"And before you try to argue against that, go back and read the court filings for PTSC v TPL. "

Neither I wanted to start any discussion about things we discussed at length in the past years (and to the most of it I agree with you) nor I wanted to argue with you (or Ron) in any way.
I simply was asking if the fact the patent environment has changed in the last years (something you can read all over the internet, the last article was posted by me two or three weeks ago) has made it much more difficult to retain the same amount of money as we received some years ago.

I agree the ratio of fee to revenue has been steady until the Apple debacle but never the less we see a decrease of MMP revenue starting at 2008.
With "your" ratio being the same in 2008/09/10 this would mean that less bigger companies have bought a license but more smaller companies.

The question to me is:
Was it done intentionally to go after the smaller companies resp. accept their offers for an MMP-license or was it simply because the bigger companies got more and more reluctant to pay for a patent and instead start litigation (a trend which is described by a Ex-Supreme Court Judge in the cited article)?

Again: I know your position and I agree with it to a certain degree but IMO any patent holder faces a more complex situation than he did years ago - that was the main content of my post.