I agree with what you say in large part. You may recall lengthy, though friendly, arguments along these lines years ago, right around the time PTSC started getting some real money (first dividends era). Many were arguing that it was essential that PTSC dedicate funds to develop/acquire actual operations - selling something of their own or under their infamous umbrella - in order to achieve any level of true success and PPS appreciation (sustained). Predictable revenues.

My argument was that any such endeavor emposed many undesired risks, and a probable lengthy period of time before there would be tangible results - if there were any to be had. Better to invest the income in two ways, IMO at the time (and now): buy back PTSC stock (at the time along the lines of buying Swartz' holdings) and invest in the most secure instruments offering a descent return (with the thought that, with the money we had and expected to receive, the return on a simple/safe investment would be far greater that what could be expected from a new, product-driven endeavor for many years, without the associated risk).

But it seems the majority here, and apparently on the BoD, were convinced that PTSC had to expand its horizons (though they've flip-flopped a lot: bought back shares, got Swartz pretty much out of the way, made what they thought was a secure/safe investment while also, at times, pursuing new endeavors - the handling of which is the focus of all attention currently). It almost seems, in hindsight, that they were trying to run in all directions, maybe trying to satisfy all - but unfortunately satisfying few.

Now it seems many on this forum have come full circle (with the twist of a desire by some for PTSC to just issue the money to shareholders - BTW, wouldn't those be called dividends?). Or maybe they were the ones arguing along with me those years ago.

Just interesting....to me at least.

SGE