Actually, it wouldn't work out that way. If TPL failed to perform, we'd wind up in court with them - having a dispute over fulfilling the requirements of the Master Agreement. If we severed our relationship with TPL, the MMP would not be "worthless", as, per patent law, either patent owner could pursue infringers independently (keeping all the fruits) - and TPL is in a much better position (with their legal staff) to do that.

PTSC has a 50% interest in the patents and, by design, little control over the MMP - and I'm fine with that. Let PTSC do as they are planning and pursue expansion of their business. Leave the legal headaches to TPL/Alliacense. That stuff is only fun if you're a lawyer. Let Jim and Nick have fun in their world, identifying acquisition targets with desireable tech, developing a list of viable subsidiaries with our guys on the BoD of each. The new CFO can then have fun in his world - counting the money. And us, we'll have fun doing whatever we want to do with our reward for embracing the risk and suffering the agony of watching and waiting.

JMHO,

SGE