While Ron may have his opinions, and many may share his opinions or follow his lead, I can assure you that many here have their own opinions, shared by still others.

My opinion is that while I'm not fond of the divy appraoch and would much rather they dedicated those funds to share buy-back, I think they're doing the right thing re: handling of PR (where my opinion differs from Ron's) and developement of alternate revenue streams.

Back to the divys - some people seek out stocks that pay consistent divys. To them, I suspect it's like buying a T-Bill. The stock's PPS remains relatively static and those divys just keep rolling in. I could go on, but to some this mitigates this risk of investing. A more passive approach.... And I'll say that IF I owned a few million shares of PTSC, I'd be loving the divys - original investment paid back to some degree and still holding all my shares in a promising stock. Again, it mitigates the risk of investing. And there's my segway....

RISK: IMO, a large reason we languish is because of the perceived risk in investing in PTSC. Especially with this litigation hanging. While I'm very pleased with PTSC's investment in Holocom (small dollars = small risk, corporate shelters from liabilities, about to turn a profit in just a couple of months), I'd hate to see PTSC invest in some other endeavor for say $50-100M (high risk), with potential liabilities (if it were an endeavor with PTSC's name on it), and the likely wait of many years to (maybe) see a profit. PTSC has plenty of inherent risk on the table, why introduce even more? I'd run away, at least until the litigation goes clearly in PTSC's favor. And if many think as I do, forget S&L's selling, retail would dump and everyone loses (does this give you a clue as to why PTSC hasn't done as you seem to want?).

So wait until the litigation is settled, one way or the other. When it goes clearly in our favor, then consider introducing more risk.

BTW, how much money do you think TPL has made sans MMP? Any net profit? They're in an extremely competitive market, trying to break their way in by what ever means (Sony?). Large OH - facilities, payroll, plant equipment. IMO, IF we were so unfortunate as to fail in the litigation, PTSC would be in better far shape than TPL.

And why do you and many others it seems totally ignore the brilliance of the Holocom investment and Holocom's potential? IMO, Holocom's potential is far greater than TPL's other, much more costly, endeavors.

JMHOs and I KNOW nuttin'!

SGE