Personally, I don't know any of the board members. They might be good people who had good intentions and now are no longer relevant. They, by virtue of corporate governance (by-laws) have adopted a tenure system for themselves. They have job security and significant benefits and have no consequences for poor performance.

Universities who typically have a tenure systems could pay dearly when they offer lifetime employment (tenure) to someone who does not deserve it. In my opinion, based on all the reasons posted by Wolf, Brian and others, our three long time board members certainly do not deserve tenure.

So the question is how do PTSC shareholders, who continue to post their displeasure with certain board members, legally remove those board members who are no longer relevant? An SEC attorney may be the most likely person to answer that question. Ranting and raving about poor performance will not change anything. Baroni by himself, will not change anything. Mistry and Tredennick together do not have a majority vote to change anything.

If anyone on this board has the ear of an SEC attorney, please talk to them and report back to us. I knew the risks when I invested in this stock but I sure as heck am not prepared to lose it all based on the decisions of three tenured individuals. I still believe in the MMP which has huge potential to provide revenue which can be used to develop a viable company. I am just not convinced after three years that Johnson, Faulk and Felcyn are the right people for the job. Just my opinion.

Laurie