I actually think we are not that far from agreement here...

I didn't get the connection: warrants off the books? If accumulation/control were their objective, why did they covert the warrant?

I think removing the warrants (with the assumption of positive MH/trial) makes the company books cleaner (maybe even clean), therefore making investment firms, mutuals etc (Pohl's NY trip) more likely to consider large accumulated positions in the future which would remove a large % of the float and share price would then be able to significantly appreciate... thereby benefitting Swartz (& PTSC), And if it were Swartz accumulating (like I posted just before, Swartz would not neccessarily have to be the lone accumulator here of all the warrants he converted) it does not appear to me that he would not loose much control, in fact he would regain more control (or lose less) than if he were just converting/selling all warrants down to his retail share core ~40 mil sh.

I agree with most of your thoughts regarding TPL. I don't see this as a take over attempt by them, and agree they don't appear to have the resourses to do it alone.. S&L would benefit from an increased share price for which to sell their retail shares.. the eventual theoretical bottom line.

Though you acknowledge that you aren't sure such a thing is possible, IMO the reality would ultimately reveal itself, and he'd (S&L) be in very hot water.

That would probably be very true, if it was revealed this was actually occuring.

Also re CenturyCom's take on MMP licensees buying the converted warrants/shares.. I mentioned that as a possible senario in my original response to tcr.. to some extent it could be a combination of these.

I don't think we're too far apart here (hope you can follow my thought process)... and with these discussions, I learn from those with better insight than I.

respected regards