A lot of interesting thoughts - some I agree with, some I don't.

One possible error: You state more than once: "....s&l's pockets, this is assuming that they have kept their core share holding at 9.99% or 80m or so". 382M OS X 9.99% = ~38M, not 80M. Pretty basic.... Does that change anything?

Some other conflicting thoughts:

1. S&L selling shares to enable warrant conversion into fresh new shares. IMO, the PPS doesn't matter. It's a trade out. S&L is IMO just selling away with big limit orders being filled piece-meal, and they take advantage of any news/volume to expedite the process. IMO, S&L is "cooperating" in the warrant conversion as they recognize that it's in their long-term best interest to do so.

2. Accumulation, IMO, is very limited, and is probably primariuly PTSC doing their buybacks. IMSO the rest is simply retail. TPL has other uses for their money; they have less incentive to buy more PTSC than do retail investors. Also, it seems to me that if there were a ying-yang, planned sell-off/accumulation thing happening, we'd see frequent huge blocks going off as paired trades. We don't, ever (though you suggest these trades are somehow "hidden"). So while I agree that there is a planned sell off (i.e., S&L selling with large limit sell order to enable more conversions), IMO the buy side is from retail nibblers/adders. The daily volumn says it all....

And, as I'm sure you suspect, I too believe that your scenario "a" is what is playing out (tweeked as per the above).

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but just "bumping thoughts" against eachother for all to consider.

And I KNOW nuttin'!

SGE