But here again I suggest the simplest of methods. Using your $1B to PTSC number in one year (!), simply invest it in some reasonably safe investment vehicles. That could relatively easily get a 10% return, or a recurring "almost certain" revenue stream of $100M per year (ignoring tax liabilities). How many companies can do that, with almost no risk? And after all that, there are still about half the supposed infringers left to pursue (based on Leckrones 485 number put on notice).

Here I'll suggest something pretty provocative: we have Johnson (Swartz's guy) still on the BoD. He KNOWS the Swartz method. Adopt it, using the eyes and ears of Jim and Nick. Several here have suggested that Swartz incurred zero risk with his investment in PTSC. PTSC will have the money to mimic that approach, with stronger talent to make that approach even more lucrative. The Holocom deal had a somewhat similar approach.

I guess what I'm saying is that, ultimately, with THAT kind of money laying around, a recurring revenue stream will come with very little effort. A completely predictable revenue stream, at least until acquisitions come into play.

And the company has made it very clear that they intend to invest at least some in acquisitions.

I never understood the mindset that says "gosh, we could collect a billion $ from licensing but we need a recurring revenue stream or the PPS will never move". It just seems like an incomplete thought.... Like they'd bury that $1B in their back yard, collecting no return. Not that you've ever suggested this. I just think that with THAT kind of money rolling in, the "recurring revenue stream" issue will take care of itself, with or without any significant effort by PTSC. Throw in some significant effort, and a little luck, and.....

JMHOs,

SGE