it was shareholders who wanted Patriot to focus on M&A. I could be mistaken but I thought it was said at an ASHM. Why then did the BoD take full credit in a 2008 PR for the decision to pursue M&A as part of their blueprint for success.

from my previous post remember the letter to shareholders

"It is the Board's opinion that Patriot's cash and the interests of our shareholders are better served by finding the right M&A acquisition and growing the company."

1. With the past blueprint for success which included M&A, minority investments and expansion of the IP portfolio a total bust....how specifically will the BoD position Patriot for future growth and increase shareholder value?

2. Why did it take nearly 5 mos after GE was announced publically in a Pacer for both Patriot and Alliacense to barely mention GE in the PR about Ford licensing the MMP? Wasn't GE worthy of its own PR? Is hiding information from shareholders part of their plan to bring value to shareholders?

3. After the Markman in Texas, we saw a tremendous amount of licensing activity. From a PR dated 8-20-08 it stated that thru May 31 total MMP licenses exceeded $240 million with 27 new licenses in patriot's fiscal 2008. Does our BoD expect to see rapid fire licensing upon the announcement of a decisively favorable Markman? If not, why?

http://50.28.91.52/~patriots/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=188&Itemid=29

4. Does the BoD still believe that it was in the best interest of shareholders to settle with TPL and if so what is TPL/Alliacense now doing for us that wasn't being done before?