Relies to your replies:

"1,-- large settlements offer MORE incentive for others to fight. A small settlement or license fee may be paid because it is cheaper to pay than fight."

But a large settlement attests to the validity of the patents.  The more valid the patents are perceived to be, the less likely they are to being contested, IMO.

"2-- a different type lawsuit, another company claiming ownership of the patent or a portion of the patent. AKA patent pirates."

I'm an certain, that with all the resoures that have been thrown at this dispute, if such were available, it would have surfaced by now (from either the Js, ARM, or one of the 24 licensees).  JMHO

"Works both ways, who has bigger legal pockets, us or them?  That may play a part of the legal fight.  Time may be on their side, legal fights take time."

But there are over aspects to consider.  Yup, the Js could just to continue to throw money at this - and so could we (we have plenty specifically available for this purpose).  But, on our side, who is going to complain about the expenditure?  Anyone?  For us, success is seen as essential by all participants (including PTSC shareholders, as if we had a "say").  But on their side, as public companies, how do they explain to their shareholders why they've expended XX million dollars to fight a losing battle (recognizing that 24 of their peers secured licenses, most  for far less than they've expended on litigation).  They are accountable to people who, when they see "legal expenses" in their 10Q/K, might raise their eyebrows and say "WTF?".  Careers on the line.  They've already been at it for about 18 months.  How much do you think they've spent so far?  And our lawyer friends have advised that the expenses escalate "geometrically" as they approach trial. 

"Judgements can and will be appealed. Confidential settlements may be the best PTSC can hope for, IMHO."

I agree.  I want to see large settlements, thus ending the litigation for good with the Js.

"To me, the shareprice IS the most important thing.

Okay, look only at the PPS.  Why buy? 

 Uh, because I think it's way undervalued.       Because I hope to sell it for more than I paid.     That is the only reason I buy and sell any stock.  I don't see myself as "helping the company"  or "showing confidence in the company",   or making any social or intilectual statement.  To me, this is just a stock like any other.   Did I miss your point?"

You think the stock is undervalued.  Why?  The entire basis for that conclusion has to be based on more than the PPS, ignoring everything else.  You, like most of us, probably feel it's undervalued based not only on what we've achieved to date, but what we expect to achieve looking forward.  So, what's the most important thing?  The current PPS, or our prospects going forward?  This is why so many visit here - to keep tabs on the viability of future prospects.  They can get the current PPS from Yahoo Quotes.  But I'll give you this - the PPS can be a gauge of future prospects.  However, assuming you honestly believe that PTSC is undervalued, that gauge ain't workin' too good is it?

"ignore them?"  You make my point.  The PPS is NOT the only thing to look at.  You can't ignore the progress, nor the prospects, which are MORE important than the PPS (i.e., the PPS is NOT the most important thing).  Perhaps I'm missing your intent in this discussion.  If you're looking to buy, and have all the underlyting information already consumed, the importance of the current PPS is greatest (e.g., should I buy today?).

"Instant litigation?  Not sure I know the meaning of that........"

It's legal-eze for "the litigation in which we are currently engaged, and only that litigation".   

"Aren't you even a little curiuos about why some people think the price is fair or too high?  If you didn't want to read other opinions or see other viewpoints, why would you read any message board?"

Apparently the market fells the PPS is "fair" (sorry to state the obvious), for reasons expressed above.  As for over-priced, THE ONLY REASONS YOU"LL SEE POSTED ARE BASED ON THE DISTANT PAST. 

???????????????? The only reason I've seen is lawsuits, and they are not distant past. They are present and IMHO will be the future, as long as they are depending on patents for revenue.    Is there some deep dark secret from the past that no one will admit?  LOL!!!   Everyone keeps refering to past problems, but I've yet to see them mentioned in any detail.  What am I missing?"

Apparently you've been fortunate enough to miss the weekly flurries of "information" about why we're trading where we are and why this company is doomed to failure.  All of it based on distant past decisions (that may have been bad) that everyone acknowledges. But most disagree that it foretells what future decisions may be made, by new people.  Other than the "instant litigation", that is the only basis for a forecast ever presented.  The instant litigation is EVERYTHING is almost everyone's view.  You'll see most discussion about it, with some occasionaly suggestions/discussions about acquisition candidates.  That's it.  And there ain't no more.

"PTSC has cash, they are not going to disappear if the first patent case does not go 100% as hoped.       Give them some credit!"

I am confident that if everything doesn't go as hoped, there is still life here.  The only really bad scenario is IF we end up in court, and we lose. And then we'll appeal, and things just drag out.

"Probably about 80% of the people here (and in EDIG).  There are a few flippers/traders, but they say they always maintain a core position.  What does that tell you? 

 Honestly?  It tells me they are undecided.  Buying and selling, but not all.  I've done that in the past, but only when I had doubts about my position.  I still do it."

You missed the point.  By far, most posters here (IMO) are holding and accumulating (and have for a very long time - some 10 years plus), but a few here flip/trade - but always hold a core position.  Thus, there is no "indecison" as you gleaned.  We, for the most part, have made our decision.  Even the flippers/traders (or why would they always hold a core position?).

"Now that is what I was looking for!  Lack of cash!  See, that isn't a problem now.  The share price should react, or at the very least lack of cash won't keep the price down.  One less problem.  Can you give more examples of "old dissenting opinions" that are no longer relevant?"

First part BINGO!  No, I will not drag out our irrelevant past yet again for all to endure.  It's irrelevent!

"Hoping for $1.20 to $1.50 soon, a very reasonable PE !!!"

With a reasonable P/E multiple, we should be trading at at least $2 right now (industry average P/E is about 40).  Reset your sights! 

Thanks,

SGE