brian, thanks for the post. your view point on PTSC has always been a welcome read.

i agree with the "re-seeding" of our BOD with seasoned professionals. RG has done more in 7 weeks than our BOD has ever done. Our "old guard" BOD has been overly compensated for doing very little to grow the company and the few decisions they have made were ones that they should be held accountable for.

The agreement between TPL and PTSC, IMO from reading the master agreement, is that we are 50% partners with TPL and have an equal say in matters regarding the MMP. This being so, the BOD, IMO, needs to revisit the information release issue with TPL. The lack of any disclosure of any financial or licensing terms is why our share price goes no where on all the "good news" we have received. To those that say that this is a necessity for TPL to negotiate contracts is (IMO) nonsense. On one hand, the non disclosure may aid TPL as a tool....but on the other hand.....the same could be said by saying the releasing of the financials would show the "infringer" what you will pay now if you decide to sign early and the decision to not sign or delay would/could cost more. Bottom line, the non disclosure issue has a price associated with it and this affects PTSC (public) more than it affects TPL (private). A public company will struggle in growing a share price when all financial information relating to its only source of income is hidden/burried/disguised (take your pick) in the Q's.

And a "thank you" to Lambert for his spreadsheet breakdown/estimates. i find the information valuable.

best of luck to all,

teremoto