While I appreciate your effort with this, I think you are overlooking many things from my post @ 4:13 PM, 2/13/10. While there are many unknowns reflected in my commentary/speculation, there are things in conflict with what you suggest.

While the patents do approach expiration, there is the 6 year look-back, as well as 7 more patents yet to be issued by the PTO (whose life has not yet even begun). And keep in mind my suggestion to PTSC if the patent expiration thing becomes a huge issue. Hang a giant carrot out there for the day they turn out the lights.

Also, there are the literally thousands of infringers out there which can and should (and will?) be pursued. With only some 71 licensees to date, we've barely scratched the surface. And it's not like all the heavy hitters have already been hit. Microsoft (Wii), Nentendo, Motorola, TI, GE, Siemans, ARM, Apple, IBM, Dell, LG, the entire aerospace/defense industry, automakers, cell phones, home appliances - the list is endless. Practically everything has an infringing chip/DSP in it (from your Sleep Number bed to your daughter's talking doll), and many businesses/product lines are totally dependent on our technology.

I have often pointed at DirecTV - a past licensee - to further make the point. Where would DirecTV be without our technology? One answer - out of business. That's how crtitical it is in so many products. Someone suggested that the CAT license is probably small in value. Where would their products be without our technology? Back in the 1960s, completely outdated, unable to compete, out of business. What's the license worth? Okay, remove the (validity) uncertainty, then what's it worth?

People point to the early days of licensing. Yes, some early mover discounts. But then there was Fujitsu - $30M+. But what followed? The PTO jungle, with its associated uncertainty. Get out of that jungle, and add competition for licenses by competing businesses, and what could happen?

Apologies for being so optimistic, but IMO there is some realism in there.

We have talk of dividends. What would happen to the PPS if PTSC announced a plan for scheduled dividend distributions? Even small ones? Be real conservative, and try a one cent dividend per share every qtr. Cost to PTSC, around $4M per qtr (could be easily accomplished - even at today's licensing rate). Play with the idea. 2 cents? Monthly?

I talked of progressively more aggressive identification of infringers and licensing. $$, generating more $$. From what I heard came out of the AMS, this may be their intent. And it should be!

Just get us out of the PTO jungle! I think I see some light up ahead....maybe a clearing, maybe more jungle. Feelin' lucky? I'm hoping we're approaching the day where luck won't even be an issue.

And it sounds like the BoD is "cooperating", and found the wisdom to promote progress with a lot less risk/intervention. Think of this: with the patent validity issue out of the way (at least on the '336), where is the risk in dedicating more resources to Alliacense to identify and pursue infringers? From that, and the probable results of that, where is the risk in issuing scheduled dividends? In share buy-backs?

Time to shut up before I get booted for pumping....regardless of how real the possibilities.

SGE