In the words of Ronald Reagan, "Well, ah..there you go again."
There's merit in most of what your write, and there's nothing that I wrote that is in conflict with what your write. My point is simply that you are putting ONLY PTSC in the position you're taking.
I was not around during the PTSC v TPL/Moore litigation, but my recollection of what I've read was that PTSC was trying to get sole possession of the MMP. They failed, and the B&O debacle played a large role. But I don't believe they were in jepardy of losing their 50%. Corrections welcome.
With respect to what your wrte, please explain how TPL was in a different position. Thanks in advance.