Just some weekend thoughts regarding the letter from Goerner:

"Jim leaves the Company having outlined a plan to transition the Company from sole reliance on our MMP licensing revenues into an operating company with sustainable growth, profitability and increased shareholder value."

On the first look it seems like nothing new and that Turley wasn't able to add something different to Pohl's umbrella strategy, on the second look the word "operating company" might be the difference Turley brought in. While Pohl had thought of PTSC as a kind of financial holding company, Turley wanted PTSC to get a "real" company with real R&D and real products. Maybe this was the significant contribution from Turley to PTSC.

"I'm excited about the future prospects for Patriot and expect to build an infrastructure within the Company to support a more aggressive assessment of business opportunities."

IMO this shows three things:

1. The financials are great, because so far the only "future prospects" PTSC can have are of financial nature.

2. So far business opportunities were NOT realized aggressive enough in Goerner's opinion - IMO a clear failure originated by the former CEO.

3. With the upcoming installment of a business development person/department Goerner shows, he is not necessarily the "visions" person, but the "operating" person (see his credentials on the PTSC website) - a further hint, that PTSC might get involved in product development, product production etc. (of course together with an other company, we have to buy/merge with etc.)

"We believe that market conditions are favorable for M&A and that quality opportunities will surface."

IMO a sign, that so far M&A activities have not come to fruition and that PTSC is still in searching mode.

"I know that change is both inevitable, and disconcerting, and I ask for your patience, and support during the transition."

The most interesting and strange phrase.

1. Why was/is the change "inevitable"? Was there some kind of emergency situation, thus the BoD had to decide to get rid of Turley as fast as possible?

2. Why was/is the change "disconcerting"? Is there something we should be scared of?

3. Why are we asked to show patience and support? Some of you are here for nearly ten years, most are for more then two years and the "be patient & you will be rewarded"-phrase sounds familiar to me...In the past it was always the signal, that things will NOT happen as I/we thought they would/should (or in a completely different speed as I expected).

4. What kind of "transition" does he mean? Where and what will we be at the end of this "transition"? What is our goal, our target? What is his vision for PTSC?

All together I welcome the sentiment and the contents of Goerner's Shareholder Letter, but IMO it supports my assumption more than it weakens it, that April 9th will NOT be the date of our relief - it might happen "a little" later...

Have a great sunday!