I won`t address the yes, as you`ve already done this...

1) As to the no, it`s my feverent belief that Patriot drank the coolaid of Beatie and Company. Patriot has TWO lawyers on the BOD (Pohl and Johnson), and since they both have considerable time with the company - they surely scrutinized Beaties plan of attack and endorsed it. We`ve had enough legal amateurs here and RB going back and forth discussing the A/C relationship, in both pro and con. Surely they too have discussed this issue, and knew Beaties strategy in pursuing discovery could be as flawed, as Fogel did.

I guess what I`m trying to say in this rambling, is that Patriot had to have known Beaties strategy, and must have endorsed it. If we can agree to blame Beatie for the front end fumble, we have to hold Patriots feet to the fire too, with the implication that they knew and endorsed B&O`s actions. CEO`s get canned every day for poor decisions affecting their company`s direction - why should this be any different?

2) The lack of communication and clarity to the investor. We`ve seen this and griped about this for years. Their PR`s are vague and poorly written. Why is this an issue with me? Well...we`re assuming AMD will be staying in for the long haul. It seems logical strategically, but we`ve seen nothing formal yet from the company addressing the agreement to allay our fears. This is a time of uncertainty, and a message like that to all it`s investors would do alot to retain confidence.

Although I`ve throttled back in my position like I intended, I still have 300K worth of NO votes to throw into the bucket.

I invite yours and others comments to my thoughts. I apologize in advance if I appear out of line, but IMHO this was a chance too valuable to have fully squandered.

Kind regards