First, apologies as I have been out, and haven't gotten anywhere near caught up on posts. So some of these thoughts may have been/probably opined by others.

My first thought goes along with my conjecture in the post to which this replies. Assuming it is correct, it explains a couple of things about Turley's actions, IMO. He may have intended to continue share buybacks. He may have been very close (or closer than most thought) in the acquisition endeavor. He had perhaps narrowed down to a very short list and had secured the services of that Investment Bank to make introductions.

Then he hears from TPL that this type of arrangement is in play, and may be the best alternative under the circumstances in TX. Not that they were weak, but they were under pressure from the court and wanted to get this behind them. Another incentive may have been the dollars they could demand coupled with the contingency (on USPTO) approach (a lot more money).

Turley's correct and prudent actions? Stop the share buyback, and stop actions toward making an acquisition happen. Suddenly he may have recognized that money may have to be stretched while awaiting a USPTO outcome.

And, assuming all the above, this explains his comments upon his resignation. That contingency deal, and maybe some that followed with later licensees, stopped him from doing what he wanted to do. His hands were tied, and he didn't want to have to just sit on those tied hands for months on in (he never struck as that kind of guy - but more a high energy type). Thus, his resignation and comments.

The above sure seems to fit, IMO, and gives me renewed respect for Jim Turley.

Just some thoughts from a guy who is clearly delusional (which is actually worse than "knowin' nuttin'!").

Another thought coming.....

SDE