Thank you for making the time to reply.

1. I am intrigued as to why you now use "substantial income" to qualify the hypothetical scenario "where checks can be mailed if any are ever received " with the focus on licensing revenues.

2. I believe that your thoughts as to what others could do differently is highly pertinent, and would ask again for some indication as to how they would increase the share price under current conditions.

3. It surprises me to think that all the time and effort spent by Senator Sarbanes, and Representative Oxley, in convincing the legislature to pass the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 were wasted for an Audit Committee which, in your own words, "would merely be holding positions without any real duties". We will have to disagree on that point.

4. Felcyn's suggested reductions were subject to there only being the MMP Portfolio as a source of revenue. I take her to be a person of integrity and as there have been none of the reductions made, believe both Holocom and PDSG are financially viable growing segments within PTSC. Any reductions under these circumstaces becomes moot, as will accusations of failure to increase shareholder value.

.

.

.

Be well