thing, I seriously doubt that it would have any significant affect on the PPS. I beleive, especially at this point, a ruling of validity is predominently assumed/expected.

As for M&A activities, IMO, ultimately, these activities are almost entirely driven by available funding. So it's back to the importance of the MONEY. More money should equal better acquisition, however you want to define "better".

Just expanding on your thoughts for ya! Hopefully we are in agreement re: my ramblings!

JMHOs,

SGE