Moore, is also on the Creditor's Committee, yet he is simultaneously looking out for his own best interests, is the BOD doing that for PTSC Shareholders ? Has PTSC filed it's own independent Objection ? Why does PTSC seem so passive in this entire process ???
.
Some of Moore's take away pearls: ...
As owner of Alliacense, Mr. Leckrone can "dial up" or "dial down" licensing operations for any of the portfolios in the TPL stable.
Alliacense has received and under Debtor TPL’s plan will continue to receive quarterly advances of $500,000 from PDS – with no provision for Alliacense performance!
.............
There are no revenue targets to be hit; no forecasts required. Alliacense, and Alliacense alone, can opt out of the agreement whenever it chooses. These conflicts doom Debtor TPL’s plan to failure.
...............
Thus, PDS has been providing the majority of the revenue earned by Alliacense as Alliacense provides litigation support to PDS and TPL's legal partner, Agility Law. This arrangement has a double benefit for Mr. Leckrone. First, unlike MMP licensing revenues, PDS litigation support revenue provides Alliacense with 100% dollars....
.............
The TPL bankruptcy has not caused reduced licensing revenue: reduced licensing revenue, poor marketing and failed litigation caused the bankruptcy.
................
TPL is a patent aggregator. It buys or licenses patents, finds potential infringers, and demands money for a license. In certain circles this might be termed a "shake down". TPL has been one of the most aggressive aggregators in the IP world since 2009.
.............
The revised TPL Plan is deafening silent as to how its failed litigation strategy can be somehow revitalized and converted into a viable licensing program for MMP.