"Fut also seems to have concluded something that did not pan out in the Q and that is the issue of revenue recognition.  I remember when he first stated that the method used for revenue recognition would necessarily reveal all revenues and seemed to imply that all revenues would be recognized in some way and would be evident in the Q if they were indeed a part of a licensing agreement or a part of the J's settlement."

Please point out a post in which I said this or concluded this. As I recall I pointed out the rules for revenue recognition and specifically said that if any revenue is based on some kind of contingency (such as future sales) that it was not booked as revenue until that contingency is satisfied.

I do recall that in a separate post to Deb I stated that I thought if some kind of recurring revenues were in play that ptsc would reveal that in the notes. I don't think I ever stated that ptsc would be required to disclose this, just that I thought they would. If anyone was misled by my postings I apologize. To allude to our "bubble bursting" due to this expectation (based on my postings) I think is a bit of an overstatement. At least I hope that is not the case. Truth is, I don't think anywhere close to a majority of ptsc investors read this board. People outside of the readers of this board read the 10q and made their own decisions on the status of things. Many different people will read the 10q and interpret things many different ways. I hope you are right. I hope we have future revenues to be recognized based on the J3 settlement. And I again apologize if I created false expectations somehow. Anyone that knows me knows that it was certainly not intentional.